be awaited till 1.00 pm. (poonam chaudhary) ad&sj-cum-p.o...
TRANSCRIPT
M. in No. 12/14. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Sh. R.N. Oberoi, Ld. counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
As none has appeared for appellant, be awaited till 12.00
pm.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
09.10.2019. 2.45PM Sh. Mohit Sharma, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Sh. R.N. Oberoi, Ld. counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
None has appeared on behalf of the appellant. Respondent
is directed to take necessary steps for comlpliance of order
dated 07.11.2017 for recovery of the cost from the appellant
in accordance with law.
Be listed for further proceedings on 08.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
M.No. 68/17. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Ms. Babita Kaushik, Ld. counsel for New Delhi Municipal
Council.
Be awaited till 1.00 pm.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 232/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. D.D. Joshi, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjeet Pandey, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks time to file status report
regarding verification of affidavit of appellant qua details of
existing construction.
Be listed for filing of status report on 31.10.2019.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 484/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. D.D. Joshi, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjeet Pandey, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Arguments partly heard on the application for interim stay.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
In view of averments made in the appeal that appellant has
challenged the impugned notice dated 27.09.2017, and
notice dated 02.04.2018 vide Appeal No. 231/19, which was
withdrawn, the file of said appeal be tagged with this file by
registry.
Be listed for arguments on the application for stay on
31.10.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 667/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant with Ld. counsel, Sh. Nitish Ojha.
Sh. Pritish Sabharwal, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Ld. counsel for appellant has pointed out the order of
Hon’ble High Court passed in LPA no. 295/19 titled Shankar
Gupta Vs. SDMC whereby the Hon’ble High Court vide
order dated 03.05.2019 directed that the appeal be decided
at the earliest and in any event not later than two months
thereafter from the date of hearing before this Tribunal
which was 02.07.2019.
The delay had occured due to the non filing of status report
by the respondent.
An application moved on behalf of respondent for waiver of
cost.
I have heard and considered the submissions made, there
is no justifiable ground to wave the cost, the application is
dismissed.
More time is sought to file status report.
EE(B) concerned to be present with status report .
Be listed for arguments on 1710.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 744/18, 745/18 and 746/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Avishek Kumar, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal and Sh. Anil Mishra, Ld. Counsels for
EDMC.
Ld. counsel for respondent states that the appeal is time
barred. It is further stated that no document has been filed
in support of the submissions made in the application for
condonation of delay that the appellant was confined to bed
which led to the delay in filing of appeal.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant, adjourned for
arguments on the application for condonation of delay and
filing of authorization by A.R. of appellant to 13.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 411/17. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for North DMC.
As none has appeared for the appellant, be listed for further
proceedings / final arguments on 22.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 619/18, 1050/16, 1065/16, 759/17, 273/17 and 274/17. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks more time to file status
report regarding verification of affidavit of appellant
regarding existing construction. It is stated that the status
report could not be filed since concerned JE(B) has been
transferred.
Be listed on 13.12.2019.
AE(B) to be present on the date fixed with report.
Interim orders, if any, to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 583/18 and 175/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, Ld. Counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for North DMC.
Status report filed stating that the regularization application
has been rejected for non-compliance of IN and for non-
submission of complete chain of ownership documents.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant, adjourned for final
arguments to 20.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 1197/13 and 376/14. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Manish Tanwar, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for North DMC.
Sh. Ankit Kumar, Ld. Proxy counsel for DDA.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant, be listed for final
arguments on 19.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 357/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Atul Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for DDA with AE(B), Sh.
Mahipal singh.
Status report filed stating that regularization application has
been rejected, copy supplied.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that in Writ Petition no.
10477/2019 filed by the appellant titled Manju Aggarwal Vs.
DDA, Hon’ble High Court had directed DDA / respondent
therein to file status report on the regularization application
of appellant and opinion of expert concerning the fact that
extension of balconies has rendered them dangerous It is
stated that the opinion of expert has not been filed,
Be listed for filing of the same and arguments on application
for interim stay on 16.10.2019.
