Khatri Hotels Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India on 28 March, 2009
The ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has placed his
reliance on the crossexamination of PW4 who is unable
to tell whether Khasra no. 1674 was a subject matter of
notification dated 20.8.1974. This I am afraid will not
help the plaintiff in any manner and merely because
PW4 the Record Keeper LAC South has stated that he
: 76 :
has not aware if Khasra no. 1674 is the subject matter of
the notification issued under Section 22 (1) of the DD
Act will not make any difference since the notification
dated 20.8.1974 itself is very clear and clearly shows
that the entire village Kishangarh (Mehrauli) which had
earlier been acquired by the Central Government vide
notification dated 3.6.1966 Ex.D2W1/1 had been placed
at the disposal of the DDA for development and
maintenance as green and for taking such steps as
required to serve the said purpose, subject to the
conditions that the DDA shall not make or cause, or
permit to be made any constructions on the said land.
Therefore, under these circumstances, as per the settled
law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Jangbir Vs. Mahavir Prashad Gupta (Supra) and
also followed by the Delhi High Court in the case of
: 77 :
Rajender Kakkar Vs. DDA (Supra) as discussed
herein above, I hold that since no specific Khasra no.
having been mentioned, the entire village Kishangarh
was placed at the disposal of the DDA for development
and maintenance as green and no construction on the
land could have been made or permitted to have been
made over the said land.