Land disputes regarding demarcation must be resolved by the competent authority, ensuring no coercive actions are taken against rightful possessors pending appeal decisions.

JUDGMENT

D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)

Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.

CM Nos. 26238-26239/2021 (Exemptions)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Applications are disposed of.

LPA 244/2021 and CM No. 26237/2021 (stay)

1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order dated 08.07.2021 passed in W.P. (C) 6232/2021, the Appellant (original Petitioner) has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.

2. The case of the Appellant, as set out in the appeal, is that the Appellant purchased a farm land in Village Asola, bearing Khasra Nos.1273, 1275 and 1276, and the construction plan was duly sanctioned. The Appellant constructed a house on the farm land and is in settled possession of the property in question since 1995. It is alleged that in the year 2018, Respondents on the basis of an incorrect demarcation attempted to wrongfully dispossess the Appellant from the aforesaid land. Since the Revenue and the Forest Department were constantly threatening the Appellant of dispossession, the Appellant had filed a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.1743/2018 before this Court. Vide order that 23.01.2019, the Court directed the concerned SDM to carry out a fresh demarcation so as to clearly demarcate the area that falls under the forest land. The order was challenged by the Appellant in LPA No.66/2019 and vide order dated 31.01.2019, the Division Bench of this Court affirmed the order of the learned Single Judge, however, granting liberty to the Appellant to avail the statutory remedies available, in case he was aggrieved by the demarcation and the findings recorded therein and also directing the concerned Authorities to follow the due process of law, before taking any coercive action.

3. As per the pleadings in the appeal, the officials of the SDM came to the subject land on 24.07.2019 and started forcefully demolishing portion of the back boundary wall of the Appellant, which led to the Appellant filing a contempt petition being Cont. Cas. No.668/2019, which is still pending. On 26.07.2019, the Appellant was provided with a Demarcation Report, which was challenged by the Appellant by way of an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (South) under Section 64 read with Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 alongwith a stay application. The appeal is stated to be pending before the Deputy Commissioner.

4. Appellant filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge being W.P.(C) 6232/2021 seeking directions restraining the Respondents from demolishing the private property of the Appellant comprised in Khasra Nos.1273, 1275 and 1276, Village Asola, New Delhi and/or taking forcible possession till the decision of the pending appeal. Before the learned Single Judge, the Appellant argued that a portion of the boundary wall, which lied in the property of the Petitioner, had been demolished and forcible possession of the part of the property had been taken by the Respondents. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents, on advance copy, had, however, denied that Respondent No.2 had taken forcible possession of any part of the Appellant's property and also made a statement, on instructions, that Respondent No.2 did not propose to take any coercive action in respect of the subject property and that there would be no interference with the possession during the pendency of the appeal. Binding Respondent No.2 to the statement made, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition, also granting liberty to the Appellant to raise the plea of alleged forcible take-