A copy of order be given Dasti to Ld. counsel for respondent
as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 350/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Radha Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for SDMC.
Status report filed stating that application for re-opening of
regularization file is pending consideration as there are
some shortcomings which have not yet been complied.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that she has not received
any letter for compliance of IN, the same be supplied to the
appellant.
Be now listed for filing of status report / further proceedings
on 06.02.2020.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 243/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Narveer Dabas, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Ms. Anubha Kaushal, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks further time to file status
report regarding the verification of affidavit of appellant qua
details of existing construction.
EE(B) to be present on the next date with status report.
Be listed for further proceedings on 23.12.2019.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 564/18 and 396/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant with Ld. counsel, Sh. Bharat Bhushan Jain.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for SDMC with Sh. Krishan
Kaushik, LI.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that the appellant intends to
use the property in question for residential purposes, he
seeks more time to file the affidavit in this regard.
Be listed for further proceedings on 05.11.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 475/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, Ld. Counsel for appellant.
Ms. Sarita Gaur, ALO for North DMC.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that the rectification plan
has been submitted to the respondent on 09.09.2019 for
installation of a lift.
It is to be noted that on the previous date of hearing, the
respondent had submitted that the application for
rectification would be decided within a week and the
decision would be communicated to the appellant.
However, Ld. counsel for appellant states that no such
decision has been communicated to him till date.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that until and unless his
rectification application is decided, he cannot carry out the
rectifications, since a lift is to be installed in the property in
question.
EE(B) to be present on the next date with the report.
In case the report is not filed on the next date, Dy.
Commissioner to be present on the next date.
Be listed for further proceedings on 15.10.2019.
Ms. Sarita Gaur, ALO is directed to be present on the date
fixed.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 549/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Sagar Dhama, Ld. counsel for EDMC with Sh. Sandeep
Kumar Jain, AE(B).
Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the respondent.
1. Time is sought to file status report and record.
2. This is an appeal against the order of sealing dated
15.07.2019.
3. Ld. Counsel for appellant has pressed the application
for ad-interim stay on the ground that otherwise appeal will
become infructuous. The submissions made are tha the
appellant is the owner of the plot bearing no. F-52,
measuring 70 sq. yds. (East Side), Gali no.10, Brahampuri,
Delhi-110053, the same is ancestral and devolved upon the
appellant upon the death of his father. It is further alleged
that the entire construction in the property existed since
prior to 08.02.2007. It is also alleged that the property is
situated in the unauthorized regularized colony and has
been regularized by MCD. It is further stated that the
impugned demolition order has been passed without
considering the reply of the appellant. It is also alleged that
it is stated in the impugned order that no reply was received
whereas infact the appellant had filed reply to the same. It is
further stated that no unauthorized construction has been
raised by appellant. It is further alleged that property is
protected by the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws
(Special Provision) Act, 2011. The property has been
assessed to House-tax since the year 2000.
4. It is further stated that as per show cause notice
issued by Quasi Judicial Authority and the sealing order the
property is an old and occupied one. It is further stated that
no show cause notice or sealing order was served upon the
appellant. It is further stated that interim protection had been
granted by this Tribunal in the appeal filed against the
demolition order in respect of ground floor of the property in
question. The Appellate Court had granted interim
protection in respect of the first and second floor of the
property in question.
5. Heard, keeping in view the submissions made as
time is sought to file the record by respondent, in the facts
and circumstances of the case and considering that the
property was assessed to House-tax since the year 2000, I
am of the view that appellant has made out the case for ad-
interim stay. Respondent is restrained from taking coercive
action in the property in question bearing No. F-52, (East
Side), Gali No.10, brahampuri, Delhi till next date of hearing,
pursuant to the impugned sealing order dated 15.07.2019.
However, this order is subject to any other order passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court/Hon’ble High Court in respect of
the property in question.
6. Appellant is directed to file affidavit giving details of
construction with measurement of the existing construction
alongwith existing site plan and photographs of the property
in question within five working days, failing which stay order
granted shall deemed to be vacated.
7. Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned
AE(B) by the appellant, who shall verify whether details of
construction mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.
