amcdonline.gov.in/at/dailyordersnew/5_10.07.2017.pdf · ld. counsel for respondent filed status...
TRANSCRIPT
A.No. 384/15 10.07.2017
Present : None for appellant.
Mohd Khalid, proxy counsel for Sh. Naveen
Grover, counsel for MCD.
None has appeared on behalf of appellant.
In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned for final
arguments on 14.11.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 222/15 10.07.2017
Present : None for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, proxy counsel for Ms.
Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for respondent filed status report. As per
status report there are two towers installed at the premises
and both have been sealed. From the record it is evident
that record pertained to the Idea Cellular Ltd. has been filed
by the respondent. Hence, respondent is also directed to
file the record of other tower.
Ld. counsel for respondent submits that the power of
attorney filed by the appellant has already been expired on
31.03.2016 as per the Board Resolution filed by the
appellant, therefore, appeal is not maintainable.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent / final arguments on 14.11.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 408/15 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Jatan Singh, counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for SDMC.
Ms. Vinnie Sharma, proxy counsel for
Monitoring Committee.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appellant has
deposited the misuse charges. Further, he submits that
appellant is ready to give undertaking that he will not use
the property in question for commercial purpose and will use
the same for residential purpose or any other purpose as
provided in MPD-2021. He also submits that appellant is a
lawyer company and thus permitted to run the office from
basement being professional activities.
Final arguments heard.
Put up this matter for clarification if any/ orders on
27.07.2017.
In the meanwhile respondent is directed to file the
status report whether appellant has deposited the misuse
charges or not atleast one week prior to the date fixed failing
which it will be presumes that same has been deposited by
the appellant.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 946/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO from EDMC.
Ld. counsel for appellant seeks some more time to
file amended appeal.
In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is
granted for filing of amended appeal by the appellant on
14.11.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 1100/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Sarsij Nayanam, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO from EDMC alongwith
Sh. S.K. Katara, AE(B).
Vakalatnama of Sh. Randhir Kumar Singh on behalf
of respondent filed.
AE(B) submits that there is no file with the address
C-1/56, Khasra No.410, Village Bihari Pur, Dayal Pur
Extension, Ilaka Shahdara, Delhi-94.
At the request of both the parties let joint inspection
of property in question be carried out on 20.07.2017 at 2.00
PM.
Put up this matter for filing of status report, reply of
the appeal and record by the respondent on 01.08.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 1099/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Sarsij Nayanam, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Mukesh Sharma, counsel for EDMC
alongwith alongwith Sh. S.K. Katara, AE(B).
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
AE(B) submits that the tower installed at the property
in question i.e. Khasra No. 484, Village Tukmirpur, Majra
Biharipur, Illaqa Shahdara, Delhi-94 has been removed from
the site on 22.09.2016.
At the request of Ld. counsel for appellant, let joint
inspection of the property be carried out on 20.07.2017 at
2.00 PM to verify whether the tower is installed at the
premises or not.
Put up this matter for filing of status report, reply of
the appeal and record by the respondent on 01.08.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 724/16 & 727/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Praveen Suri, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD
alongwith Sh. Sanjay Gupta, ALO.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks some more time to
file status report.
In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is
granted for filing status report by the respondent on
04.09.2017, failing which concerned Dy. Commissioner will
appear in person.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
M.No. 24/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Raghav Ranjan Srivastav, counsel for
applicant.
None for respondent.
None for Monitoring Committee.
None has appeared on behalf of NDMC despite
service of notice.
Issue show cause notice to concerned head of
NDMC as well Member of Monitoring Committee to explain
why nobody has appeared on their behalf for 12.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 271/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Praveen Suri, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Sarita, proxy counsel for Sh. Umesh
Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent has filed
vakalatnama as well as status report. Copy of status report
supplied.
Record has already been filed by the respondent.
Let respondent to file complete status report whether
property in question is regularizable or not without going into
the issue of floor wise policy.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent on 24.08.2017.
