Delhi Development Authority vs Ramesh Lakhwani

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Delhi Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Lakhwani – Respondent

Table of Content
1. factual background of property conversion case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. defendants' delay and failure to act. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. requirement of concrete evidence for denial of rights. (Para 13 , 18 , 19)
4. appellant's arguments regarding forged documents. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. court's imposition of costs and dismissal of appeal. (Para 20 , 21)

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. Aggrieved by the Order dated 18.03.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 3359/2017, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has preferred the instant appeal. The learned Single Judge by the Judgment impugned herein in the appeal has allowed the writ petition which was filed by Respondent No.1 herein for a direction to the Appellant/DDA to process the application of the Respondent No.1 for conversion of the property bearing J-221, Malviya Nagar Extension, Saket, New Delhi-110017 from leasehold to freehold in accordance with the policy guidelines of the DDA.

2. The facts, in brief, which has led to filing of the instant appeal are that the Government i.e., Secretary (CN), Land and Building Department, Delhi Administration, recommended allotment of an alternati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASADDelhi Development Authority – AppellantVersusRamesh Lakhwani – Respondent

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Delhi Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Lakhwani – Respondent