8. Appellant is also directed not to carry out any
addition, alteration, repair or construction and shall also not
create any third party interest in the property in question.
9. Be listed for arguments on 17.12.2019.
10. A copy of the order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
parties, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 68/17. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Ms.Babita Kaushik Ld. counsel for New Delhi Municipal
Council.
Be awaited at 1.00 PM.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
09.10.2019. 1.00 PM. Present : None for appellant.
None for respondent.
Court notice be issued to the appellant to deposit the cost
in compliance of order dated 23.08.2017.
Be listed for further proceedings on 19.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 572/19,573/19,574/19 and 575/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Bandana, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Nagina Jain, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Shri Utkarsh Sharma, Ld. counsel for the respondent .
Shri S.K. Gupta, AE(B).
Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of the respondent.
Status report filed in appeal No.572/19 and 573/19, copy
supplied.
Record be deposited with the Registry within three days.
To come up for arguments on the application for interim stay
on 16.10.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
M in A.No. 593/18. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Shri Rameez Abbas, Nodal Officer.
AE (B) concerned is directed to submit the action taken
report before Dy. Commissioner concerned who will ensure
the compliance of the impugned order.
The file of the department, if any, be returned to the
respondent along with copy of this order.
File be consigned to record room.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 1075/16 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Shri Rameez Abbas, Nodal Officer.
AE (B) concerned is directed to submit the action taken
report before Dy. Commissioner concerned who will ensure
the compliance of the impugned order.
The file of the department, if any, be returned to the
respondent along with copy of this order.
File be consigned to record room.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 1037/16 and 1054/16. 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant in person.
Sh.Abhished Kaushik, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Request is made for adjournment by appellant as his
counsel is busy in Saket Court.
To come up for final arguments on 12.02.2020.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 849/18. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Ms. Manjusha Jha, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
As none has appeared on behalf of the appellant, be listed
for further proceedings on 30.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 1190/15 09.10.2019 Present : Shri Dalip Rustogi, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
At request of Ld. Counsel for the appellant , adjourned for
filing of brief synopsis and final arguments to 10.02.2019.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 607/14,969/16, and 138/17. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri Dalip Rustogi, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Amit Kumar,Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent .
Shri Tarun Sabharwal, Ld. counsel for the respondent
Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that excess coverage in
the property in question is only 2-3 mt. which is
compoundable. The appellant is willing to pay the
compounding charges in this regard.
The status report be filed by the respondent.
Concerned AE(B) is to be present with status report on next
date of hearing.
To come up on filing of status report on 15.11.2019.
Interim orders, if any, to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 612/17. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that misuse
charges/penalty charges has been deposited.
Ld. counsel for the respondent seeks time to verify the
same.
The concerned Official to be present on the next date of
hearing.
Be listed for final arguments on 04.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 233/16,148/18,166/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri S.K. Tiwari, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
Shri Desh Raj, Ld. counsel for applicant.
An application moved under order XXXIX Rule 7 read with
order XXVI Rule 9 and 10 and section 151 of the CPC on
behalf of the applicant, copy supplied.
To come up for reply and arguments and reply on the
application under order XXXIX Rule 7 read with order XXVI
Rule 9 and Order 1 Rule 10 CPC on 06.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 718/13. 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. N. Sehar, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, Ld. proxy Counsel for respondent.
At joint request, adjourned for final arguments to
27.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 762/13. 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Mahima Dayani, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Ms. Nagina Jain, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant seeks time to file objections to
the status report regarding the calculation of misuse
charges/penalty.
Be listed for further proceedings on 04.11.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 162/16. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Ms. Manjusha Jha, Ld. Counsel for the respondent.
Shri B.N. Gupta, Ld. counsel for applicant.
Shri Surender Goel, Ld. counsel for applicant.
Ld. counsel for the respondent states that appellant has not
supplied complete chain of title documents, the same be
supplied within a week.
Be listed for arguments on the application under order 1 rule
10 CPC on 28.01.2020 at request of appellant.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 821/14. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri Mayank Bhargav, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Abhishek Kaushik, Ld. Counsel for the respondent.