Copy of the order be given dasti to both the parties,
as prayed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 1198/15 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Nilesh Kumar Bhardwaj, proxy counsel for
appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Ld. proxy counsel for appellant seeks some more
time to deposit the misuse charges.
Let the same be deposited. Copy of receipt be
supplied to concerned AE(B) atleast two weeks prior to the
date fixed and AE(B) will file status report whether amount
has been deposited or not.
Put up this matter for final arguments on 26.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 607/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Abdul Haq, JLO.
Ld. counsel for respondent filed status report. Copy
supplied. As per status report the appellant is liable to pay a
sum of Rs. 59,041.77/- as misuse charges / registration
charges/ 10 times penalty and same has not been deposited
till date.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appellant will
either deposit the charges or file objections to the status
report.
Copy of receipt be supplied to concerned AE(B)
atleast two weeks prior to the date fixed and AE(B) will file
status report whether amount has been deposited or not.
Put up this matter for final arguments on 19.09.2017.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 473/13, 1014/13, 1015/13 & 1016/13
10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for DDA alongwith Ms.
Neeru Sharma, Nodal Officer and Sh. Tejpal
Singh, Kanungo for DDA.
Sh. Sujoy Gaur, proxy counsel for Sh. Navin Mata,
counsel for Monitoring Committee in appeal no.
473/13.
Sh. Himanshu Harbola, counsel for Monitoring
Committee in appeal no. 1014/13, 1015/13 &
1016/13.
Ld. Counsel for MCD and DDA has filed status report.
Copies supplied. As per status report of MCD the property in
question was jointly inspected on 05.07.2017. The report has
been filed only qua the 149 properties, though as per the previous
report 240 commercial establishments were sealed. Nothing is
mentioned about remaining properties as according to previous
status report 240 were sealed and further said land is owned by
DDA whether DDA has taken any action to recover the
possession and whether it intent to take the possession of the
same or not.
Further, DDA has filed new letter dated 09.11.2016 written
to the joint secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, regarding
its proposal for transfer of land at Mangolpur Kalan from DDA to
Development Department of GNCTD. Let reply of the said letter
be filed.
In the circumstances, let fresh status of the remaining
properties be also filed in this regard. Further, respondent
corporation will file status report whether appellants are liable to
pay any misuse charges or not.
For the said purpose, they are allowed to deseal the
property on 24.07.2017 at 11.00 AM and reseal the same after
the inspection on the same day.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent corporation as well as DDA on 11.09.2017.
Copy of the order be given dasti to all the parties, as
prayed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 452/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Jitender Saini, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Varun Khera, proxy counsel for SDMC.
Vakalatnama of Sh. Jatin Aggarwal on behalf of
respondent filed.
Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent seeks time to
file reply of the appeal and record.
Put up this matter for filing of reply of the appeal and
record by the respondent on 26.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
M.No. 33/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for applicant.
Arguments heard on application for revival of the
appeal.
Issue notice of the application to the respondent
corporation as well as Monitoring Committee for 26.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 86/15 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Pawan Behl, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Hukam Singh, AE(B) alongwith Sh. Ashok
Kumar, ALO for SDMC.
Fresh vakalatnama on behalf of appellant filed.
Status report filed by the respondent. Copy supplied.
As per status report the file has been sent to Building (HQ)
for clarification and decision whether appellant is also
required to pay conversion charges or not.
In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is
granted to file the same on 29.07.2017, failing which
concerned Dy. Commissioner will appear in person.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 320/17 & 343/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Desh Deepak, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma / Sh. R.K. Singh, counsel
for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Status report filed by the respondent corporation. Copy
supplied. As per the status report application for Sanctioned
Building Plan for construction of residential building on plot no.
