The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of demarcation in resolving land disputes and the court's authority to direct demarcation proceedings.

CM No.17142/2013 (for review of order dt. 14.3.2015)

1. This is an application filed on behalf of respondent No.5, for recall of order dated 14.3.2013, passed in writ petition No.590/2013.

2. To be noted, vide order dated 14.3.2013, my predecessor had disposed of the writ petition with a direction that demarcation proceedings be carried out in respect of Khasra No.30/2/2, falling in the revenue estate of village Mandawali, Fazalpur, Delhi -110092.

3. For the sake of brevity the order is not extracted herein.

3.1 It is, however, noticed that in the order, the learned Judge had noticed that respondent No.5 had expressed his difficulty with regard to demarcation of the subject land. The learned Judge, however, rejected the reason put forth on the ground that the defect could be overcome by identifying at least two pukhta points by identifying the said points on the site plan pertaining to subject land. Furthermore, the learned Judge observed that the demarcation could take place by using the Total Station Machine Method.

4. Insofar as this application is concerned, the stand taken, in sum, by respondent No.5 is that the subject land was bifurcated into three parts, i.e. 30/1 (2-8), 30/1(0-12) and 30/3 (17-2). This bifurcation, according to respondent No.5, took place in 1915-1916.

4.1 It is further stated that in 1949-50 one of the bifurcated khasras, i.e. Khasra No.30/1(2-8), was further divided into two part, i.e. Khasra Nos.30/1 and 30/1(min). It is stated that each of these parts admeasures 1 bigha and 4 biswas.

4.2 There is a further averment that in the revenue records, in 1964-65, Khasra No.30/2 and 30/4 have been shown as banjar kadim.

4.3 In other words, this land remained fallow for a continuous period of three years and as such was vested in Gaon Sabha.

5. Furthermore, it is averred that in 1964-65, Khasra Nos.30/1-2-3/1, admeasuring 6 bighas and 5 biswas were acquired vide award No.1695 dated 3.4.1964.

5.1 It is the case of respondent No.5 that possession of this land was handed over to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on 25.4.1964.

6. Insofar as the remaining area, which is represented by Khasra No.30/1-2-3/2, admeasuring 13 bighas and 17 biswas was concerned, this was, apparently, acquired vide award No.2179 dated 18.11.1996.

6.1 It is the case of respondent No.1 that possession of this land was handed over to DDA and PWD on 3.12.1968.

7. Respondent No.5, in the application, candidly, accepts that acquisition of the aforementioned khasras is not reflected in the revenue records.

8. Based on the above, it is stated that the petitioner is not the owner of subject land i.e., khasra No.30/2/2. The stand taken is that the land over which rights are claimed by the petitioner is, in fact, the Government land and is in possession of Government agencies.

8.1 Counsel for the petitioner, on the other hand, states that at this stage he is not claiming any ownership in respect of Khasra No.30/2/2, which admeasures 8 biswas. He says that he has come to court only to seek demarcation.

9. Counsel for respondent No.5 says that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, the demarcation could be carried out.

10. Accordingly, the application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to carry out the demarcation, as indicated in the order dated 14.3.2014 with due expedition though, no later than twelve weeks from today.