AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MINI PUSHKARNA, J: (ORAL)
The present petition has been filed seeking to restrain respondent no. 1/Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) from demolishing the property of the petitioner, situated at property no. 344/4, Khasra No. 193 Min, Village Lado Sarai, New Delhi.
This Court notes that when the matter was listed for hearing on 16th December, 2022, this Court had noted the submission on behalf of the petitioner, that the petitioner was owner of property measuring 235 sq. yds., falling in Khasra No. 193 Min. However, the DDA asserted that the DDA was owner of area admeasuring 4 bighas 13 biswas falling in Khasra No. 193/2 Min.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 1/DDA submits that the land claimed by the petitioner as 193 Min, is actually part of Khasra no. 193/2 Min, which is under the ownership and possession of the DDA.
Considering the aforesaid controversy, by order dated 16th December, 2022, Predecessor Bench of this Court had directed that demarcation be carried out of the subject land, in the following manner:-
“xxx xxx xxx
8.The controversy in the present petition is with respect to an ongoing construction by the Petitioner and he relies upon sale deed dated 2nd December, 2016 to claim ownership rights in the disputed parcel of land.
9.On the other hand, according to the Respondent, the Petitioner is a rank trespasser who has encroached on the land belonging to Respondent, DDA falling in Khasra No. 193/2(min) comprising of 4 Bigha and 13 Biswa.
10.Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Additional Standing Counsel for Respondent No. 2, who is present in Court has been directed to assist this Court in the present matter and represent Respondent no. 2.
11.Taking into account the submissions of the parties regarding the demarcation of the land by applying TSM, this Court directs:
(i)Respondent No. 2 to carry out the demarcation of land bearing Khasra No. 193 Min and Khasra No. 193/2(Min) by TSM.
(ii)The Respondent No.2 shall identify whether the disputed parcel of land, forming a subject matter of sale deed dated 02.12.2016, falls in Khasra No. 193 (min) or Khasra No. 193/2 (min).
(iii)The Respondent No. 2 is directed to carry out the demarcation process within a period of 10 days.
(iv)The demarcation will be carried out by Respondent No. 2 after giving notice to both Petitioner and Respondent No.1. However, in case, any of the parties are not present for carrying out the demarcation process, the absence will not be a ground for Respondent No. 2 to not carry out with the demarcation process.
(v)The entire cost of demarcation will be borne by the Petitioner and at this stage an advance amount of Rs. 1,00,000 shall be deposited with Respondent No. 2.
(vi)After the demarcation process is carried out by the Revenue Authority, the concerned person shall superimpose the Google Earth Map images on this demarcation report, to examine the location of the disputed parcel of land and the construction thereon.
12.The learned senior counsel for the Petitioner assures that the Petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. 1 lakh to carry out the process of demarcation. In case any further cost is being incurred by the Revenue Authority for carrying out demarcation and preparing the map, the Petitioner shall also bear the said cost. The cheque of Rs. 1 lakh will be issued by the Petitioner to the concerned authority, as per the instructions of Respondent No. 2 and handed over the counsel for Respondent No. 2.
13.Both the parties i.e. Petitioner and Respondent, DDA are further directed to maintain status quo with respect to the land until the next date of hearing. The learned senior counsel for the Petitioner on instructions states that the Petitioner will not carry on any further construction on the land. He also undertakes that the Petitioner will not carry out any repairs on the building including to the portions, which were demolished by Respondent No.1 on 9th December, 2022. It is further directed neither the Petitioner nor any person claiming through him will occupy the constructed portion of the property or any portion of the disputed parcel of land till the next date of hearing. The Petitioner is bound to the said undertaking.