435/10, out of Khasra No. 486, Khewat No. 613, Hardevpuri,
Delhi was received and the building plan was sanctioned on
03.09.2010. A complaint dated 26.09.2016 was received that
Sanctioned Building Plan was obtained by appellant by showing
wrong location of plot and road in part layout plan submitted with
the building plan application and also constructed the building in
lieu of that sanction on the open land adjoining to F-11(Pvt. No. F-
11-B) earmarked for community facilities in the approved layout
plan of East Jyto Nagar. Therefore, a show cause notice dated
08.03.2017 was issued to appellant for revoking of Sanctioned
Building Plan. The appellant filed reply, in which he could not give
any reasonable justification for showing the wrong location of plot
and road in the part layout plan submitted with the building plan
application, therefore, Sanctioned Building Plan was revoked.
In the circumstances, respondent to file layout plan
whether the property in question is situated showing specifically
the plot about which sanction was granted and the plot on which
the appellant has raised the building.
In the meanwhile respondent will file status report whether
detail of construction mentioned in the affidavit filed by the
appellant is correct or not, by the next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of layout plan by the
respondent and for final arguments on 25.10.2017.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 318/17 & 344/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Desh Deepak, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma / Sh. R.K. Singh, counsel
for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed in appeal
no.318/17.
Status report filed by the respondent corporation. Copy
supplied. As per the status report application for Sanctioned
Building Plan for construction of residential building on plot no.
435/10, out of Khasra No. 486, Khewat No. 613, Hardevpuri,
Delhi was received and the building plan was sanctioned on
03.09.2010. A complaint dated 26.09.2016 was received that
Sanctioned Building Plan was obtained by appellant by showing
wrong location of plot and road in part layout plan submitted with
the building plan application and also constructed the building in
lieu of that sanction on the open land adjoining to F-11(Pvt. No. F-
11-B) earmarked for community facilities in the approved layout
plan of East Jyoti Nagar. Therefore, a show cause notice dated
08.03.2017 was issued to appellant for revoking of Sanctioned
Building Plan. The appellant filed reply, in which he could not give
any reasonable justification for showing the wrong location of plot
and road in the part layout plan submitted with the building plan
application, therefore, Sanctioned Building Plan was revoked.
In the circumstances, respondent to file layout plan
whether the property in question is situated showing specifically
the plot about which sanction was granted and the plot on which
the appellant has raised the building.
In the meanwhile respondent will file status report whether
detail of construction mentioned in the affidavit filed by the
appellant is correct or not, by the next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of layout plan by the
respondent and for final arguments on 25.10.2017.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 319/17 & 346/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Desh Deepak, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma / Sh. R.K. Singh, counsel
for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Status report filed by the respondent corporation. Copy
supplied. As per the status report application for Sanctioned
Building Plan for construction of residential building on plot no.
435/10, out of Khasra No. 486, Khewat No. 613, Hardevpuri,
Delhi was received and the building plan was sanctioned on
03.09.2010. A complaint dated 26.09.2016 was received that
Sanctioned Building Plan was obtained by appellant by showing
wrong location of plot and road in part layout plan submitted with
the building plan application and also constructed the building in
lieu of that sanction on the open land adjoining to F-11(Pvt. No. F-
11-A) earmarked for community facilities in the approved layout
plan of East Jyoti Nagar. Therefore, a show cause notice dated
08.03.2017 was issued to appellant for revoking of Sanctioned
Building Plan. The appellant filed reply, in which he could not give
any reasonable justification for showing the wrong location of plot
and road in the part layout plan submitted with the building plan
application, therefore, Sanctioned Building Plan was revoked.
In the circumstances, respondent to file layout plan
whether the property in question is situated showing specifically
the plot about which sanction was granted and the plot on which
the appellant has raised the building.
In the meanwhile respondent will file status report whether
detail of construction mentioned in the affidavit filed by the
appellant is correct or not, by the next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of layout plan by the
respondent and for final arguments on 25.10.2017.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 317/17 & 345/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Desh Deepak, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma / Sh. R.K. Singh, counsel
for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed in appeal
no.318/17.
Status report filed by the respondent corporation. Copy
supplied. As per the status report application for Sanctioned
Building Plan for construction of residential building on plot no.
