Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Veer Singh & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
North Delhi Municipal Coporations & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 1041 of 2022, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2961-2962 of 2022
Decided On : 17-01-2022
Construction - Property Dispute - The court directed the respondents to inspect the construction site and repair any damage caused to the petitioner's property at their own costs.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner sought restraint on respondents from raising construction in a property, claiming damage to their own property due to the construction.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to inspect both properties and ascertain if the construction was in accordance with the sanctioned plan and if any damage had been caused to the petitioner's property. Remedial steps were to be suggested and immediately rectified at the respondents' own costs.
Issues: Dispute over construction activity causing damage to petitioner's property.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that if damage was found to be caused to the petitioner's property due to the construction, the respondents were obligated to have the property repaired expeditiously at their own costs.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with the court's directive for inspection, remedial steps, and immediate rectification of any damage at the respondents' own costs.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks a restraint on the respondents from raising any construction in property bearing No.12, Vivekanand Puri, Sarai Rohilla, New Delhi.
3. It is contended that on account of the construction that is being raised in the subject property and digging of the basement, the property of the petitioner being property No.11, Vivekanand Puri, Sarai Rohilla, New Delhi tilted and got damaged.
4. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 as also by counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4.
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that there is a sanctioned plan for raising construction and even construction of the basement has been sanctioned.
6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that certain compensation was sought by the petitioner and which was not acceded to on account of which the subject petition has been filed. He disputes the photographs placed on record. He submits that the adjoining area had fallen down on its own and immediate steps for repair of the same were undertaken.
7. He however submits that in case any damage has been caused to the property of the petitioner on account of the construction activity, said respondents undertake to have the property of the petitioner repaired expeditiously at their own costs.
8. Without prejudice to the dispute being raised by respondent 2 to 4, the officers of the respondent Corporation are directed to inspect both property No.11 and property No. 12 within one week to ascertain as to whether the construction being carried out in property No.12 is in accordance with the sanctioned building plan or not and further as to whether any damage has been caused to the property of the petitioner i.e. property No.11, Vivekanand Puri, Sarai Rohilla, New Delhi on account of said construction.
9. In case it is found that there is any damage to the property of the petitioner because of the construction being carried out by respondent Nos.2 to 4 remedial steps be suggested by the officers.
10. On such remedial steps being suggested, respondent Nos.2 to 4 shall immediately rectify the same at their own costs.
11. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
12. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.
The obligation of the respondents to repair any damage caused to the petitioner's property due to construction activity at their own costs.
Property owners are entitled to seek remedies for damages caused by construction activities on adjacent properties, emphasizing the necessity of compliance with sanctioned plans.
Requirement of a sanctioned building plan and measures to protect structural integrity in property disputes.
Construction activities must adhere to sanctioned building plans to ensure structural integrity and prevent unauthorized modifications affecting neighboring properties.
The court's decision was influenced by the adherence to the sanctioned building plan and environmental norms, leading to the disposal of the petition with a specific direction for repair of the bound....
The court's decision was influenced by the Corporation's revocation of the sanction plan and the pendency of an appeal before the appellate Tribunal, MCD, without making any determination on the meri....
Court upheld adherence to sanctioned building plans in response to petitioner's claims of unauthorized construction and confirmed respondent's undertaking for property repairs.
Unconditional apology with a cost and subjecting further construction activity to the orders of the appellate Tribunal-MCD.
The court reiterated that unauthorized construction issues should be dealt with by the municipal corporation, while appeals regarding property ownership must be resolved through the appropriate tribu....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
