IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Vinod Kumar Gupta - Appellant
Versus
SDM(HQ) - Respondent
W.P.(C) 4358 of 2021 & CM Appl. 13283 of 2021
Decided On : 16-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. failure to submit requisite documents for land allotment. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding tenant's inability to produce ownership documents. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's view on the impugned order's basis. (Para 6) |
| 4. remittance of the matter for reconsideration. (Para 7) |
| 5. disposition of the petition and guidelines for further action. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (ORAL)--The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner impugns order dated 21.01.2021 whereby the application of the petitioner for allotment of an alternative plot as per the Government policy in lieu of acquisition of land of Village Sanoth vide award No.17/2003-04 has been rejected solely on the ground that petitioner has failed to submit the requisite documents within 15 days.
3. The impugned order records that petitioner has not submitted the complete documents i.e. title deed of property No.4353/55, Second Floor, Naya Bazar, Delhi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a tenant in the subject property and had produced the rent receipt. He submits that as there is an ongoing dispute with the landlord, petitioner was not in a position to produce the original sale deed of the said property.
5. Learned counsel submits that with great difficulty petitioner had been able to trace out the registration details of the sale deed and has accordingly obtained a certified copy of the sale deed of property with regard to second floor with terrace roof rights having an area measuring 100.33 sq.mtrs being part of the northern side portion of property No.4053 to 4055 situated at Naya Bazar, Lahori Gate, Delhi.
6. In view of the fact that petitioner has now produced the sale deed dated 16.06.2016 of the second floor allegedly of the subject property, I am of the view that the very basis of impugned order does not survive any further and accordingly the same calls for a remit.
7. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 is set aside. Matter is remitted to the Recommendation Committee for reconsideration. The Committee shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a fresh speaking order expeditiously.
8. All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.
9. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
10. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
The court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness, allowing reconsideration of applications when new evidence is presented, even if initial requirements were not met.
Failure to submit requisite documents within the specified time frame may be reconsidered if the petitioner subsequently produces the necessary documentation.
The court emphasized that failure to receive notices does not negate the petitioner's right to due process, allowing reconsideration of their application for an alternative plot.
The court emphasized the importance of complying with notice requirements and submitting requisite documents in applications for allotment of alternative plots, while also directing expeditious consi....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the documents submitted by the petitioner and granting them an opportunity of hearing in the case of allotment of an alternative plot.
Respondents unjustly dismissed the petitioner's application for an alternative plot due to lack of notified requirements, leading the court to quash the decision and remand the case for fresh conside....
Ownership issues cannot be determined in eviction suits, and certified copies of public documents are admissible in evidence.
The exemption of the limitation period granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court during the COVID-19 pandemic can be relied upon to justify the delay in approaching the court.
Ownership issues cannot be adjudicated in eviction suits; certified copies of public documents are admissible as evidence.
Fair consideration of evidence and granting the petitioner an opportunity to present their case before the Scrutiny Committee.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.