435/10, out of Khasra No. 486, Khewat No. 613, Hardevpuri,
Delhi was received and the building plan was sanctioned on
03.09.2010. A complaint dated 26.09.2016 was received that
Sanctioned Building Plan was obtained by appellant by showing
wrong location of plot and road in part layout plan submitted with
the building plan application and also constructed the building in
lieu of that sanction on the open land adjoining to F-11(Pvt. No. F-
12-A) earmarked for community facilities in the approved layout
plan of East Jyoti Nagar. Therefore, a show cause notice dated
08.03.2017 was issued to appellant for revoking of Sanctioned
Building Plan. The appellant filed reply, in which he could not give
any reasonable justification for showing the wrong location of plot
and road in the part layout plan submitted with the building plan
application, therefore, Sanctioned Building Plan was revoked.
In the circumstances, respondent to file layout plan
whether the property in question is situated showing specifically
the plot about which sanction was granted and the plot on which
the appellant has raised the building.
In the meanwhile respondent will file status report whether
detail of construction mentioned in the affidavit filed by the
appellant is correct or not, by the next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of layout plan by the
respondent and for final arguments on 25.10.2017.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 124/12 & 540/11 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal / Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,
counsel for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed in appeal
no. 540/11.
An application U/o 16 Rule 3 CPC filed by the
appellant Sh. Sunil Ahuja and Sh. Prem Ahuja both sons of
Sh. Bhagwan Dass Ahuja is pending for disposal.
Statement of the Sh. Prem Ahuja in this regard has been
recorded separately who depose that his father expired on
26.12.2016 leaving behind following LRs Smt. Chander
Kanta Malhotra, Daughter, Smt. Usha Kiran Kataria,
Daughter, Smt. Shashi Sial, Daughter, Shri Sunil Ahuja,
Son, Shri Prem Ahuja, Son, and further submits that his
sister has issued RD in their favour. Let applicant to call his
sisters for recording their statement that they have executed
RD in favour of his brothers.
Put up this matter for arguments on 09.10.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 762/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Chand Zafar, counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, proxy counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for appellant seeks some more time to
deposit the misuse charges / penalty.
In the circumstances, case is adjourned to
20.11.2017 for arguments.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 824/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. R.P. Singh, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that since the
respondent has sealed the property in question in
pursuance of the order passed by the NGT, therefore, he
want to approach the NGT for desealing the property in
question and prayed for withdrawal of the present appeal
with liberty to file fresh appeal before the NGT. Statement
of the appellant has been recorded in this regard separately.
In view of the statement of appellant, the present
appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh
appeal before the NGT, as per law. The file of the
department, if any, be returned to the respondent alongwith
copy of this order. One copy of the order be sent to
Commissioner concerned through concerned Chief Law
Officer. File be consigned to record room.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 516/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. G.S. Narula counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Kuldeep Chopra, AE(B) .
AE(B) submits that a sum of Rs. 14,02,910/- has
been deposited by the appellant vide G-8 receipt no. 71758
on 12.04.2017 with the respondent Corporation.
Put up this matter for orders at 4.00 .M.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 516/13 10.07.2017 04.00 P.M.
Present : Sh. G.S. Narula counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD .
Vide separate detailed order, the present appeal is
allowed.
The file of the department, if any, be returned to the
respondent alongwith copy of this order. One copy of the
order be sent to Commissioner concerned through Chief
Law Officer concerned for necessary action. File be
consigned to record room.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 465/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. S.D. Dixit, counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks some more time to
file record.
Ld. counsel for appellant has filed copy of existing
Sanctioned Building Plan.
Put up this matter for filing of record and arguments
on 14.07.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 682/13 10.07.2017
Present : None for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for respondent some more time to file
sealing order no. 75/AE(B)/SZ/08/51 dated 17.06.2008. Let
said record be filed by the respondent by next date of
hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of said record by the
respondent and arguments on 01.08.2017. Copy of the
order be given dasti to counsel for respondent, as prayed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 115/12 & 542/11 10.07.2017
Present : None for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta / Sh. H.R. Aggarwal,
counsel for MCD.