Shri Sanjiv Ralli , Ld. counsel for respondent No. 2.
Objections have been filed by appellant to the status report
of MCD regarding misuse charges payable.
Documents filed on behalf of respondent No. 2. Ld. counsel
for respondent No.2 states that an application moved by
respondent No. 2 for appropriate directions is pending.
Ld. counsel for the appellant and respondent No.1 state that
they have not received the copy of the same, the same be
supplied.
Be listed for reply and arguments on the application filed on
behalf of respondent No. 2 and final arguments on
08.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 906/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri S. Goel, Ld. proxy Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Ranjit Pandey, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Shri Amitabh Marwah, Ld. counsel for applicant.
At request of Ld. Proxy counsel for appellant, adjourned for
arguments on the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC
on 18.12.2019.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 814/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant with Shri Rajesh Verma , Ld. Counsel for the
appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
This is an appeal against sealing order dated 25.10.2017
passed by Dy. Commissioner Shahdara (South) Zone for
violation of Section 416/416 of DMC Act 1957.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant states that the appellant
wishes to withdraw the appeal with liberty to institute
appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Statement
of the appellant recorded.
The appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to
file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
File be consigned to record room.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 594/15 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant in person.
Shri Harshit Thakur, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
More time is sought 6to file status report of the
regularisatjion application.
Show cause notice be issued to AE(B) concerned as he is
absent despite directions to be present todlay.
Dy. Commissioner concerned to be present on next date of
hearing in case status report is not file.
To come up for filing of report on 23.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 569/18 and 240/18. 09.10.2019 Present : None for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, Ld. Counsel for respondent.
As none has appeared on behalf of the appellant, be listed
for further proceedings on 20.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 282/11. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri G.R. Verma, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Utkarsh Sharma, Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent.
Ms. Binney, Ld. counsel for Monitoring Committee.
At request of Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent,
adjourned for final arguments to 03.12.2019 as main
counsel is not available today.
Status report be filed by the Monitoring Committee in case
the same has not been filed.
Be listed for arguments on 03.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 903/18. 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant with Ld. counsel Shri Manish Jain.
Shri Harshit Thakur, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Shri S.K. Gupta, AE(B).
Status report filed, copy supplied.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant seeks time to file reply to the
status report.
To come up for final arguments on 23.01.2020.
Interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 238/19 and 239/19. 09.10.2019 Present : Shri K.B. Gupta, Ld. Counsel for the appellant.
Shri Savinder Singh, Ld. counsel for the respondent.
Shri Rishab Sharma, Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent.
At request of Ld. proxy counsel for the respondent
adjourned for final arguments to 06.02.2020.
Interim orders if any, to continue till next date of hearing.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 333/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Mahesh Chand Sharma, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Ms. Manjusha Jha, Ld. counsel for EDMC.
Ld. counsel for appellant seeks more time to file documents
to show that the construction in the property in question
exists prior to 08.02.2007.
To come up for arguments on the application for stay on
20.11.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 291/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. A.K. Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Manish Kumar, Ld. proxy counsel for respondent.
1. This is an appeal against the order of demolition
dated 22.04.2019. Ld. counsel for appellant has pressed
the application for interim stay on the ground that otherwise
the appeal will become infructuous. The submissions made
are that the appellant is the owner of property No.B-
11/8175, DDA Flat Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 and has
been paying property tax for the extended portion in the
property in question. It is further stated that one Bijyalaxmi
Mishra filed civil suit against the unauthorized construction
raised by the occupant of flat No.8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi titled Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti
Srivastava & Ors. The respondent /MCD had filed a status
report in the said civil suit in respect of the said flat No.
8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.
