SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(Del) 22647

DELHI HIGH COURT
ASHA GUPTA & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATON THROUGH COMMISSIONER & ORS. – Respondent
W.P.(C)-12260/2021 2023:DHC:6674-DB



W.P.(C.) No.12260/2021

Page 1 of 19

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment reserved on: 25.08.2023

%

Judgment delivered on: 15.09.2023

+

W.P.(C) 12260/2021 & CM APPL. 38363/2021

ASHA GUPTA & ANR.

..... Petitioners

Through:

Mr. Jatin Kumar, Mr. Bikram Gupta,

Advocates

versus

SOUTH

DELHI

MUNICIPAL

CORPORATON

THROUGH

COMMISSIONER & ORS.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Dhanesh Relan, SC with Mr.

Arindam Dey and Mr. Aditya Pandey,

Advocates for R-1.

Ms. Monika Tripathy, SC with Mr.

Chiranjan Saha and Mr. Rony John,

Advocates for R-2.

Ms. K. Iyer and Mr. C.R. Dutta

Biswas, Advocates for R-4.

Mr. Sandeep Chatterjee and Mr.

Sanyam Suri, Advocates for R-5.

Mr. Shoumendu Mukherjee, SPC

with Ms. Megha Sharma, Advocates

for UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

J U D G M E N T

Digitaaly Signed

By:BHUPINDER SINGH

ROHELLA

Signing Date:15.09.2023

10:59:48

Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C.) No.12260/2021

Page 2 of 19

SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, C.J.

1.

The present writ petition has been filed by Mrs. Asha Gupta and Mr.

Jayanta Ghoshal (collectively referred to as the “Petitioners”) who are the

owners-in-possession of the First Floor; and Second Floor forming a part of

an immovable property situated at Plot No.108, Pocket 40, Chittaranjan

Park, New Delhi 110019 (the “Identified Property”) and have filed this

present writ petition aggrieved on account of re-development of an adjacent

property i.e., an immovable property bearing No. 119 situated at Pocket 40,

Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi 110019 (the “Subject Property”) wherein

Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 i.e., the joint owners of the Subject Property have

demolished the original superstructure on the Subject Property and have

commenced construction de novoon the Subject Property(the “Writ

Petition”).

2.

The brief facts leading to the filling of this Writ Petition are that the

Delhi Development Authority (the “DDA”) developed Pocket 40,

Chittaranjan Park, New Delhi (the “Identified Land”) by way of plotting the

Identified Land for the purpose of a planned residential colony by carving

out plots admeasuring approximately 135.45 Sq. Meters, each. The

Identified Property situated on the Identified Land was allotted jointly to Mr.

Deepak Kumar and Ms. Purabi Ray vide a lease deed dated 15.10.1990 (the

“Original Allotees”). Pertinently, requisite sanction was accorded on

26.12.2000to the construction site plan by the erstwhile South Delhi

Municipal Corporation (“SDMC” or “Respondent No. 1”) (now merged as

the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (the “MCD”)) for the construction of

Ground Floor, First Floor and Second Floor over the Identified Property

Digitaaly Signed

By:BHUPINDER SINGH

ROHELLA

Signing Date:15.09.2023

10:59:48

Signature Not Verified

W.P.(C.) No.12260/2021

Page 3 of 19

keeping in view the Master Plan for Delhi, 2001 (“MPD 2001”) and other

laws applicable at the relevant point of time.

3.

Thereafter, vide a sale deed dated 22.04.2004, Petitioner No.2

purchased the First Floor forming a part of the Identified Property from one

Mr. Bibash Nag Chowdhari who had in turn purchased the same from the

Original Allotees. Additionally, vide a sale deed dated 11.10.2010,

Petitioner No.1 purchased the Second Floor forming a part of the Identified

Property from one Ms. Beli Banik who had in turn purchased the same from

the Original Allotees. The Petitioners are admittedly, second purchasers of

their respective floors forming a part of the Identified Property.

4.

It is stated that on 1.20.2021, the Petitioners‟ noticed that building

pillars were being erected near the rear boundary wall of the Subject

Property i.e., the common wall between the Identified Property and the

Subject Property without provisioning for any setback/gap/space from the

setback line of the rear façade of the superstructure to the outer-boundary

wall (“Rear Setback”). Thus, the Petitione

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top