Delhi High Court - Orders
Poornima Sharma vs Vipul Gaur on 24 September, 2021
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:Devanshu
Signing Date:26.09.2021
18:06:01
$~1 & 5 to 7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 614/2021
POORNIMA SHARMA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rohit Kishan Naagpal & Mr.
Dipanshu Gaba, Advocates.
Ms. Garima Anand, Advocate.
versus
VIPUL GAUR ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate.
5 With
+ CM (M) 323/2021 & CM APPLs. 14178/2021, 20945/2021,
20949/2021, REVIEW PET. 103/2021
BISHAN SWAROOP ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Thakur Sumit, Advocate.
versus
MAHENDER KUMAR PANDEY ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Jitender Verma, Advocate for R-1
Mr. Anuroop P.S., Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Mayank Yadav, Advocate for
Applicant.
Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate for
R-3.
6 With
+ FAO 36/2021 & CM APPLs. 2914/2021, 10444/2021, 20904/2021,
23819/2021, 25868/2021, 25869/2021, 25870/2021, 25884/2021,
25885/2021, 26495/2021, 29121/2021
NEETA BHARDWAJ & ORS. ..... Appellants
Through: Mr. R.K. Bhardwaj with Mr.Dheeraj
Bhardwaj, Advocates.
Mr.Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate.
versus
KAMLESH SHARMA ..... Respondent
CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 1 of 6
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:Devanshu
Signing Date:26.09.2021
18:06:01
Through: Mr. Rohit Kishan Naagpal, Mr.
Akarshan Bhardwaj & Mr. Dipanshu
Gaba, Advocates for R-1to 4 & 6.
Ms. Rashmi B. Singh, Advocate for
R-7&8.
Mr. Sarvesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for
R-7.
Mr. Aly Mirza & Mr. Prabhash
Chandra, Advocates for R-10.
Ms. Sangeeta Bharti, Standing
Counsel for DJB (M-9811112863).
Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate for
Applicants.
Insp. Virendra Singh, SHO/Kalkaji
and SI Manu Dev, PS Kalkaji
7 And
+ CM (M) 575/2021 & CM APPLs. 29013/2021, 29014/2021
MAM CHAND ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Krishan Gopal Chokkar,
Advocate.
versus
SATISH KUMAR AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Anuroop P.S, Advocate for R-46
to 49. (M:9582818838)
Mr.Humayun Khan, Advocate
(M:9811177317) for Mr. Pradeep
Kumar Gulia, Advocate for R-59 &
57.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate
for LRs of R-58.
Mr.Kamal Kumar, Advocate for R-22
& 25
Appearances:-
Mr. Vishal Bhardwaj, Advocate in FAO 36/2021.
Mr. Kamal Kant Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Ms. Smita Maan, Advocate.
Mr.Vishal Maan and Mr.R.S. Verma, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate.
CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 2 of 6
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:Devanshu
Signing Date:26.09.2021
18:06:01
Mr. Atul Bandhu, Advocate.
Mr. Kush Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr.Luv Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr. Sanjay Bhardwaj.
Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate.
Mr. R.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr. Lakshay Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr. K.G. Chhokar, Advocate.
Mr. Avinash Chaurasia, Advocate.
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (CRL)
Mr. Arun Birbal, Standing counsel for SDMC
Ms. Sangeeta Bharti, Advocate for DJB.
Mr. Thakur Sumit, Advocate.
Mr. Lokesh Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr.D.K. Singhal, Advocate
Mr. Yoginder Nath Bhardwaj, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 24.09.2021
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. These matters relate to Shri Kalkaji Mandir and are being heard from time to time.
CM(M) 323/2021
3. At the outset, Mr. Jitender Verma, ld. counsel, seeks discharge on behalf of Mr. Mahender Kumar Pandey i.e., Respondent No. 1 in this petition.
