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

1997 Supreme(Del) 211

High Court Of Delhi
DEWAN AND SONS INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - Respondent
Civil 647 of 1995
Decided On : 02/28/1997

Advocates Appeared:
A.K.NIGAM, Jayant Bhushan, S.K.Chachra, Sangita CHANDRA

Headnote:Property – construction - Sections 7, 12 and 14 of Delhi Development Act, 1957, Section 54 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Article 226 of Constitution of India, Sections 180-A and 183-A of Cantonments Act, 1924 and Section 25 (O) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – whether petitioner entitled to issuance of no objection certificate for raising construction –petitioner contended that he acquired vested right as result of agreement to sell coupled with passing of resolution dated 30.08.1971 by respondent – facts revealed that application for sanction of building plan submitted by predecessor in interest of petitioner rejected on 19.02.1962 – no order for issuance of no objection certificate passed on application of petitioner submitted after acquiring right over property after execution of registered sale deed – held, petitioner had not acquired vested right to have no objection certificate.

Lokeshwar Prasad, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner, named above, has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing directions to respondent No. l the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the DDA ) to issue a no Objection Certificate from the land use, location and ownership point of view as demanded by respondent No. 2 - the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (for short the MCD ), for raising construction on property, bearing No. 15/7361 (Tel Mill Plot), Ram Nagar, Main Kutub Road, Delhi also described as Khasra No. 158/2, Qadim Sharif Estate, Kutub Road, Delhi in accordance with law prevalent in 1971 i. e. with FAR 300 and also for a direction, directing the MCD (respondent No. 2) to sanction the building plans in respect of the commercial construction asked for on the above said property in accordance with the laws prevalent in the year 1971.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for the disposal of the present petition, briefly stated, are that it is averred that. the petitioner is the owner, in possession in respect of Khasra No. 158/2, Qadim Sharif Estate, Kutub Road, Delhi, measuring about 4977. 75 sq. yards, also described as 15/7361 ( Tel Mill Plot), Ram nagar, Main Kutub Road, Delhi. The petitioner, it is alleged, acquired the said property vide Deed of Sale dated the 13th February, 1990, duly registered with the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Delhi. Prior to the execution of the Deed of Sale in its favour, the petitioner, it is alleged, had entered into an agreement for the purchase of the above said property from M/s Goodwill India Limited vide Agreement to Sell dated 1. 5. 1970. M/s Goodwill India Limited, the predecessor-in-title of the petitioner, in respect of the property in question, had filed a suit (Suit No. 341/68 - entitled Goodwill India Limited Vs. Union of India and others) and the DDA (respondent No. l) was defendant No. 2 in the above said suit. The above said suit was decreed in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner vide judgment and decree dated 6. 6. 74. Feeling aggrieved the DDA and the Union of India preferred an appeal [rfa (OS)47/74 - Delhi Development Authority etc. Vs. M/s Goodwill India Ltd. etc. ]. The above mentioned appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 14. 3. 80. Against the decision of the Division Bench in the above mentioned appeal, the DDA preferred a Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6636/81 before the Supreme Court. The Special Leave Petition (SLP), filed by. the DDA, was dismissed as withdrawn. However, liberty was given to the appellant DDA to apply for review of the judgment and order of the Division Bench of this Court in RFA (OS) 47/74.

2. 2 The DDA, pursuant to the dismissal of the Special Leave Petition and in terms of the orders passed by the Supreme Court, Filed a Review Application (RA No. 3/84 in RFA (OS) 47/74 ). The above mentioned Review Application was also dismissed vide order dated 26. 10. 87.

2. 3 It is alleged that the predecessor-in- interest of the petitioner had applied for sanction for construction on the above said plot in October, 1961 which was declined by the MCD (respondent No. 2) on 19th February, 1962. Against the above refusal by MCD, the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner Filed an appeal before the Commissioner, MCD on 12. 10. 1962. In the process of deciding the appeal, a notice dated 16- 17/11/1962 was received by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner requiring to obtain certain approvals. The matter was taken up with the DDA who vide communication dated 6. 1. 63, 10. 7. 63, 12. 9. 63 and 30. 10. 63 informed that the matter was under consideration. It is alleged that the respondent No. l DDA vide communication dated 4. 2. 67 and 30. 11. 68 informed that the Zonal Plan of the area was being considered by the DDA and a decision was yet to be arrived at. The predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner also made a representation to the DDA (respon




















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 Back to top