Sh. Sujoy Gaur, proxy counsel for Sh. Navin
Mata, counsel for Monitoring Committee.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed in appeal
no. 542/11.
Put up this matter with connected appeal no. 540/11
and 124/12 on 09.10.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 54/12 & 55/12 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. K.N.Singh, counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal / Sh. Dharamvir Gupta /
Sh. Naresh Kumar, counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for respondent has filed status report
alongwith copy of circulars.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that the respondent
has filed the rules / circulars which were prevailing in the
year 2010-11 and 2013-14 but he has applied for
regularization in the year 2008 and his application was
rejected in the year 2008, therefore, respondent was
directed to file rules of 2008.
Let respondent to file the rules / circulars with regard
to width of road of 15’ was in the year 2008 or not.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appellant is
ready to demolish the projections which are on municipal
land if the appellant is allowed the temporary desealing of
the property in question and he pray for the temporary
desealing of the property for the said purpose.
Ld. counsel for respondent has no objection for
temporary desealing of the property for the purpose of
demolition / removal of projections on municipal land,
hence, I order the respondent to deseal the property in
question on 17.07.2017 at 11.00 AM and reseal the same
on 21.07.2017 at 04.00 PM. During this period appellant will
not carry out any construction / addition / alteration / repair
in the property and will not use the property for any other
purpose except for removal of projections on municipal land.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 20.09.2017. Copy of the
order be given dasti to both the parties, as prayed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 1048/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Part arguments heard.
From the impugned order it is evident that the
building plan has been rejected due to non compliance of
objections contained in IN dated 28.05.2015 & 10.12.2015.
Ld. Counsel for appellant submits that respondent
has only rejected the Sanctioned Building Plan as letter was
filed by the appellant for eviction of his tenant before the
ARC and the said case has no concern with the ownership
title of property in question, hence, a refusal of Sanctioned
Building Plan is not sustainable.
Let respondent to file status report which point is
mentioned in the IN dated 28.05.2015 and 10.12.2015
which has not been complied by the appellant.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 26.09.2017. Copy of the
order be given dasti to both the parties, as prayed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 559/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Surender Verma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Ld. counsel for respondent has filed photocopy of the
dak register showing that show cause notice was sent to the
appellant alongwith photo copy of the postal receipts.
In the meanwhile respondent will file the Sanctioned
Building Plan of the property in question showing the
deviations which are beyond Sanctioned Building Plan.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 15.11.2017. Interim stay, if
any, is extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 776/16 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Sh. Rajeev Kumar counsel for applicant.
An application under rules 14 & 17 of DMC Act
Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1986 alongwith
documents has been filed by the applicant. Copy supplied.
Ld counsel for appellant submits that respondent has
issued show cause notice dated 11.08.2015 for
unauthorized construction in the shape of deviations/excess
coverage against Sanctioned Building Plan dated
19.01.2012 from Stilt to third floor. However, the same has
not been specified in the order. On perusal of the record I
found that Sanctioned Building Plan is not in the record,
neither same has been filed by the respondent. therefore,
both respondent and appellant are directed to file
Sanctioned Building Plan showing the deviations which are
beyond Sanctioned Building Plan.
Put up this matter for filing of reply of the application
filed by the applicant as well as for filing of status report by
the respondent on 09.11.2017. Interim stay, if any, is
extended till next date.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 562/13, 564/13 & 568/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Hemant Kaushik proxy counsel for
appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Proxy counsel for appellant submits that main
counsel is not available as he is ill and seeks adjournment.
In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is
granted for final arguments on 16.10.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
M.No. 06/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. R.Y. Kalra counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Ms. Nirmala Gupta counsel for DDA alongwith
Ms. Neeru Sharma, Nodal officer and Sh.
Ishwar Chand, Kanungo, DDA.
