A.No. 26/19 Present : Sh. O.P. Verma, counsel for appellant...

A.No. 26/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. O.P. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Status report filed stating that owner of the building got

Sanctioned Building Plan under Saral Scheme vide ID

No.10052432 dated 02.08.2018.

At the time of applying Sanctioned Building Plan, it is the

responsibility of the owner as well as Architect to inform the

building department that building in question is heritage building

or not. The standard building plan has been obtained by

concealing the fact that property falls under Grade II property at

Status report. No.45 of GNCTD (Delhi Gazette) vide

No.F.SN.13(43)/MB/UD/2014/1602 dated 29.07.2014.

Accordingly show cause notice was issued on 12.11.2018

through speed post which was duly received by owner of the

property.

Reply was received on 20.11.2018. Personal hearing

letter was issued. Detailed speaking order was passed on

19.12.2018 and Sanctioned Building Plan was revoked under

section 338 of the DMC Act on the basis of misrepresentation and

false statement.

It is further clarified that due to typographical error, serial

no.236 instead of serial no.45 was typed in the speaking order.

Now, it is clarified that the correct serial number is 45 as per list

attached wherein property is shown at serial no.45.

Copy of the status report supplied to the counsel for

appellant.

Reply of the appeal also filed. Copy supplied.

It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that hearing

proceedings regarding demolition are in progress. Hearing has

been afforded to the appellant.

Put up for final arguments on 02.04.2019.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.

Appellate Tribunal:MCD 04.02.2019

A.No.47/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Sudhir Sukhija, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Adjournment sought to file amendment application as

landlord has not appeared despite directions.

There is no stay of the proceeding. Respondent is at

liberty to act as per law.

Put up this matter for filing of status report by the

respondent and arguments on 13.03.2019.



A.No. 103/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Manik Garg, counsel for SDMC.

It is stated that original record has been filed in

appeal No. 48/2018 which was dismissed as withdrawn.

Status report not filed.

EE(B) concerned is directed to appear in person

alongwith status report.

Appellant wants to move an application for

withdrawal of the present appeal.

Put up for appearance of the EE(B) and further

proceedings on 12.03.2019.



A.No. 1072/17 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Randhir Kumar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Sh. R.N. Sharma counsel for applicant.

Status report not filed.

Appellant giving details of construction with

measurements of the existing construction alongwith

existing site plan and photographs of the property in

question not filed despite directions.

Regularization application has not been filed. Status

quo order was granted vide order dated 05.01.2018 subject

to filing the regularization application within two months.

Since the appellant has not complied the said order and has

not filed the regularization application and as such there is

no stay against the impugned order.

Respondent is directed to take action as per law.

Put up for filing action taken report / arguments on

the application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC on 25.04.2019.



A.No. 895/14 & 896/14 04.02.2019

Present : None for the appellant.


Status report filed stating that as per record action

u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act already stands booked on

27.09.2012 for unauthorized construction in the shape of

basement, ground floor and first floor.

Action taken report not filed.

Dy. Commissioner concerned is directed to file the

status report under his hand and signature on 23.04.2019.



A.No. 145/17, 146/17, 148/17, 149/17, 1147/15, 1148/15, 1149/15 & 445/16 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal / Ms. Nagina Jain, counsel

for MCD.

Status report not filed regarding decision on the

regularization application.

EE(B) is directed to remain present alongwith status

report on 22.04.2019. Interim stay, if any, is extended till

next date.



A.No. 154/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Rajnish Kumar Banyal, counsel for

appellant alongwith appellant.

Sh. Shivendu Gaur, counsel for respondent.

Status report was filed on 18.10.2018 stating that

property was booked for unauthorized construction in the

shape of ground floor, first floor, second floor, third floor and

fourth floor on 02.06.2015 and thereafter sealing order was

passed on 06.08.2015.

On the record of the sealing proceedings has been

filed. The record of the demolition proceedings not filed.

