Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: Civ Suit 162/24
HARISH VS. YAG PRATAP GUPTA
29.01.2025
AT 11:30 AM
Present: Plaintiff in person alongwith Ld. Counsel Mr. A A
Khan.
Defendant no. 1 and 2 in person alongwith Ld.
Counsel Mr. Mahesh Kumar Sharma.
Mr. Rahul Verma, Ld. Counsel for the defendant no.
3 / MCD through VC.
In terms of previous order, Ld. Counsel for the
plaintiff points out that the plaintiff has been running from pillar
to post, to MCD, to police and all sorts of authorities and despite
the same, defendants have been undertaking construction work at
the site of the suit property unabated. With regards the state of
affairs being as such, Ld. Counsel for the defendant no. 3 / MCD
is questioned and he states that he does not have the entire
details. As such therefore, Ld. Counsel is asked to get joined
through VC the proper official / AE for MCD at 12:30 PM.
Kept awaited.
(Gaurav Sharma)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian Judge
East/KKD Courts/Delhi
29.01.2025
AT 12:30 PM
Present: Plaintiff in person alongwith Ld. Counsel.
Defendant no. 1 and 2 in person alongwith Ld.
Counsel.
Mr. Harjeet Singh, AE for MCD / defendant no. 3
through VC alongwith Ld. Counsel Mr. Rahul
Verma.
-1/3-
-- 1 of 3 --
On perusal of the case file, it is observed that the
matter is at the stage of arguments on the application under O 6
R 17 CPC.
Ld. Counsel for the defendants fairly concedes that
there is no objection as such to the amendment sought since its
merits shall anyways be subject to the defence of the defendants
during trial going forward.
Submissions heard. Application perused.
For the reasons stated in the application and
considering the fact that the matter is at an initial stage, even
issues have not been framed and trial is yet to commence,
application under O 6 R 17 CPC stands allowed.
Amended plaint be filed, if not already.
Be that as it may, Ld. Counsel for the MCD and the
AE appearing through VC have been asked to apprise the Court
about the as on date status of the grievance of the plaintiff with
regards construction activity being undertaken at the site of the
suit property in an unauthorized manner.
The AE appearing has given the entire chronology
of the sequence of events. He has stated that the site plan
sanctioned by the MCD in favour of the defendants no. 1 and 2
already stands revoked on 29.11.2024. Further, the property itself
is stated to have been booked by the MCD on 05.12.2024.
Hearing was granted to the defendants against the same which
was also closed in due course. Subsequently, the AE has
informed that the defendants had moved an application
for regularization on 14.01.2025. With regards the same also, it is
-2/3-
-- 2 of 3 --
stated by the AE that it has been rejected by a formal order dated
29.01.2025, which shall be communicated to the defendants in
due course. As to the way forward, the AE informs that
demolition order shall now be passed against the suit property
constructed by the defendants in violation of the MCD rules and
guidelines. (suit property: the entire structure built up at Plot No.
23, Veer Savarkar Block, Computer Market, Metro Pillar No. 59,
Shakarpur, Vikas Marg, Delhi-110092). Demolition notice in that
regard, as per the AE, will also be issued to the defendants in
respect to the same.
Given the factual scenario as aforesaid and no
contrary factual averments being made from the opposing side,
defendants no. 1 and 2 are hereby restrained from carrying out
any further construction at the site of the suit property in any
manner. Any violation of such restraint order shall invite adverse
consequences. The officials of the MCD / defendant no. 3 are
hereby enjoined to ensure that no further illegal / unauthorized
construction takes place at the suit property at the hands of the
defendants no. 1 and 2.
Copy of this order be sent to the office of the
defendant no. 3 without further delay and be handed over dasti to
the plaintiff as well, if sought.
Re-list on 05.03.2025.
(Gaurav Sharma)
JSCC-cum-ASCJ-cum-Guardian Judge
East/KKD Courts/Delhi
29.01.2025
-3/3-
-- 3 of 3 --