CM(M) 575/2021
4. In this petition, the Petitioner- Sh. Mam Chand, claims rights in his share in the Mandir's offerings and collections, which are claimed to have devolved upon him from his mother through his naani, who in turn got rights from her father Sh. Mehar Nath, s/o Sh. Sukhi Nath. He claims that he CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 3 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:Devanshu Signing Date:26.09.2021 18:06:01 belongs to Gharbari Jogi. Vide order dated 8th September 2021, this court had issued notice in the present petition. Mr. Pradeep Gulia, ld. Counsel, had accepted notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 59 and 60 i.e., Mr. Inderjeet and Mr. Tarun respectively on the last date. Today, Mr. Thakur, accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No. 31 i.e. Sh. Bishan Swaroop. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, ld. Counsel, has accepted notice on behalf of Respondent No. 58 i.e., the LRs of Mr. Shubhash. Mr. Ravi Sharma, Ld. Counsel, accepts notice on behalf of other contesting Respondents i.e. Respondent Nos. 33 to 40 and Respondent Nos. 42 to 49.
5. Mr. Krishan Gopal Chhokar, ld. counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the counsel for other contesting Respondents i.e., Respondent Nos.1 to 11, Ms. Rashmi Sharma, has refused to accept notice. It is submitted that Ms. Rashmi Sharma has informed the counsel for the Petitioner that notice should be served directly to the parties.
6. Since the present petition has been filed challenging an interlocutory order dated 30.09.2020, passed by the Trial Court, and the suit is still pending, this court is of the opinion that serving all the parties once again can be dispensed with as it is cumbersome and also considering the large number of individuals who have been arrayed as Respondents.
7. Accordingly, the service on counsels shall be deemed to be service. One last opportunity is given to all the Respondents to enter appearance in this matter, failing which the court would be constrained to proceed ex- parte.
8. Let a copy of this order be also sent to the ld. Additional District Judge, West, Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi, where RCA No. 60746/16 is CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 4 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:Devanshu Signing Date:26.09.2021 18:06:01 pending, in order to ensure that all counsels are intimated once again by the Court. No fresh service is directed in the matter. FAO 36/2021 & CM APPLs. 2914/2021, 10444/2021, 20904/2021, 23819/2021, 25868/2021, 25869/2021, 25870/2021, 25884/2021, 25885/2021, 26495/2021, 29121/2021
9. In terms of the order dated 8th September, 2021, the report of the Local Commissioner has been received.
10. The amounts which have been deposited in view of Paragraphs 14 and 15 of the order dated 8th September 2021, shall be retained with the Registrar General, and the same shall be kept in a fixed deposit in auto- renewal mode. The same shall be subject to further orders of this Court.
11. Insofar as the aspect of maintenance, redevelopment, and cleanliness of the Kalkaji Mandir premises are concerned, pursuant to the order dated 8th September 2021, Mr. Sanjay Lao, ld. Standing Counsel (Criminal) for the Delhi Police, has placed before this court, a joint-inspection Status Report on behalf of the Delhi Police and the SDMC. Mr. Arun Birbal, ld. Standing Counsel appearing for the SDMC, also confirms the joint-inspection and adopts the Status Report placed by Mr. Sanjay Lao. The said Status Report is already on record.
12. Further, on 8th September 20201, Ms. Sangeeta Bharati, ld. Standing Counsel for the Delhi Jal Board, was directed to file an affidavit in respect of sewerage lines that were to be laid as also details of the tender etc. that were floated for execution of the sewerage work. Today, Ms. Bharti has appeared and submits that she needs an additional week's time to file the said affidavit. Let the said affidavit be filed within two weeks without fail.
CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 5 of 6 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:Devanshu Signing Date:26.09.2021 18:06:0113. On behalf of the SDMC, Mr. Birbal, ld. Standing Counsel submits, on instructions, that Kalkaji Mandir premises has not been handed over by the DDA to the SDMC. He further submits that there is no Temple beautification/redevelopment plan which has been developed by the SDMC.
14. List all these matters for orders on Monday, September 27, 2021, at 2:30 PM.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
SEPTEMBER 24, 2021 SU/AK CM (M) 575/2021 & connected matters Page 6 of 6