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

Khalid Rehman vs The Commissioner Municipal ... on 9 November, 2022

Author: Manoj Kumar Ohri

Bench: Manoj Kumar Ohri

                            $~63
                            *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            +    W.P.(C) 15371/2022 & CM. APPL. 47728/2022
                                 KHALID REHMAN                               ..... Petitioner
                                                  Through: Ms.Niharika Rai, Mr.M.S.Khan and
                                                            Mr.M.Arshyan, Advocates

                                               versus
                                  THE COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL
                                  CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.          ..... Respondents
                                               Through: Mr.Kamal Digpaul (Through V.C.)
                                                        and Ms.Swati Kwatra, Advocates for
                                                        Mr.Ajay Digpaul, Standing Counsel,
                                                        MCD.
                                                        Mr.Arun Panwar, Advocate for
                                                        respondent No.2/SHO with SI Anil
                                                        Kumar, PS. Jamia Nagar.

                                  CORAM:
                                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
                                               ORDER

% 09.11.2022

1. By way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner who claims to be the owner of property bearing Municipal No. 337C/16 (Old) C-31 (New), Gali No. 6, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi - 110025 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'subject premises'), is aggrieved by the fact that respondent No.3 has carried out illegal and unauthorised construction in the subject premises.

2. Ms.Niharika Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has entered into an Agreement to Sell with respondent No.3 however, later disputes arose between the parties. She submits that respondent No.3 has carried out illegal and unauthorised construction in the subject premises for which various complaints have been addressed to Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND Signing Date:10.11.2022 12:42:39 respondent Nos.1 and 2, however no action has been taken till date.

3. Issue notice.

4. Mr.Kamal Digpaul, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1/MCD and, on instructions, submits that unauthorized construction in the subject premises has already been booked, whereafter, a demolition order has also been passed on 18.02.2022. He seeks some time to file Action Taken Report. Let the same be placed on record before the next date of hearing.

5. Mr.Arun Panwar, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2/SHO, P.S. Jamia Nagar.

6. Notice be issued to respondent No.3 by all permissible modes, returnable on 07.03.2023.

7. In the meantime, respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall ensure that no further construction is carried out at the subject premises, which is not in accordance with law.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J NOVEMBER 9, 2022/v Digitally Signed By:SANGEETA ANAND Signing Date:10.11.2022 12:42:39