Respondent is directed to file the said record.

Concerned AE(B) to remain present on date fixed.





A.No. 117/15 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora, counsel for respondent.

Respondent was directed to file necessary

documents regarding the property, subject matter of the

present appeal, not forming part of Zakir Nagar which is

unauthorized regularized colony.

Concerned AE(B) was directed to remain present. He

is absent.

EE(B) is directed to appear in person and file status

report on 01.05.2019.



A.No. 39/18 04.02.2019

Present : Mohd. Shameem, counsel for appellant.


Charges have been deposited. Jain of documents

regarding ownership will be filed within three days.

Put up for orders / clarification, if any on 11.02.2019.



M. in A.No. 555/18 04.02.2019


Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Adjournment sought to file the action taken report.

Put up on 19.02.2019 for filing action taken report by

the respondent.



A.No. 153/18 04.02.2019



It is stated that speaking order has been passed.

Copy of the speaking order / status report will be filed.

Put up on for filing said speaking order wherein

status quo order has been granted under special law by the

Quasi Judicial Authority.



A.No. 205/13 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Vikas Sharma, counsel for appellant.


Counsel for appellant pointed out the order passed

by the Ld. District & Session Judge South East in MCD

Appeal No.7/18 dated 01.12.2018 wherein It is clarified

that there is no stay of proceedings or even on the operation

of impugned order dated 30.07.2018.

The appellant has not complied the status report filed

on previous date, however, objections are filed.

The appellant has submitted that in the order dated

02.02.2019, Ld. District & Session Judge has held that :

“after some discussion, at joint request, it is directed that on 09.02.2019 at 12.00 noon all parties shall collect at the suit property where architect to be engatged by the petitioners at their expense shall be called to take measurements. In case measurements taken on 09.02.2019 turn out to be different from measurement filed on 02.01.2018 by architect of respondent No.4, it is respondent no.4 who shall reimburse the expenses to the petitioner.”

The matter is now listed on 18.03.2019.

Put up for filing re-joinder / objection, if any on 27.03.2019.



A.No. 329/18 & 330/18 04.02.2019


Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for respondent.

Court notice be issued to the appellants as well their

counsel for 27.03.2019.



A.No. 1106/16 04.02.2019


Sh. Idris Khan, AE(B).

Record not produced. It is stated that the property

has been sealed on the directions of the Monitoring

Committee. Chain of documents id to be produced by the

appellant. Put up again.

A.No. 1106/16 04.02.2019 1.00 p.m.

Present : Sh. Satyender Chahar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Madan Sagar, counsel for respondent

alongwith Sh. Idris Khan, AE(B).

Original record not produced on the ground that

property has been sealed on the directions of the Monitoring

Committee.

Misuse charges have been deposited. Receipt filed.

Adjournment sought to place on record title

documents.

Put up for placing the title document, clarification, if

any / order on 18.02.2019.



A.No. 871/17 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Kapil Lalwani, counsel for appellant.

File taken up today as an application for early

hearing alongwith application for recalling the order dated

10.10.2018.

Let notice of these two applications be issued to the

respondent for 18.02.2019. Notice be issued dasti.



A.No. 908/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. S.K. Gupta, counsel for appellant alongwith

appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora. Counsel for respondent/

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.

Record not produced. It is stated that sealing record is

attached with the appeal bearing No.316/18 which was dismissed

as withdrawn on 09.08.2018.

It is submitted that the said order of dismissal has been

challenged before the Ld. District & Session Judge in appeal

which is listed for final hearing on 18.02.2019.

It is stated that after dismissal of the said appeal as

withdrawn, an application for revival has been moved on the

ground that he has made a statement with the liberty to file fresh

appeal.

It is further stated that property lies in unauthorized

regularized colony where construction can be regularized.

Ld. counsel for appellant states that appellant has

approached the respondent for regularization of the construction

but the said application is not entertained, which fact has been

denied by counsel for respondent.

