Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: CS No. 180/2024 Sushil Goel v. Naresh Kumar & Ors. Page 1 of 5
IN THE COURT OF SH KISHOR KUMAR, DJ-04
NORTH, ROHINI COURTS, DELHI.
CS No. 180/2024
CNR No. DLNT01-003022-2024
Sushil Goel
…… Plaintiff
Vs.
Naresh Kumar & Ors.
…… Defendants
ORDER/29.05.2024
1. Vide this order I shall dispose of an application under
Order I Rule 10 CPC, filed on behalf of defendant no.6/MCD for
deletion of its name from the array of defendants.
2. The plaintiff has filed the present suit thereby seeking
directions against defendant no.6/MCD besides other reliefs
against other defendants, to cancel site plans letter
no.2034/10025968/B-II/RZ dated 30.12.2014 and sanctioned site
plan vide file no.112/10032046/B-II/RZ/16 dated 26.02.2016 as
null and void with respect to suit property bearing no.8, H-4,
Sector-11, Rohini, Delhi-110085. The plaintiff has also sought
direction against defendant/MCD to not to do change in name of
title deeds, conversion from leasehold to freehold, mutation in
house tax or to pass sanction site plan of the suit property.
-- 1 of 5 --
CS No. 180/2024 Sushil Goel v. Naresh Kumar & Ors. Page 2 of 5
3. It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for defendant/MCD that
sanctioned building plan dated 30.12.2014 has already been
lapsed being valid upto 2019 and no further extension of the
same has been sought within stipulated period and, thus, sanction
plan on date is as good as non-existing. It is further submitted
that if plaintiff has any grievance, he has to approach the
Appellate Tribunal. It is further submitted that sanctioned site
plan dated 30.12.2014 was granted in the name of Sh. Naresh
Kumar with respect to suit property whereas sanctioned site plan
dated 26.02.2016 is with respect to property no.108, Pocket E-01,
Sector-16, Rohini, Delhi in the name of Sh. Kulwant Singh and
Smt. Jaswal Chawla which has no concern with the suit property.
It is further submitted that no application with reference to
mutation of the suit property has been received in the office of
House Tax Department of MCD. It is submitted that there is no
cause of action against the defendant/MCD and MCD is neither a
necessary nor a proper party to the suit.
4. Per contra, it is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff
that Appellate Tribunal cannot declare any document as null and
void. It is further submitted that defendant no.6 sanctioned the
site plan of suit property which belonged to plaintiff and applied
by stranger/defendant no.1. Ld. Counsel for the plaintiff has
relied on order dated 13.12.2022 passed by Ld. Predecessor of
this Court on application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, moved by
-- 2 of 5 --
CS No. 180/2024 Sushil Goel v. Naresh Kumar & Ors. Page 3 of 5
the plaintiff. Rest of the contents of application under Order I
Rule 10 CPC are denied by the plaintiff being false and incorrect.
5. I have heard Ld. Counsels for the parties and have
carefully gone through the material on record.
6. The main grievance of plaintiff against the defendant
no.6/MCD is that the defendant no.6 sanctioned the site plan with
respect to the suit property, applied by defendant no.1 whereas
the suit property belongs to the plaintiff.
7. A person is a necessary party when in the absence of
whom relief claimed in the suit cannot be granted. A necessary
party is against whom the relief is sought and without whom no
effective order can be passed. Proper parties are those whose
presence may be necessary with a view to fully adjudicate upon
the matters involved in the suit. In Kasturi vs. Uyyamperumal
and others (2005) 6 SCC 733, the Hon’ble Apex Court provided
two tests that are to be satisfied for determining the question that
who amounts to a necessary party:
(i) there must be a right to some relief against such party in respect of the
controversies involved in the proceedings,
(ii) no effective decree can be passed in the absence of such a party.
8. Section 347B (1)(a) of DMC Act says that any person
aggrieved by an order according or disallowing sanction to a lay-
-- 3 of 5 --
CS No. 180/2024 Sushil Goel v. Naresh Kumar & Ors. Page 4 of 5
out plan, may prefer an appeal against such order or notice to the
Appellate Tribunal.
9. Admittedly, the plaintiff has not preferred any appeal to the
Appellate Tribunal regarding alleged wrong sanctioning of site
plan with respect to the suit property. Further, with respect to the
relief of cancellation of site plans letter no.2034/10025968/B-
II/RZ dated 30.12.2014 and sanctioned site plan vide file
no.112/10032046/B-II/RZ/16 dated 26.02.2016 as null and void
with respect to suit property bearing no.8, H-4, Sector-11,
Rohini, Delhi-110085, the sanctioned site plan dated 30.12.2014
has already been lapsed being valid only up to 2019 whereas
sanctioned site plan dated 26.02.2016 is with respect to property
no.108, Pocket E-01, Sector-16, Rohini, Delhi which has no
concern with the suit property. So far as the another relief sought
by the plaintiff from defendantMCD is concerned i.e. the
direction against defendant/MCD to not to do change in name of
title deeds, conversion from leasehold to freehold, mutation in
house tax or to pass sanction site plan of the suit property, as per
Ld. Counsel for defendant/MCD, no application for mutation of
the suit property has been received in the office of House Tax
Department of MCD and this submission of Ld. Counsel for
defendant/MCD has not been controverted by Ld. Counsel for
the plaintiff. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that there
is any cause of action exists against the defendant/MCD.
-- 4 of 5 --
CS No. 180/2024 Sushil Goel v. Naresh Kumar & Ors. Page 5 of 5
Consequently, defendant/MCD is neither a necessary party nor a
proper party for the purpose of present suit.
10. In view of my above discussion, application under Order I
Rule 10 CPC, moved on behalf of defendant/MCD stands
allowed and defendant/MCD is hereby deleted from the array of
defendants. However, an opportunity is hereby granted to the
plaintiff to summon defendant/MCD as witness in the present
case.
11. Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Announced in the Open Court
On 29.05.2024.
(Kishor Kumar)
DJ-04, North, Rohini Courts,
Delhi/29.05.24.
-- 5 of 5 --