2. It is further stated that as a counter blast to the above
suit, owner of flat No. 8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High
Court regarding unauthorized construction in the flat of the
appellant titled Nirmala Kumar Vs SDMC which was
disposed off vide order dated 08.02.2019, with the
observations that in compliance of the order of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the Writ Petition (C) No. 4677/1985 titled
M.C. Mehta Vs UOI , the DDA has constituted a Special
Task Force to comprehensively address violations of the
provisions of the Unified Building Bye Laws and Master Plan
of Delhi 2021 for monitoring construction activities in Delhi
and fixing responsibility in case of violations of Unified
Building Bye Laws and MPD-2021, while disposing of the
above Writ Petition liberty was given to the parties was
given to approach the Special Task Force. It is to be noted
that the appellant was one of the respondent in the said Writ
Petition.
3. Admittedly respondent had sent a show cause notice
to the appellant which was duly replied, personal hearing
was also afforded to the appellant. Thereafter respondents
issued the impugned order directed the appellant to remove
the unauthorized construction.
4. It is also submitted by Ld. counsel for appellant that
no unauthorized construction has been carried in the
property in question after 2007. It is also stated that
property in question is protected under NCT of Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act, 2011 as amended from time to
time and extended till 31.12.2020.
5. Ld. counsel for appellant further submitted that the
flat in question was booked pursuant to civil suit filed by
Bijaylaxmi Mishra titled Bijaylaxmi Mishra V Rameti CS
No.431/18 as mentioned in the impugned demolition order
but respondent/ MCD has not filed the copy of the order of
said suit pursuant to which the property of appellant was
booked.
6. Heard, I have perused the impugned order which
states that consequent to the institution of case titled
Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti CS/431/18 the property in question
was inspected and unauthorized construction was found
therein. Keeping in view the directions of the Hon’ble High
Court passed in Writ Petition No.2509/2018 Ms. Nirmala
Kumar Vs. SDMC dated 08.02.2019. The appellant was
directed to approach the Special Task Force as there were
allegations and counter allegations regarding unauthorized
construction. In view thereof, in my view, no ground is
made out to grant interim stay, the application for interim
stay stands dismissed.
7. Be listed for final arguments on 16.01.2020.
8. Copy of the order be given dasti to the parties, as
prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 292/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. A.K. Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Arun Yadav, Ld. counsel for respondent.
1. This is an appeal against the order of demolition
dated 22.04.2019. Ld. counsel for appellant has pressed
the application for interim stay on the ground that otherwise
the appeal will become infructuous. The submissions made
are that the appellant is the owner of property No.B-
11/8173, DDA Flat Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 and has
been paying property tax for the extended portion in the
property in question. It is further stated that one Bijyalaxmi
Mishra filed civil suit against the unauthorized construction
raised by the occupant of flat No.8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi titled Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti
Srivastava & Ors. The respondent /MCD had filed a status
report in the said civil suit in respect of the said flat No.
8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.
2. It is further stated that as a counter blast to the above
suit, owner of flat No. 8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High
Court regarding unauthorized construction in the flat of the
appellant titled Nirmala Kumar Vs SDMC which was
disposed off vide order dated 08.02.2019, with the
observations that in compliance of the order of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the Writ Petition (C) No. 4677/1985 titled
M.C. Mehta Vs UOI , the DDA has constituted a Special
Task Force to comprehensively address violations of the
provisions of the Unified Building Bye Laws and Master Plan
of Delhi 2021 for monitoring construction activities in Delhi
and fixing responsibility in case of violations of Unified
Building Bye Laws and MPD-2021, while disposing of the
above Writ Petition liberty was given to the parties was
given to approach the Special Task Force. It is to be noted
that the appellant was one of the respondent in the said Writ
Petition.
3. Admittedly respondent had sent a show cause notice
to the appellant which was duly replied, personal hearing
was also afforded to the appellant. Thereafter respondents
issued the impugned order directed the appellant to remove
the unauthorized construction.
4. It is also submitted by Ld. counsel for appellant that
no unauthorized construction has been carried in the
property in question after 2007. It is also stated that
property in question is protected under NCT of Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act, 2011 as amended from time to
time and extended till 31.12.2020.
5. Ld. counsel for appellant further submitted that the
flat in question was booked pursuant to civil suit filed by
Bijaylaxmi Mishra titled Bijaylaxmi Mishra V Rameti CS
No.431/18 as mentioned in the impugned demolition order
but respondent/ MCD has not filed the copy of the order of
said suit pursuant to which the property of appellant was
booked.