The appellant is at liberty to move fresh regularization

application within two weeks and the said application will be

decided as per rules and decision will be taken within four weeks

from today by the respondent.

Since the appeal against the dismissal order has already

been entertained by the Ld. District & Session Judge which is

listed on 18.02.2019, therefore, till next date of hearing the

respondent may not take any coercive action in the property in

question.


respondent and arguments on 11.03.2019. Copy of the order be

given Dasti to both the parties, as prayed.

Sealing record is not attached. Let the same be attached

with this file.



A.No. 387/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Jaspal Singh, counsel for appellant.

File taken up today as an application for early

hearing has been moved stating that appellant has already

moved an application for regularization of the structure and

the structure is protected under Special Flaw and appellant

is ready to deposit the misuse charges already calculated.

Respondent is directed to file the status report

regarding decision on the regularization application of the

appellant alongwith status report as to whether property in

question is having protection under special Laws or not.

Put up for reply and consideration of this application

on 19.02.2019.

Copy of the order be given Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 69/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Manu Sisodia counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against Demolition order dated

26.09.2017. An application seeking condonation of delay

has been filed alongwith appeal.

Impugned order shows that the property has been

booked in continuation of the previous booking dated

10.08.2015 for unauthorized construction in the shape of

entire first floor in part property at gali no. 1.

Connected appeal against the sealing order is stated

to be listed on 08.03.2019. At request, issue notice of the

appeal and application to the respondent through concerned

Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is directed to appear in person

alongwith entire record of the proceedings, status report and

reply of the appeal on date fixed. Record be deposited

immediately in the Tribunal.

Put up this matter on 08.03.2019. Notice be given

Dasti along with copy of order, as prayed.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN)

AD&SJ-cum-P.O. Appellate Tribunal:MCD

04.02.2019

A.No. 64/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against rejection of regularization

order dated 03.07.2018 alongwith application seeking

condonation of delay.

Connected appeals are stated to be listed on

30.05.2019, issue notice of the appeal and application to the

respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is

directed to appear in person alongwith entire record of the

proceedings, status report and reply of the appeal on date

fixed. Record be deposited immediately in the Tribunal.

Put up this matter on 30.05.2019.



A.No. 26/13 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Rajendra Arya ,counsel for respondent.

File not traced.

Written submission on behalf of Appellant filed.

Put up on 05.02.2019 for arguments.



A.No. 251/17 04.02.2019

Present : none for appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora,counsel for respondent.

Counsel for respondent submits that one page record has

already been deposited by the AE(B).

Respondent is directed to attach the said record if

any.

Titled documents already filed. put up on 19.02.219

for clarification, if any/ order.



A.No. 65/19, 66/19 & 67/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Sagar Aggarwal, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC

alongwith Sh. Ravi Kumar, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that after booking of the

property u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act, sealing action was

planned on 29.01.2019 in respect of the property in

question.

It is further stated that a telephonic massage was

received regarding interim relief to the impugned shops; the

sealing drive was called off. Police force was withdrawn.

Original record perused which shows that demolition

order has been passed on 28.01.2019.

AE(B) is present.

Nothing is mentioned in the record as to how the

demolition order was served. The property was booked on

19.12.2018 for unauthorized construction on account of

deviations against standard plan, however, no standard plan

of the DDA has been placed on record and when I have

asked the AE(B) how he reached the conclusion that there

is deviations against the standard plan, he simply states that

he was not in possession of the standard plan.

Show cause notice dated 19.12.2018 was issued.

Nothing is mentioned on it how it was served. The said

show cause notice placed at page No.19/C of the record.

AE(B) states that it was served by receiving but no such

receiving is mentioned on the show cause notice.

It is stated that reply was filed by the appellant.

