RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. These Intra-Court Appeals are preferred impugning the common order dated 19th January, 2012 of the Learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C) No. 8065/2011 and W.P.(C) No. 8036/2011 with costs of `50,000/- each, for the reason of the appellants/writ petitioners having suppressed/concealed material facts therefrom. The counsel for the private respondents appeared on caveat and considering the nature of the controversy, we have with consent heard the parties finally.

2. The writ petitions were filed seeking a direction to the Land & Development Office (L&DO) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to hear and decide the statutory revision petitions dated 27th July, 2005 and 18th May, 1994 preferred by the appellants/writ petitioners respectively, under Section 24 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954.

3. The aforesaid revision petitions were filed by the appellants/writ petitioners seeking cancellation/setting aside of the sale certificate dated 17th October, 1963 and other transfer documents in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the private respondents in respect of shop No.114, New Qutub Road Market, Delhi – 110 006.

4. Shri Bhagwan Dass, father of the appellants/writ petitioners claimed himself to be allottee w.e.f. 10th May, 1956 of the aforesaid shop paying rent for the same to the government. Shri Bhagwan Dass filed W.P.(C) No. 438-D/1958 at the Circuit Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Delhi seeking transfer of the said shop to himself instead of the same being sold in a public auction to any other person. The then Settlement Commissioner, Ministry of Rehabilitation filed counter affidavit in the said writ petition pleading that Qutub Road Market was constructed by the Ministry of Rehabilitation and the same formed part of the compensation pool within the meaning of Section 14 of the Displaced Persons Act and the said shop was to be transferred on ownership basis to displaced persons only. It was further pleaded that the said Shri Bhagwan Dass was not a displaced person and the shop had been allotted to him as a temporary measure only but could not be transferred/sold to him. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 21st September, 1960 with the department agreeing that if it decided to sell the shop , by auction - whether public or private or by calling tenders, Shri Bhagwan Dass as occupier of the shop will also be given equal opportunity to give his bid or tender and the said bid will be considered on merits along with bids of other bidders/tenderers if any.

5. An advertisement was issued on 28th December, 1960 in the newspapers inviting tenders for the sale of the aforesaid shop. The predecessor in interest of the private respondents submitted his tender and which being the highest was accepted and part of the price of the shop was adjusted against the verified claims of the said predecessor of the private respondents, as per Section 8 of the Displaced Persons Act. Shri Bhagwan Dass did not participate in the sale proceedings. Sale certificate aforesaid (impugned in the revision petitions) was issued in favour of the predecessor of the private respondents and a lease deed and a supplementary lease deed with respect to the said shop also registered in his favour on 17th October, 1963 and 28th February, 1967. As per the terms thereof the predecessor of the private respondents as purchaser became entitled to receive rent from Shri Bhagwan Dass in occupation of the said shop.

6. Shri Bhagwan Dass, predecessor of the appellants/writ petitioners died in the year 1962. The predecessor of the private respondents on 26th July, 1973 instituted a suit for recovery of possession of the shop against the legal heirs of Shri Bhagwan Dass including the appellants/writ petitioners herein. The legal heirs of Shri Bhawan Dass contested the said suit, also challenging the ownership/title of the predecessor of the private respo