Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

North Delhi Municipal Corporation vs Avinash Bansal on 22 September, 2020

Author: Prateek Jalan

Bench: Chief Justice, Prateek Jalan

                             $~7
                             *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                             +      LPA 455/2019 & CM APPLs. 31649-31650/2019, 6880/2020

                                    NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION         ..... Appellant
                                                 Through: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Adv.

                                                       versus

                                    AVINASH BANSAL                           ..... Respondent
                                                Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani, Sr. Adv. with
                                                Mr. Kapil Midha & Dr. Anurag Kr. Agarwal,
                                                Advs.

                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

                                                       ORDER

% 22.09.2020 The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.

1. This appeal was listed today for final hearing. Learned counsel for the appellant is seeking time as the arguing counsel is not available.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the premises in question is known as Abhinandan Vatika at Mundka Village, Delhi was being used as a banquet hall for marriage and other purposes. He further submitted that respondent may be allowed to accept bookings for the premises in question so that in case LPA is decided in favour of the respondent, the respondent may not lose his future business. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent that if the LPA is LPA 455/2019 Page 1 of 2 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ KUMAR Location: Signing Date:23.09.2020 16:51:40 allowed, they will return the money and no equity will be claimed by this respondent.

3. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that earlier sealing order was passed on 5th March, 2012 under Section 345-A of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 by the competent authority. The said order has thereafter been upheld by the appellate authority, whereupon the respondent herein (also respondent in the writ petition) challenged the same before the learned District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge. The learned District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order of the competent authority and the appellate authority. Thereafter, the appellant (original petitioner) preferred W.P.(C) 740/2014 which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 14.11.2018 (order under challenge in this LPA). Thus, the orders of both the District Judge and the learned Single Judge are in favour of the respondent herein.

4. We, therefore, allow the respondent to accept bookings of the premises in question which is known as Abhinandan Vatika, Mundka Village, Delhi. The respondent shall not claim any equity in case this LPA is allowed.

5. List on 16th October, 2020.

CHIEF JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 ns LPA 455/2019 Page 2 of 2 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PANKAJ KUMAR Location: Signing Date:23.09.2020 16:51:40