Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Bhagwan Dass, Proprietor Of M/S R. G. ... vs Delhi Development Authority And Anr on 28 June, 2022

Author: Sanjeev Narula

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

                          $~21
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +    W.P.(C) 9631/2022 & CM APPLs. 28738-39/2022
                               BHAGWAN DASS, PROPRIETOR OF M/S R. G. ENTERPRISES
                                                                                ..... Petitioner
                                                Through: Mr. Anupam Srivastva, Mr. Rajneesh
                                                         Bhaskar, Mr. Uday Chauhan and Mr.
                                                         Prakash Gohil, Advocates.
                                                versus
                                 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR.
                                                                                    ..... Respondents
                                                   Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Standing
                                                                Counsel for DDA.
                                 CORAM:
                                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
                                                   ORDER

% 28.06.2022

1. The Petitioner seeks urgent orders for stay on demolition action by Respondents No. 1 to 3 [who are all officers of Delhi Development Authority ("DDA")] scheduled for today i.e., 28th June, 2022 and tomorrow i.e., 29th June, 2022 at site no. DWK-53, H Block, Vikaspuri, New Delhi- 110018 [hereinafter, "site"].

2. Amongst several grounds urged for impugning the action of demolition, it is urged that the Petitioner has not received advance notice/ information for carrying out the said demolition.

3. Briefly stated, the Petitioner's case is that it was declared as the successful H-1 bidder in an e-auction process held by DDA on 06th May, 2022 qua the said site. Thereafter, a Letter of Intent [hereinafter, "LOI"] was also issued in favour of the Petitioner on 20th June, 2022. The Petitioner also deposited second stage earnest money deposit of Rs. 30,000/- with DDA.

4. Presently, there is a tent structure which is erected on the aforenoted site. The Petitioner claims that the said structure belonged to M/s Panchhi Tent House [hereinafter, "erstwhile licensee"]. When Petitioner was declared as the H-1 bidder, he purchased the same vide a Sale Agreement dated 27th June, 2022. It is thus contended that DDA does not have any right to demolish the said structure.

5. On the other hand, Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Standing Counsel for the DDA, on instructions, states that certain damages were to be paid by the erstwhile licensee, and therefore, the tent structure existing on the site is being demolished as the site has to be given free of any hindrance(s) to the successful bidder. Ms. Takiar also relies upon an undertaking given by the erstwhile licensee dated 27th June, 2022 to the effect that the outstanding dues of DDA were to be settled.

6. On the above submission, Mr. Anupam Srivastva, counsel for the Petitioner, states that Rs. 3,39,995/- has been paid to the DDA today itself and handed over a copy of bank challan as proof of the same. He submits that with the said payment, no other dues are payable by the erstwhile licensee.

7. Ms. Takiar, however, states that the above payment needs to be verified by DDA.

8. Considering that Petitioner has been declared as the H-1 bidder and has purchased the existing structure, and that outstanding dues of the erstwhile licensee have been paid, the court is of the view that, given the limited prayer sought in the instant petition, the same can be disposed of with the following directions:

(a) Respondents No. 1 to 3 shall not demolish the existing tent structure Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9631/2022 Page 2 of 3 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:28.06.2022 18:55:10 at the site in question, for which the Petitioner has been issued the LOI.

(b) In case the LOI issued to the Petitioner does not fructify into a binding contract/ license in favour of the Petitioner, DDA shall be free to take action in accordance with law.

(c) If, in the future, Respondent-DDA desires to demolish the said structure, Petitioner shall be given a seven days' notice, whereafter, the Petitioner shall be at liberty to impugn the same in accordance with law.

(d) The observations made above shall not be considered as court opinion on DDA's claims against the erstwhile license - M/s Panchhi Tent House. DDA shall be entitled to take any action for recovery of its outstanding dues, if any, against the said licensee, in accordance with law.

9. With the above directions, the petition is disposed of, along with other pending applications.

10. It is 4:20 p.m. Since it will take some time for the order to be uploaded on this court's website, Ms. Takiar is requested to immediately intimate the concerned officers of the DDA regarding the order passed today.

11. Copy of the Order be given dasti under the signature of the learned Court Master.

SANJEEV NARULA, J (VACATION JUDGE) JUNE 28, 2022/d.negi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 9631/2022 Page 3 of 3 By:SAPNA SETHI Signing Date:28.06.2022 18:55:10