14.The Respondent is directed to place on record the Google Earth images along with the affidavit of the concerned officer of the Respondent. The Respondent No. 1 shall bring the short affidavit on record. The Petitioner shall bring the rejoinder affidavit on record. xxx xxx xxx”
(Emphasis Supplied)
Subsequently, since it was the stand of the SDM, Saket that the area in question had already been urbanised, this Court had directed that the demarcation, as directed vide order dated 16th December, 2022, shall now be carried out by the DDA. Order dated 23rd January, 2024 passed in this regard reads as under:-
“1.Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, learned standing counsel for the respondent-Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) draws the attention of this Court to the short affidavit filed on behalf of the SDM, Saket dated 28th April, 2023. She refers to the following paragraphs:
“xxx xxx xxx
3.That it is submitted that the village Lado Sarai has been urbanised vide 23.04.1982 and DLR Act has ceased to apply.
4.……
5.That it is submitted that DDA is the land owning agency in the subject matter further that DDA has its own surveyor and the mechanism of demarcation. Hence, the demarcation of the land and question shall be carried out by the DDA itself.
6.That it is submitted that if any assistance is required from Revenue Department regarding reference point, Revenue Record, the same may be provided to DDA as and when required. xxx xxx xxx”
2.By relying upon the aforesaid affidavit, she submits that it is the DDA which shall now carry out the demarcation in terms of the directions dated 16th December, 2022 passed by this Court.
3.She further submits that the petitioner had been directed to bear the cost of demarcation, for which the petitioner had deposited an amount of Rupees one lac with the respondent no. 2-SDM, Saket. She, however, submits that since the demarcation is now being carried out by respondent no. 1-DDA, the said amount of Rupees one lac be transferred from SDM, Saket to DDA.
4.Accordingly, direction is issued to SDM, Saket to transfer the said amount of Rupees one lac, deposited by the petitioner, to the DDA forthwith.
5.Learned counsel for DDA submits that the demarcation shall be carried out by DDA within a period of two weeks from today.
6.Let the demarcation report be filed before this Court before the next date of hearing.
7.Needless to say, DDA shall comply with the directions passed by this Court vide order dated 16th December, 2022 at the time of carrying out the demarcation.
8.Re-notify on 15th February, 2024.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, learned Additional Standing Counsel for respondent no. 2-GNCTD, has handed over a cheque of ₹ 86,940/-, that had been earlier deposited by the petitioner with the Surveyor for the purpose of carrying out the demarcation.
This Court notes that by order dated 16th December, 2022, petitioner had been directed to deposit an amount of ₹ 1,00,000/- towards demarcation. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid amount of ₹ 86,940/- had been deposited with Surveyor, after deduction of Tax Deducted at Source (“TDS”).
Since, now the demarcation process has to be carried out by the DDA, it is directed that the petitioner shall deposit an amount of ₹ 1,00,000/- by way of cheque/Demand Draft with the DDA, within a period of four days from today.
It is made clear that in case the petitioner does not deposit the aforesaid amount of ₹ 1,00,000/- with the DDA within a period of four days, the DDA shall be at liberty to carry out requisite action for removal of encroachment, as per its records.
Upon receipt of the aforesaid amount, the DDA shall forthwith carry out the demarcation, in terms of the previous directions passed by this Court.
Pursuant to the demarcation carried out by the DDA, in case the DDA finds that there is encroachment on public land by the petitioner, the DDA is at liberty to forthwith take action against any such encroachment.
It is further directed that in case demarcation process is carried out by the DDA after receipt of the aforesaid amount by the petitioner, if the cost incurred by the DDA is more than the deposited amount, the DDA is at liberty to raise further demand towards the demarcation process with the petitioner, which the petitioner shall be bound to pay.
The SDM, Saket is also directed to cooperate with the DDA in carrying out the demarcation process, including, handing over the requisite records to the DDA.
The aforesaid exercise of demarcation be carried out expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two weeks from today.
Needless to state, in case, the petitioner disputes the demarcation in any manner, he would be at liberty to challenge the same and file appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law.
Further, the petitioner or his authorised representative are also directed to be present at the time of carrying out the demarcation process by the DDA, in terms of the directions as contained in order dated 16th December, 2022.
Till the demarcation process is carried out by the DDA, status quo shall be maintained by both the parties, as regards the land in question, as already directed vide order dated 16th December, 2022.
In case, any issue still remains, both the parties are at liberty to file an appropriate application before this Court.
With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.