SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Del) 165

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
SATISH KUMAR KAPOOR – Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
DIPAK KHADARIA, SANJIV KHANNA

( 1 ) WITH the consent of learned Counsel for the parties the petition is taken up for final disposal.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was granted perpetual sub-lease hold rights in respect of plot a-80, Geetanjali Enclave, New Delhi, measuring 900 square yards (752. 51 square metres) in pursuance to the perpetual sub-lease deed 10. 1. 1972. The petitioner was required to construct on the plot in question within a period of two years from 21. 9. 1971 in terms of Clause II (5 ). This period in terms of guidelines of respondent were extended to three years from two years. Thus the petitioner was required to complete the construction by 20. 9. 1974.

( 3 ) IT is not disputed that a general amnesty period was provided from 1. 1. 1971 to 31. 12. 1975 in view of the shortage of steel, cement and necessary requirements for carrying on construction. On 15. 9. 1976 the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) act was notified and made applicable to Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The petitioner applied for exemption under the Act on 14. 9. 1976. On 7. 1. 1988 a draft assessment order was prepared in terms whereof the entire land was liable to be forfeited and to vest with the Government under t










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top