Ms. Vinnie Sharma proxy counsel for
Monitoring Committee.
Ld. counsel for DDA submits that he need to verify
whether the property in question falls within the jurisdiction
of DDA or not and seeks adjournment.
In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is
granted for final arguments on 25.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 374/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Hemant Payak counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.
An application under section 151 CPC on behalf of
appellant seeking permission to restore the position of
construction as it existed prior to commencement of
construction on 01.04.2017 has been filed by the appellant
is pending for disposal. Let copy of the same be supplied to
the counsel for respondent today itself and respondent is
directed to file reply of the same.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 31.08.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 495/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. H.S. Kohli, counsel for appellant.
Present appeal has been filed against demolition
order dated 02.06.2017.
Let notice of the appeal and application be issued to
the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B)
is directed to file entire record of the proceedings and reply
of the appeal on date fixed.
Put up this matter on 14.07.2017. Notice be given
dasti.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 494/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. B.L. Chawla, counsel for appellant.
Present appeal has been filed against order dated
16.03.2016, whereby respondent has ordered to demolish
the unauthorized construction in the shape of excess
coverage / deviations against the Sanctioned Building Plan
dated 31.03.1984 at ground floor and entire first floor.
Let notice of the appeal and application be issued to
the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B)
is directed to file entire record of the proceedings and reply
of the appeal on date fixed.
Put up this matter on 20.07.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 477/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. R.P. Sirohi, counsel for appellant.
An application under 1 rule 10 CPC has been filed for
impleading M/s ATC Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. as a
necessary party alongwith amended memo of parties.
Issue notice of application to the proposed
respondent through ordinary process as well as through
registered AD and Speed Post, for the date already fixed i.e.
on 24.07.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 236/17 & 262/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Yogesh Kumar, counsel for appellant.
File taken up on an application for clarification /
modification or order dated 24.05.2017.
Issue notice of the application to the respondent for
the date already fixed i.e. on 26.09.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 493/17 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. Peeyush Kalra, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the revocation of
Sanctioned Building Plan dated 30.06.2017 for property
bearing no. B-55, Greater Kailash Part-I, New Delhi.
Let notice of the appeal and application be issued to
the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B)
is directed to file entire record of the proceedings and reply
of the appeal on date fixed.
Put up this matter on 19.07.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 486/15 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. H.S. Kohli with Sh. T.D. Sharma, counsel
for appellant.
File taken up on an application filed by the appellant
to take Indemnity Bond and undertaking on record.
Indemnity Bond and undertaking is accepted.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 133/14, 141/14, 148/14, 151/14 & 622/14 to 625/14. 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. K.N. Singh / Sh. J. Mohan, counsel for
appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta / Sh. A.L. Agnihotri,
counsel for North DMC.
Final arguments heard.
Put up this matter for clarification if any/orders on
08.08.2017.
Both the parties are at liberty to file written
submissions if any within two weeks prior to the date fixed.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 641/16 10.07.2017
Present : Appellant in person.
Ms. Nirmala Sharma, counsel for respondent
SDMC.
Ms. Neeru Sharma Nodal officer for DDA.
Case is fixed for orders.
However DDA has filed standard building plan.
Appellant has filed the allotment letter.
Put up this matter for clarification if any/orders on
10.08.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 516/13 10.07.2017
Present : Sh. G.S. Narula, counsel for appellant.
Sh.V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Kuldeep Chopra, AE(B).
None for Monitoring Committee.
Ld. counsel for the appellant submits that appellant
has deposited a sum of Rs. 14,02,910/- vide G8 Receipt No.
71758 on 12.04.2017.
AE(B) admits that appellant had deposited the
misuse charges of Rs. 14,02,910/-. His statement has been
recorded separately.
Put up this matter at 4.00 PM for orders.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
It is submitted by Ld. counsel for respondent that this
is an appeal against sealing order, but as per status report
there is no sealing record available and sealing of the
property was done on 02.05.2011 and 04.05.2011 as per
the directions of the Monitoring Committee. The property in
question falls in unauthorized colony and not abutting any
notified commercial road and as such no conversion /
parking charges are leviable at this stage. It is submitted by
Ld. counsel for the appellant that on this ground the appeal
be set aside and remanded back for deciding the same
afresh.
