Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: MCA No. 27/26 CNR No. DLET01-003681-2026 Shakuntla Vs DDA & Ors. Page No. 1 of 3
MCA No. 27/26
CNR No. DLET01-003681-2026
Shakuntla Vs DDA & Ors.
06.08.2026
Present : Sh. Deepak Parashar and Sh. Pradeep Sharma, Ld.
Counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Kshitiz Ahuja, Ld. Counsel for respondent No.1.
Sh. Vijay Tyagi, Ld. Counsel for respondent No. 2.
None for the respondent no. 3.
An application under Section 151 CPC has been filed by
the appellant seeking urgent listing of the present appeal on the
ground that he apprehends that the respondents may forcibly
dispossess him from the suit property. Considering the urgency
expressed in the application, notice of four days was issued to the
respondents and the matter was listed today at the request and
convenience of the Ld. Counsel for the appellant/ applicant.
On appearance, the Ld. Counsel for respondent no.1/DDA
submitted that the present appeal has become infructuous as
possession of the suit property has already been taken by the DDA.
It was further submitted that photographs with geotags and time
would be placed on record to show that possession has already
been taken over and nothing is left to be adjudicated in the present
appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the appellant refuted the submissions
of the Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 with the submissions
that although officials of the respondents along with bulldozers,
man force and police force, have reached the locality and have
commenced proceedings in the area but actual possession of the
-- 1 of 3 --
MCA No. 27/26 CNR No. DLET01-003681-2026 Shakuntla Vs DDA & Ors. Page No. 2 of 3
suit property has not yet been taken. It has been emphasised that if
they aren't stopped right now the possession of the suit property
will be taken over and eventually the present appeal become
infructuous. In support of his submissions the appellant has placed
on record 8 coloured photographs and a letter dated 03.08.2026
issued by the Executive Engineer, EMD-5, DDA in MCA No.
25/2026.
Heard.
The rival submissions show that there is a serious dispute
regarding the present status of possession of the suit property.
According to the DDA, possession has already been taken and,
therefore, nothing further remains to be done at the suit property.
Per-contra, the appellant maintains that possession has not yet
been taken and that the respondents are in the process of taking
coercive action.
This Court is of the considered opinion that if the stand of
respondent no.1 is correct no further action would remain to be
taken at the suit property However, if the submission of the
appellant is correct and possession has not yet been taken by the
respondents than any further action during the pendency of the
appeal may render the appeal infructuous and may result in
irreversible consequences.
In these circumstances, the balance of convenience clearly
lies in preserving the existing position until the appeal is heard on
merits. The appeal is already fixed for hearing on 24.08.2026,
which is only a short time away of 18 days. If the respondents are
-- 2 of 3 --
MCA No. 27/26 CNR No. DLET01-003681-2026 Shakuntla Vs DDA & Ors. Page No. 3 of 3
restrained from taking any further steps with respect to possession
until that date, no irreparable prejudice is likely to be caused to
them. Though, on the other hand, if the possession is taken in the
meantime then the very purpose of the appeal may be defeated.
Therefore, maintaining the existing position for the next few days
would serve the ends of justice and ensure that the appeal is
decided on merits.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, both the parties are
directed to maintain
status quo, as existing at 12:39 P.M. today,
with respect to the suit property. No further coercive action or
proceedings relating to possession of the suit property shall be
undertaken, if still pending, till the next date of hearing, i.e.,
24.08.2026. However, if possession had already been taken before
12:39 P.M. today, as claimed by respondent no.1, this order shall
not disturb the existing position and the question whether the
appeal has become infructuous shall be considered on the next date
of hearing after hearing both the sides.
Be listed on the date already fixed i.e. 24.08.2026.
(Sandeep Kumar Sharma)
District Judge-04, East District,
Karkardooma Courts, Delhi
06.08.2026
-- 3 of 3 --