Sealing show cause notice was issued on

22.01.2019 giving three days time to file reply. Sealing

order has been passed on 25.01.2019. Nothing is

mentioned in the record as to when it was served upon the

owner.

A.No. 65/19, 66/19 & 67/19 - 2 -

Before passing of sealing order, JE(B) has made a

report that reply not found satisfactory which shows that

concerned Dy. Commissioner has acted merely on the

report of JE(B) and has not personally considered the

detailed reply filed by the appellant to the show cause notice

u/s 345-A of DMC Act which shows that the sealing order

dated 25.01.2019 is passed without application of mind and

is found to be cryptic.

As per record, sealing action was taken on

29.01.2019. The property was sealed at entry of the upper

floor of shops No.44, 45 & 46. During the said process a

telephonic message was received that interim relief was

granted to the appellants shops, till that time sealing at entry

gate of the ground floor shops No.44, 45 & 45 has been

completed and the process of sealing lower ground floor

was immediately stopped after receiving the message.

It is not clear that before the demolition order served

upon the appellant, what was the need to carry out sealing

action because as per provision of the DMC Act, sealing

action is taken to prevent further unauthorized construction,

if any, or to prevent any dispute as to the nature and extent

of construction / structure.

It seems that the condition for carrying out sealing

action immediately after passing of the demolition order

were not existed in this case and the respondent officials

have taken the action under some malafide intention.

Dy. Commissioner concerned is directed to look into

the matter and to act according to the order dated

29.01.2019 passed by this Tribunal with respect for the

shops in question.

Dy. Commissioner concerned is further directed to

file the status report after considering the order dated

29.01.2019 passed by this Tribunal clearly specifying that

A.No. 65/19, 66/19 & 67/19 - 3 -

there was imminent requirement of sealing of this property

as per provisions of the DMC Act and there were condition

for taking immediate action because the property was stated

to be occupied and no vacation notice is given.

Counsel for appellant submits that only the appellant

has been targeted and other similar property are not

touched.

Dy. Commissioner concerned is, therefore, directed

to inspect the entire shops / complex to find out whether

there are similar alleged unauthorized construction in the

other properties / shops in the Triveni Complex, LSC

Market, Shekh Sarai Phase-II, New Delhi. If there is similar

unauthorized construction in the other properties / shops

also, why action has not been taken against those

properties / shops.

Put up for filing the status report by the Dy.

Commissioner concerned under his hand and signatures.

An application has been moved on behalf of the

appellant for desealing of the premises. Copy supplied to

the AE(B) who shall place it before concerned Dy.

Commissioner for necessary action and file status report.



Interim stay is extended till next date.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,

as prayed.



A.No. 49/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Ramneek Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Rajeev Garg, ALO.

Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.

Record produced. status report not filed.

The property was booked for unauthorized

construction in the shape of deviation/ excess coverage

against standard plan and erection of entire floor at terrace

of flat No.12.

Show cause notice was issued on the same date.

Reply was filed on 12.11.2018 wherein it is stated that

unauthorized construction, if any is old. Further the society

has not given any building plan to the appellant.

After considering the reply, demolition order was

passed on 03.01.2019. No demolition action ever take

place.

AE(B) is absent stated to be on leave.

Counsel for appellant submitted that entire society is

built in the same way as house of the appellant house has

been built which is clear from the photographs placed on

record.

AE(B) is directed to inspect the entire society and

submit the report regarding each flat. If there is

unauthorized construction in the society in the same way as

of the appellant, why action be not taken against other flats

and why the appellant has been targeted.

The said status report will be submitted under the

hand and signature of the Dy. Commissioner concerned.

Put up for filing status report and arguments on

11.04.2019.

In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking

any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing

flat No.12, SBI Colony, Rani Bagh, Delhi in pursuance of

demolition order dated 03.01.2019 till next date of hearing.

A.No. 49/19

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.

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.

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.

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.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,

as prayed.



