Om Apartment Pvt. Ltd. vs Delhi Development Authority & ...
2009 Latest Caselaw 665 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+     WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) 195/1994

                               Reserved on :    12th February, 2009
                           Date of Decision :   26th February, 2009

      OM APARTMENT PVT. LTD.                         ....... Petitioner

                          Through : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv.


                 versus


      DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents

                          Through : Mr. Vikas Sharma, Adv.




    % CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

      1.    Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
            the judgment?                                          Yes.
      2.    To be referred to the Reporter or not?                 Yes.
      3.    Whether the judgment should be reported in
            the Digest?                                            Yes.



                            JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

1. The Petitioner was the successful bidder at the auction of

perpetual lease hold rights in commercial Plot No.92, Nehru Place,

New Delhi, held by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). After

construction of the multi-storey building, the Petitioner sold the

apartments therein to various persons.

2. The Petitioner states that on 31st May, 1983 the Respondent

issued show cause notice to the Petitioner stating therein that the

basement is being used for office and shops contrary to the terms and

conditions of the auction/lease deed. The Petitioner replied to the

said show cause notice vide reply dated 10th June, 1983 denying that

any breach of the terms and conditions of the auction was committed.

3. The DDA despite this reply vide communication dated 10th

September, 1983 informed the Petitioner that the allotment of plot in

question had been cancelled. Subsequently, ex-parte proceedings

were taken against the Petitioner culminating with eviction order

dated 19th July, 1993 under the provisions of the Public Premises

(Eviction of Unauthorised Occupant) Act, 1971. According to the

Petitioner the said impugned action was without notice or service and

without affording any opportunity of hearing.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has drawn our attention to

similar matters decided by a learned Single Judge of this Court being

C.W. 2324/1993 (M/s Raja Towers (P) Ltd. and Anr. vs. DDA

and Anr.) and CW 2364/1983 (Sh. Satinder Nath Kaul vs.

Deputy Director (Commercial) DDA and Ors) both decided on 25th

July, 2002. The learned Single Judge while allowing those petitions

held that the DDA was at liberty to proceed against individual flat

owners after due notice to them.

5. We do not see any reason to disagree with the view taken by the

learned Single Judge. It is submitted by learned counsel for the

Petitioner that floor space having been sold to the various flat buyers,

the latter became owners thereof and, therefore, without hearing the

said flat buyers who are affected parties, the action of cancelling the

allotment was against the principles of natural justice.

6. That being the position, we allow the writ petition to the extent

that the order dated 10th September, 1983, cancelling the allotment of

the plot, and the eviction order dated 19th July, 1993 are hereby

quashed.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J.

MADAN B. LOKUR, J.

February 26, 2009 bp