6. Heard, I have perused the impugned order which
states that consequent to the institution of case titled
Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti CS/431/18 the property in question
was inspected and unauthorized construction was found
therein. Keeping in view the directions of the Hon’ble High
Court passed in Writ Petition No.2509/2018 Ms. Nirmala
Kumar Vs. SDMC dated 08.02.2019. The appellant was
directed to approach the Special Task Force as there were
allegations and counter allegations regarding unauthorized
construction. In view thereof, in my view, no ground is
made out to grant interim stay, the application for interim
stay stands dismissed.
7. Be listed for final arguments on 16.01.2020.
8. Copy of the order be given dasti to the parties, as
prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 290/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. A.K. Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. S.P. Sharma, Ld. proxy counsel for respondent.
1. This is an appeal against the order of demolition
dated 22.04.2019. Ld. counsel for appellant has pressed
the application for interim stay on the ground that otherwise
the appeal will become infructuous. The submissions made
are that the appellant is the owner of property No.B-
11/8171, DDA Flat Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 and has
been paying property tax for the extended portion in the
property in question. It is further stated that one Bijyalaxmi
Mishra filed civil suit against the unauthorized construction
raised by the occupant of flat No.8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11,
Vasant Kunj, New Delhi titled Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti
Srivastava & Ors. The respondent /MCD had filed a status
report in the said civil suit in respect of the said flat No.
8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.
2. It is further stated that as a counter blast to the above
suit, owner of flat No. 8169, Sector-B, Pocket-11, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High
Court regarding unauthorized construction in the flat of the
appellant titled Nirmala Kumar Vs SDMC which was
disposed off vide order dated 08.02.2019, with the
observations that in compliance of the order of Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the Writ Petition (C) No. 4677/1985 titled
M.C. Mehta Vs UOI , the DDA has constituted a Special
Task Force to comprehensively address violations of the
provisions of the Unified Building Bye Laws and Master Plan
of Delhi 2021 for monitoring construction activities in Delhi
and fixing responsibility in case of violations of Unified
Building Bye Laws and MPD-2021, while disposing of the
above Writ Petition liberty was given to the parties was
given to approach the Special Task Force. It is to be noted
that the appellant was one of the respondent in the said Writ
Petition.
3. Admittedly respondent had sent a show cause notice
to the appellant which was duly replied, personal hearing
was also afforded to the appellant. Thereafter respondents
issued the impugned order directed the appellant to remove
the unauthorized construction.
4. It is also submitted by Ld. counsel for appellant that
no unauthorized construction has been carried in the
property in question after 2007. It is also stated that
property in question is protected under NCT of Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act, 2011 as amended from time to
time and extended till 31.12.2020.
5. Ld. counsel for appellant further submitted that the
flat in question was booked pursuant to civil suit filed by
Bijaylaxmi Mishra titled Bijaylaxmi Mishra V Rameti CS
No.431/18 as mentioned in the impugned demolition order
but respondent/ MCD has not filed the copy of the order of
said suit pursuant to which the property of appellant was
booked.
6. Heard, I have perused the impugned order which
states that consequent to the institution of case titled
Bijaylaxmi Vs Rameti CS/431/18 the property in question
was inspected and unauthorized construction was found
therein. Keeping in view the directions of the Hon’ble High
Court passed in Writ Petition No.2509/2018 Ms. Nirmala
Kumar Vs. SDMC dated 08.02.2019. The appellant was
directed to approach the Special Task Force as there were
allegations and counter allegations regarding unauthorized
construction. In view thereof, in my view, no ground is
made out to grant interim stay, the application for interim
stay stands dismissed.
7. Be listed for final arguments on 16.01.2020.
8. Copy of the order be given dasti to the parties, as
prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 917/18 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Chhavi Luthra, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Ms. Nagina Jain, Ld. counsel for MCD.
Sh. Praveen Goswami, Ld. proxy counsel for applicant.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that the copy of the
application under order 1 Rule 10 has not been supplied as
such reply could not be filed. The same be supplied today.