In the interest of justice, the matter is remanded back
to the Dy. Commissioner, Shahdara South Zone for deciding
the same afresh. The respondent shall provide the
opportunity of submitting reply of the show cause notice as
well as personal hearing to the appellant who is directed to
appear in the office of Dy. Commissioner, Shahdara South
Zone on 27.07.2017 at 3:00 p.m. on which date the
appellant is permitted to file additional reply, document and
written submissions, if any. Appellant, however shall not
seek any adjournment on any ground for personal hearing
or for filing any document or written submission or for
submitting reply of the show cause notice.
The Dy. Commissioner, Shahdara South Zone
thereafter shall pass the speaking order and deal with all the
submissions, pleas and the defences raised by the
appellant and shall complete the proceedings maximum
within three months thereafter.
With these observations appeal is remanded back.
The appellant shall not raise any further construction in the
said property nor shall sell it or create any third party
interest in the same till the matter is decided afresh by the
Dy. Commissioner concerned or till the period of three
months whichever is later. Appellant shall also not carry
out any repair (except whitewash) in this property without
written permission of Dy. Commissioner concerned.
The appeal is, thus, disposed off. The file of the
department, if any, be returned to the respondent alongwith
copy of this order. Appeal file be consigned to record room.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 171/17 10.07.2017
Present : Counsel for parties.
One of the regular Stenographer is on leave.
Put up for the purpose already fixed on 21.07.2017.
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 10.07.2017
Present :
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. Statement of Sh.
ON SA
RO&AC
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 516/13 Statement of Sh. Kuldeep Chopra, AE(B) , Shahdara South Zone.
ON SA
AE(B) submits that the appellant has deposited misuse charges of
Rs. 14.02,910/- vide G-8 receipt no. 71758 on 12.04.2017 with the
respondent corporation.
RO&AC
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No.
RO&AC
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 824/16 Statement of Sh. Rajesh Lakra, S/o Late Sh. Om Parkash Lakra, aged 45
years, R/o H. No. 303, Mundka Village, Nangloi, Delhi-41
ON SA
I want to withdraw the present appeal as the respondent has
sealed the property in question in pursuance of the order dated
12.12.2013 in the case titled as Satish Kumar Vs. UOI and Mr. Mahavir
Singh Vs. UOI. Therefore, I want to approach the NGT for desealing the
property in question bearing no. 98/23, Swaran Park, Mundka, Delhi with
liberty to file fresh appeal before the NGT as per law. Hence, the present
appeal be dismissed as withdrawn.
RO&AC
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017
A.No. 540/11 & 124/12 Statement of Sh. Prem Ahuja, S/o Late Sh. Bhagwan Dass Ahuja, aged
51 years, R/o 7/56, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi
ON SA
I am son of appellant who has expired on 26.12.2016. Copy of
death certificate is Ex. P-1. He has left behind following LRs :
1. Smt. Chander Kanta Malhotra Daughter
2. Smt. Usha Kiran Kataria Daughter
3. Smt. Shashi Sial Daughter
4. Shri Sunil Ahuja Son
5. Shri Prem Ahuja Son
He has not left behind any other LRs except the above and has not
executed any Will. Smt. Chander Kanta Malhotra, Smt. Usha Kiran
Kataria and Smt. Shashi Sial had executed relinquishment deed dated
10.02.2017 thereby release and relinquish their share in the property in
question i.e. 7/56, Old Rajender Nagar, in favour of myself and my
brother Shri Sunil Ahuja. This is my true and correct statement.
Photocopy of relinquishment deed is Ex. P-2. Photocopy of my Driving
Licence is Ex.P-3.
RO&AC
(SANJEEV KUMAR) Appellate Tribunal:MCD
10.07.2017