A.No. 04.02.2019 A.No. A.No. 928/17 & 929/17 Statement of Sh. Rajeev Kumar Jain, AE(B) Shahdra South Zone

ON SA

The property bearing No. B-12, near Balaji Mandir, Madhu Vihar

was booked for unauthorized construction on 23.05.2014 in the shape of

12 shops at ground floor. The property is situated in unauthorized colony

namely Madhu Vihar therefore unauthorized construction prior to

01.06.2014 is protected from demolition till 31.12.2020 by virtue of Delhi

Laws (Special Provisions) (Second Amendment) Act, 2017.

RO&AC



A.No. 855/15 and 453/13 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Amit Kumar Sharma counsel for

appellant in Appeal No. 855/15.

Shri Neeraj Sharma counsel for appellant in

Appeal No.453/13.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal/Sh. Naveen Grover,

counsel for MCD.

Ld.Counsel of appellant in Appeal No. 855/15 pointed

out that a Civil Suit is already pending instituted by the

appellant wherein stay has been granted in his favour.

Adjournment sought.

Put up this matter for filing proceedings of civil suit

/orders of the said suit.

Respondent may file rejoinder to the objections, if

any, on 09.05.2019



A.No. 814/14 04.02.2019

Present : None for appellant.

Shri R.K. Singh, counsel for respondent.

None has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is

granted for final arguments on 16.04.2019.

Written submissions be filed by both parties positively

by next date of hearing.



A.No. 116/18 04.02.2019

Present : Appellant in person.

Shri Sushil Kumar, proxy counsel for Shri Amit

Kumar, counsel for respondent.

Status report filed stating that inspection revealed

that details of construction as spelt out in the affidavit filed

by the appellant are in accordance with prevailing site

condition.

Appellant pointed out that the appeal bearing No.

221/17 against the rejection of regularization has already

been filed which is listed for 15.03.2019.

At request, Put up this matter for final arguments on

15.03.2019.



A.No. 124/12 04.02.2019

Present: Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Status report filed stating that on 29.01.2018 Shri

Praveen Ahuja has submitted NOC against the

regularization of the property bearing NO. 07/56, Old

Rajender Nagar, New Delhi, in the name of Shri Bhagwan

Dass Ahuja.

It is further submitted that the application dated

04.11.2011 for regularization of the property vide order

dated 07.07.2012 has rejected the proposal since there is

sub division in the property and the appellant was informed.

It is further submitted that fresh application for

regularization of the property as per the provisions of

UBBL-2016 has not been filed till date.

Respondent is directed to consider the regularization

application of the appellant on filing of reopening of

application as per the directions dated 23.01.2018.

The request of reopening of regularization application

be filed with the AE(B) within two weeks.



Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for

compliance.



A.No. 540/11, 542/11 and 115/12 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi /Shri O.P. Verma counsel

for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta/Sh. H.R. Aggarwal,

counsel for MCD .

Put up this matter alongwith connected appeal

bearing No. 124/12 on 25.04.2019 for arguments.



A.No. 605/14 04.02.2019


Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Part arguments heard.

Put up this matter for remaining arguments with

connected appeal no.745/17 on 21.05.2019.



A.No. 745/17 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Vimal Dhingra, counsel for appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora, counsel for MCD alongwith Sh.

B.P. Singh, AE(B).

Sh. Daman Popli, counsel for applicant.

AE(B) seeks adjournment to comply the order dated

28.08.2018 for taking decision on the regularization

application of the appellant.

Reply to the application under Order 1 Rule 10 filed.

Put up this matter for filing status report by the

respondent / arguments on the said application / final

arguments on 21.05.2019.

Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 1202/15, 741/16 & M-60/16 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Rohit Jain, counsel for appellant.


It is stated that the appeal before Ld. District &

Session Judge is pending and listed for 20.03.2019.

Original record has been produced. The same be

deposited with the registrar.

Put up this matter for awaiting orders and arguments

on 06.05.2019.