Be listed for reply and arguments on the said application
and arguments on the application for condonation of delay
on 10.01.2020.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 200/19 & 201/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Pritish Sabharwal, Ld. counsel for respondent.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant be listed for final
arguments on 02.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 194/17 & 299/17 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Abhishek Kaushik, Ld. counsel for respondent.
Sh. S.K. Nanda, Ld. counsel for applicant.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant to come up for reply
and arguments on the application under order 1 Rule 10
CPC on 02.12.2019.
Interim order, if any, to continue till next date.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 331/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. R.K. Bhardwaj, Ld. counsel for appellant.
S. Adil Hussain, Ld. counsel for North DMC.
1. This is an appeal against order of demolition dated
18.02.2019. Ld. counsel for appellant has pressed the
application for interim stay on the ground that otherwise the
appeal will become infructuous. It is stated that that
demolition action has been taken pursuant to the impugned
order in respect of roof of ground floor as no interim
protection has been granted. It is further stated that no
show cause notice was served upon the appellant neither
the demolition order was served upon the appellant. It is
also stated that the property in question falls in village area
as such the Building Bye Laws are not applicable to it.
2. Ld. counsel for respondent seeks time to inspect the
record to address arguments regarding service of show
cause notice and demolition order.
3. Heard in view of the above facts and circumstances
as there is no proof of service of show cause notice on
appellant and the demolition order was served by pasting
without any witness to same, there shall be interim stay of
demolition, respondent is restrained from taking any
demolition action in the property in question bearing
no.2116/1-B, Gali No.7, Prem Nagar, West Patel Nagar,
New Delhi till next date of hearing, pursuant to the
impugned demolition order dated 18.02.2019.
4. However, this order is subject to any order passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court / Hon’ble
NGT about sealing and demolition in respect of the property
in question.
5. Appellant is directed to file affidavit giving details of
construction with measurements of the existing construction
alongwith existing site plan and photographs of the property
in question within five working days, failing which stay order
granted shall deemed to be vacated.
6. Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned
AE(B) by the appellant, who shall verify whether details of
construction mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.
7. Appellant is also directed not to carry out any
addition, alteration, repair or construction and shall also not
create any third party interest in the property in question.
8. Be listed for final arguments on 27.01.2020.
9. A copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for
appellant, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 381/18 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Harshit Chopra, Ld. proxy counsel for appellant.
Ms. Babita Kaushik, Ld. proxy counsel for MCD.
Be awaited for 2.00 p.m. at request of proxy counsel for
appellant.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
2.15 p.m. Present : Sh. Harshit Chopra, Ld. proxy counsel for appellant.
Ms. Babita Kaushik, Ld. proxy counsel for MCD.
At request of proxy counsel for appellant adjourned to
06.02.2020 for final arguments.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 592/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Avishek Kumar, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Fresh appeal filed u/s 343 (2) of DMC Act against the order
of demolition dated 21.01.2019 alongwith application for
stay and condonation of delay. Be checked and registered.
Notice of the appeal and application be issued to the
respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is
directed to appear alongwith entire record of the
proceedings, status report and reply of the appeal on date
fixed. Record be deposited in the Tribunal.
Be listed for arguments on application for condonation of
delay and stay on 14.10.2019.
Process be given dasti, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 504/18 & 513/18 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Ashu Arora, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjit Pandey, Ld. counsel for respondent / Sh. Rishab
Sharma, Ld. proxy counsel for respondent.
At request of Ld. counsel for appellant, adjourned to
04.02.2020 for filing of the synopsis and final arguments.
Interim order to continue till next date.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 293/19 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Ashu Arora, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjit Pandey, Ld. proxy counsel for respondent.
Final arguments addressed by Ld. counsel for appellant.
Proxy counsel for respondent again seeks adjournment.
Notice be issued to the Chief Law Officer, SDMC to appear
on next date of hearing.
Be listed for orders on 16.10.2019.
Respondent is given liberty to address arguments on the
date fixed.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 145/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. S.S. Dhingra, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjit Pandey, Ld. counsel for respondent.
