Yuvraj Singh Puar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Del) 285

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
REKHA PALLI, AJAY DIGPAUL
Yuvraj Singh Puar – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Gautam Narayan, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Asmita Singh, Mr. Tushar Nain, Mr. Anirudh Anand, Mr. Punishk Handa, Mr.Abheet Mangleek, Advs.
For the Respondent: Mr. Kapil Dutta with Mr. Vansh Luthra, Advs, Mr. Sanjay Katyal, S.C. with Ms. Ritika Bansal, Mr. Deepak Dhingra with Ms. Sneh Somani, Advs

ORDER :

1. A request for adjournment is made on behalf of the respondent no.1, who submits that earlier nominated counsel has now been designated as a Senior Counsel and, therefore, alternate arrangements are required to be made.

2. Learned senior counsel for the appellant submits that due to pendency of the present appeal, the respondent no.3, in an endeavour to make the present appeal infructuous, is proceeding to complete the construction of the suit property i.e. B-89, Greater Kailash, Part I, New Delhi. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 vehemently denies this position and submits that the building is already complete.

3. This submission is controverted by the learned senior counsel for the appellant, who contends that construction is still ongoing. He, therefore, prays that a Local Commissioner be appointed to ascertain the factual position as on date.

4. Even though learned counsel for the respondent no.3 vehemently opposes the request for appointment of a Local Commissioner, we are of the view that it will be in the interest of justice to ascertain the correct factual position of the suit property as on date, as the same is likely to have a direct bearing on the outcome of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document