A.No. 70/19 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Randhir Kumar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Ravi Kumar, AE(B).

Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.

Record not produced. Status report not filed.

AE(B) states that since he has received the copy in

the morning and has not produced the record.

Adjournment sought to file status report as well as

producing the original record.

It is submitted by the appellant that the entire

shopping complex is having the similar construction and

only appellant has been targeted.

Respondent is directed to file status report regarding

other properties in Triveni Shopping Complex. Status report

be filed under the hand and signature of Dy. Commissioner

concerned.


respondent and copy of order, if any, to be passed

alongwith original record on 15.02.2019.


compliance.



A.No. 1251/13 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Vidit Gupta, counsel for appellant.


Ld. counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to

verify the Lal Dora Certificate and to clarify whether the

property in question subject matter of the present appeal

falls i.e. unauthorized colony, unauthorized regularized

colony or village abadi etc. and for what purpose the

property can be used and further whether the property is

protected under National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws

(Special Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act, 2017 or not.


respondent and final arguments on 29.04.2019.



A.No. 702/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Zafar Abbas, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC.

Counsel for respondent is not present.

Status report filed alongwith annexures. Copy

supplied.

As per the status report, no proposal regarding

regularization of construction moved by the appellant. It is

stated that existing structure (excessive height or height

beyond permissible limit i.e. measuring more than 3.0 mtr.)

is in violation of provisions, stipulated for installation of solar

panel under UBBL-2016 as per para 7.17.2 of the said law.

It is therefore, stated that the impugned structure

cannot be used for solar panel. Further, the construction

mentioned in the affidavit does not tally with the construction

at site. However, as per the site plan submitted by the

appellant, there are no variations.

Ld. counsel seeks adjournment to file objections to

the status report. The status report is not complete in

pursuance of order dated 12.10.2018 because the details

regarding previous demolition in the property has not been

filed wherein demolition was carried out at the initial stage of

construction at 29.08.2016.

Put up this matter for filing further status report by the





A.No. 892/18 & 893/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Sanjay Sharma, counsel for New Delhi

Municipal Council alongwith Sh. Yashpal,

JE(EBR) and Sh. Ashok Kumar, Senior

Assistant.

Reply to the appeal as well as application under

section 5 of Limitation Act filed by the respondent.

Ld. counsel seeks adjournment that the premises in

question for which the appeal has been filed has been

sealed.

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that since the

property is lying sealed and the demolition order has been

passed after about 2 and ½ years of sealing order dated

18.01.2016, and the property has not been used and the

status quo be maintained till the appeal is heard on merit.

I have also heard the counsel for respondent who

submits that the appeal has been barred by limitation and

the appellant is not entitled to interim stay.

Since the property is lying sealed and appellant is not

using the same and till the appeal is heard on merits and

disposed off, respondent is directed to maintain status quo

in the ground floor and first floor of the property of the

appellant bearing no. M-89, M-Block, Connaught Place,

New Delhi till next date of hearing.

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.

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 be deemed to be vacated.

A.No. 892/18 & 893/18 - 2 -

Copy of affidavit will be provided to concerned AE by

the appellant, who shall verify whether details of

construction mentioned in the affidavit are correct or not.

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.




compliance.



A.No. 928/17 & 929/17 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. V.K. Arora, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. R.K. Jain, AE(B).

Statement of Sh. R.K. Jain, AE(B) has been

recorded.

AE(B) in whose period the property has been sealed,

is directed to appear in person for statement.

Put up this matter for that purpose and further




A.No. 575/18 & 576/18 04.02.2019

Present : Zuheb Qureshi, proxy counsel for appellant.

Ms. Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD.

Ld. proxy counsel for appellant seeks adjournment as

the main counsel for appellant is held up in Saket Court and

has not come.

The appeal is barred by limitation. Moreover, the

demolition order is not challenged in the present appeal and

since there is no stay, respondent is at liberty to take action

as per law.

