Delhi High Court - Orders
Shipra Sharma & Anr vs Union Of India And Others on 23 November, 2022
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
$~81
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 16165/2022
SHIPRA SHARMA & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Rajat Aneja and Ms.
Chandrika Gupta, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, Sr.
Panel Counsel with Mr.
Chetanya Puri, Advs. for R-
1/UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
ORDER
% 23.11.2022 CM APPL. 50508/2022 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application shall stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 16165/2022 & CM APPL. 50507/2022(Interim Direction)
1. Learned counsels who appears for respondent Nos.1 and 2 raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petition before this Court contending that since the land in question is situate outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, the writ petition should not be entertained. It was additionally submitted that the petitioner would have an alternative remedy of preferring an appeal under Section 18C of the Enemy Property Act, 1968 ["1968 Act"].
2. The Court finds itself unable to sustain the aforesaid objections bearing in mind the fact that the principal grievance stems from the notification of 15 November 2022 made by the Custodian of Enemy Properties which is arrayed as respondent No.2 here. Insofar as the Signature Not Verified issue of territorial jurisdiction is concerned, the Court would have to Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:23.11.2022 18:58:37 necessarily evaluate and examine the same bearing in mind the situation of the concerned respondent. In that view of the matter and since the principal respondent is situate within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, the first objection which is raised is negatived. Insofar as the objection with respect to the statutory alternative remedy is concerned, the Court takes note of the allegations made in the writ petition that the petitioner had not even been served with a copy of the order dated 15 November 2022 till date and had also not been placed on any prior notice of the intended inclusion of the property as an Enemy Property.
3. In that view of the above and bearing in mind the issues which were noticed by the Court in Kamlesh Sharma and Ors. vs. Union of India & Anr. [W.P.(C) 15875/2022], both the preliminary objections are negatived.
4. Let notice issue to respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. Since the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are duly represented by learned counsel, let counter affidavit(s) be filed within a period of four weeks from today. Petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit.
5. The petitioner may take steps for service on respondent No.3 through all permissible modes including via approved courier service.
6. Let this writ petition stand tagged with W.P.(C) 15875/2022 to be called on 21.12.2022.
7. In the meanwhile, the respondents shall maintain status quo as existing today in respect of the portion of the disputed property which is presently in the occupation of the petitioners here.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
NOVEMBER 23, 2022 bh Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:23.11.2022 18:58:37