1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.6829 OF 2014

G.R. GUPTA APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

LOK SABHA SECRETARIAT RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

The present appeal is directed against an order passed by the

High Court of Delhi on 29.11.2013 whereby the order of the Single

Judge Bench affirming the order passed by the Estate Officer as

well as the District Judge in appeal in proceedings under the

Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1971 [for

short ‘the Act’] was not interfered with.

The appellant was an IPS officer. He was on deputation to the

Lok Sabha Secretariat from 14.02.1979 to 25.07.1982. Being civil

servant on deputation with the Lok Sabha Secretariat, the appellant

was allotted Bungalow No.16, Talkatora Road, New Delhi. He was

repatriated to his parent department from where he superannuated on

31.12.1993. Since the house was of the pool of Lok Sabha

Secretariat, the appellant was required to vacate the same soon

after his repatriation but the appellant continued to reside in the

Bungalow allotted to him. He attained the age of superannuation on

31.12.1993 and as per rules, he could retain the house for another

period of 8 months but it was only on 27.09.2001, he vacated the

house in question.

Digitally signed by R

Natarajan

Date: 2021.08.23

17:08:25 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

The Estate Officer, Lok Sabha Secretariat passed an order on

21.11.2003 directing the appellant to pay normal licence fee from

01.01.1994 to 31.08.1994 and double normal licence fee from

01.09.1994 to 27.09.2001. This order was challenged by the Lok

Sabha Secretariat in appeal before the District Judge which was

allowed on 13.09.2010. The Estate Officer was directed to reassess

the damages. The parties were directed to appear before the Estate

Officer on 30.09.2010. It is, thereafter, the Estate Officer of Lok

Sabha Secretariat passed an order on 13.12.2010 and directed the

appellant to pay a sum of Rs.16,11,823/- on account of licence fee

at the market rates from 01.09.1994 to 27.09.2001 along with penal

interest @ 18% p.a. An appeal preferred by the appellant before the

District Judge, New Delhi was dismissed on 28.11.2011.

The writ petition filed against the order of the Estate

Officer and of the District Judge was dismissed by the Single Judge

Bench on 14.05.2013. Still aggrieved, a Letters Patent Appeal was

filed which was dismissed vide the order impugned in the present

appeal.

Before the Division Bench, an argument was raised that the

claim of Lok Sabha Secretariat is barred by limitation in view of

the judgment of this Court in ‘New Delhi Municipal Committee Vs.

Kalu Ram & Anr.’ reported in (1976) 3 SCC 407 dealing with the

Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1958 [for

short ‘the Act, 1958’].

The Division Bench held that the claim of the Lok Sabha

Secretariat falls within the ambit of Article 112 of Schedule to

the Limitation Act, 1963 which provides limitation of 30 years.

3

Therefore, the claim of the respondent is within the period of

limitation and dismissed the appeal.

During the pendency of the present appeal, the appellant had

deposited a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) when a statement

was made before this Court on 10.02.2014. Another Rs.4,00,000/-

(Rupees Four Lakhs) were deposited in pursuance to the statement

made on 31.03.2014. It was on 21.07.2014, leave was granted and the

conditional stay was granted on further deposit of a sum of

Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs). Learned counsel for the appellant

submits that total sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) stand

deposited.

The arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant before

this Court are based upon Kalu Ram’ case (supra) wherein claim of

damages under Section 7 of the Act, 1958 wo