At the request of proxy counsel for appellant, put up

this matter for final arguments on 13.03.2019.



A.No. 449/18 & 385/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. O.P. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta / Sh. Ashutosh Gupta,

counsel for MCD.

Status report filed in both the appeals stating that

inspection of the property could not be carried out as the

same was sealed. Inspection of ground floor was carried

out and the structure mentioned in the affidavit was found

correct.

No permission was required to deseal the premises

for the purpose of measurements of affidavit.

Respondent is directed to carry out inspection on

15.02.2019 at 11.00 am. The property will be resealed at

4.00 pm. Status report be filed alongwith photographs of

resealing of the property.

No status report has been filed with regard to the

contents mentioned in the appeal despite directions.

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that the

regularization of construction has already been applied.


respondent and arguments on the interim application as well

as final arguments on 27.03.2019.




A.No. 153/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Sanjay Agnihotri, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Ravinder, AE(B).

Fresh speaking order dated 28.01.2019 filed.

Ld. counsel for respondent stating that the property in

question has been protected under National Capital

Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second

(Amendment) Act, 2017 and the demolition order dated

13.12.2017 has been kept in abeyance and placed under

suspension.

Put up this matter for perusal of this order and further




A.No. 118/09 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. K.N. Singh, counsel for appellant.


Written submissions not filed.

Respondent has filed written submissions.

Adjournment sought to file written submissions by the

appellant.

Let the

same be filed positively.

Put up this matter for arguments on 20.03.2019.



M.No. 20/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Ashish Kapoor, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Rajesh Sharma, AE(B).

Sh. Dheeraj Sharma, counsel for applicant.

Status report filed stating that in compliance of order

dated 12.10.2017 fresh speaking order has been passed on

26.12.2017. Copy attached.

Copy of status report as well as copy of said order

supplied to counsel for appellant.

Ld. counsel for appellant stated that the appeal

against the order dated 26.12.2017 is already filed before

this Tribunal having appeal no. 917/18. It is stated to be

listed on 06.02.2019.

The record of this appeal be attached with said

appeal.

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that applicant has

no locus-standi to move application. Since the fresh

speaking order has been passed therefore, the application

under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC be disposed off.

In view of the above observations, once the fresh

proceedings against the speaking order has already been

started after remanding back of the matter, nothing remains

in this application, the same stands disposed off.

Ahlmad is directed to tag this file with the appeal no.

917/18 which is listed for 06.02.2019.

The present application is disposed off accordingly.

File be consigned to record room.



A.No. 221/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Ankur Kumar, proxy counsel for appellant.

Ms. Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD.

Appellant has not placed on record the documents as

was directed on 16.07.2018.

In case, the said order is not complied, necessary

adverse orders will be passed on next date of hearing.

Last and final opportunity is granted for final

arguments on 03.04.2019. No further adjournment will be

given.

Both parties are directed to file written submissions.



A.No. 710/13 04.02.2019




In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is

granted for arguments on 29.05.2019.

Both parties are directed to file written submissions

positively by next date of hearing.



A.No. 30/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Anshuman, proxy counsel for appellant.


Main counsel for appellant is not available.

Adjournment sought.

Appellant is directed to place on record the

subsequent order after 01.08.2018 in MCD appeal no.

06/2018 which is pending before Ld. District & Session

Judge.

Put up this matter for final arguments on 22.05.2019.




A.No. 234/18 04.02.2019


Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Part arguments heard.

Written submissions be filed by both parties.

Put up this matter for remaining arguments on

29.03.2019.



A.No. 159/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Anil Gera, counsel for appellant.


alongwith Sh. Rajesh Sharma, AE(B).

No status report has been filed today in compliance

of order dated 03.12.2018.

Let clear-cut status report be filed by next date of

hearing.





A.No. 723/18 & 657/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Sandeep Vishnu, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. S.P. Garg, AE(B).