Objections filed on behalf of the appellant, copy supplied.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that record has not been
filed.
Respondent is directed to file the same.
Be listed for arguments on the point of maintainability on
20.12.2019.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 27/16 09.10.2019 Present : Ms. Nidhi Mehra, Ld. proxy counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Status report filed, copy supplied.
At request of proxy counsel for appellant adjourned to
09.12.2019 for final argument as the main counsel is not
available today.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 204/19 & 205/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Virender Singh, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma, Ld. counsel for SDMC.
Documents filed on behalf of appellant, copy supplied.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that the constructions in the
property in question exists since 2001 and in this regard the
appellant has filed a copy of inspection book of MCD dated
01.04.2001,
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks time to verify the
documents.
Ld. counsel for appellant seeks time to take clarification
from the Hon’ble High Court regarding the directions of the
Hon’ble High Court passed in Writ Petition No.5833/2018
Sudesh Kumari Vs. vs SDMC & others dated 22.02.2019
whereby the appellant was directed to approach the Special
Task Force.
Be listed for further proceedings on 23.10.2019.
A copy of order be given dasti to the Ld. counsel for
appellant, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 540/19 09.10.2019 Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Ld. counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ranjit Pandey, Ld. counsel for respondent.
1. Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent.
2. Time is sought to file status report and record.
3. Ld. counsel for appellant has pressed the application
for interim stay for desealing of the tower in question in view
of the permission granted by the respondent vide letter
dated 28.08.2007, a copy of which is placed on record.
4. Ld. counsel for appellant states that the impugned
order dated 24.08.2019 was passed despite the fact that the
permission was already accorded by the respondent to
install the tower in the property in question. It is further
stated that no show cause notice was served upon the
appellant before passing of the impugned sealing order
neither any personal hearing was afforded. It is prayed that
the tower in question be desealed.
5. Heard, in view of the submissions made and as time
is sought to file the record, in the facts and circumstances of
the case, respondent is directed to deseal the tower in
question installed at the roof top of property bearing No. W-
56, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi-48, within a week of this
order till next date of hearing.
6. Be listed for filing of the status report and record and
final arguments on 08.01.2020.
7. A copy of order be given dasti to the Ld. counsel for
parties, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 585/19 09.10.2019 Present : Appellant with Ld. counsel Sh. M.A. Niyazi and Ms.
Anamika Niyazi.
1. Fresh appeal filed u/s 247 (2), 254 of New Delhi
Municipal Council Act 1994 alongwith application for stay
against order of sealing. Be checked and registered.
2. Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appellant had
filed a Writ Petition No.6737/2019 before the Hon’ble High
Court titled Yeshi Sabrina Lee Vs Naresh Kumar & Ors.
challenging the impugned order of demolition dated
31.05.2017 which was disposed off vide order dated
07.06.2019. The said Writ Petition was disposed off with
the liberty to the appellant / petitioner therein to file an
appeal before this Tribunal within two weeks from the date
of order. It was also directed that the appeal be heard by
this Tribunal within one week of powers being conferred.
The NDMC was directed not to take coercive action till the
matter was listed before this Tribunal subject to appellant
not to carry out any further construction in the property in
question.
3. The interim protection granted to the appellant by the
Hon’ble High Court is extended till next date of hearing.
4. Notice of the appeal and application be issued to the
respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is
directed to appear alongwith entire record of the
proceedings, status report and reply of the appeal on date
fixed. Record be deposited in the Tribunal.
5. Be listed for arguments on the application for interim
stay on 13.11.2019.
6. A copy of order be given dasti to the Ld. counsel for
appellant, as prayed for.
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019
A.No. 814/18 09.10.2019 Statement of Sh. Shokat Hussain S/o Sh. Rehmat Ali, appellant R/o
H.No.3/74-B Ram Gali Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi-32
On SA
I am the appellant in the present appeal, I may be permitted to withdraw
the appeal with liberty to take appropriate remedy in accordance with law.
RO & AC
(POONAM CHAUDHARY) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 09.10.2019