Ld. counsel for appellant has filed affidavit in

compliance of order dated 03.12.2018 clarifying the

difference of measurements at second floor stating that

SDMC described the area of second floor as 3973.84 sq.ft.

The area which was mentioned by the appellant in the

affidavit was 4852 sq. ft. The measurement were taken

afresh and the area on the second floor has been found to

be correctly stated in the affidavit of appellant from the outer

boundary of the floor.

Copy of affidavit supplied to the AE(B) who shall file

fresh status report in view of the affidavit filed today.






A.No. 739/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Pankaj Arora, proxy counsel for appellant.

Sh. Madan Sagar, counsel for MCD.

Status report filed which shows that regularization

application of the appellant is pending and under

consideration. IN has been issued on 18.12.2018 wherein

shortcomings has not been complied by the appellant.

Appellant is directed to comply the IN within two

weeks, failing which respondent is at liberty to decide the

same as per law.


respondent and arguments on maintainability of the appeal

on 08.04.2019.



A.No. 644/14 04.02.2019

Present : Ms. Bandana, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Madan Sagar, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. V.K. Gupta, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that appellant has not

submitted any authentic proof such as house tax return etc.

in support of existence of construction prior to cut off date.

In the absence of such proof, the existence of entire

impugned constructed in the property before the stipulated

cutoff date could not be established.

Since the construction stands booked on 15.07.2014

and also that the police complaint regarding unauthorized

construction being carried out in the property in question as

received from PS Mianwali Nagar on 16.07.2014, therefore,

the property in question is not entitled to protection granted

under National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special

Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act, 2017.

Copy of status report supplied to appellant.

Ld. counsel for appellant requested to summon the

house tax record.

Notice be issued to concerned Dy. A&C in that

regard.





A.No. 889/18 & 890/18 04.02.2019

Present : Sh. Rajiv Khosla, counsel for appellant.


alongwith Sh. O.S. Rana, AE(B).

Status report filed. Copy supplied.

An application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC has been

moved by the applicant. Copy supplied.

Verification report regarding structure not filed by the

respondent on the ground that the dimensions given in the

site plan by the appellant were not legible.

The appellant is ready to supply legible site plan for

that purpose.

AE(B) is directed to take necessary work for

compliance of previous order once the affidavit supplied to

him, he is duly bound to file the status report.

Put up this matter for filing reply and arguments on

the said application and final arguments on 22.05.2019.




A.No. 781/17 04.02.2019


Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.





A.No. 855/16 04.02.2019

Present : Appellant in person.

Sh. K.K. Arora, counsel for MCD.

Status report filed by Dy. Commissioner concerned in

compliance of order dated 08.01.2019 stating that as per

the report by AE(B) and JE(B), the portion of the property

which was sealed on 15.02.2018 and 26.02.2018 found

sealed. Vacation notice dated 30.01.2019 was issued.

Sealing action taken on 01.02.2019 and sealed stilt /

ground floor at two points and one points at first floor, entire

ground floor and first floor sealed. One room at second

floor, third floor and fourth floor has already been sealed on

15.02.2018 and further action on remaining one room could

not be taken as the room at second floor, third floor and

fourth floor was found residentially occupied.

It now become clear that the status report dated

07.01.2019 was false where it was stated that entire

property was lying sealed.

It is stated that there was a typographical mistake

regarding sealing of the entire property.

Sealing record produced which shows that on

15.02.2018, sealing action was taken in the property and

the property was sealed at one point at each floor.

Photographs attached.

Further on 01.02.2019, during the subsequent

sealing action, the ground floor was sealed at two points,

first floor was sealed at one point.

It is clearly stated that the property is entirely sealed

at ground floor and first floor at one point at each floor.




Date post:	29-Jan-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

A.No. 26/19 Present : Sh. O.P. Verma, counsel for appellant...

Documents