A.No. 719/18 Present : Sh. Ikrant Sharma, counsel for

A.No. 719/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Ikrant Sharma, counsel for appellant.

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

Sh. V.P. Kaliyar, counsel for applicant.

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent MCD filed.

Status report filed. Copy supplied.

As per the status report, property was booked on

12.02.2018 u/s 343 of DMC Act on account of unauthorized

construction of entire stilt, ground, first and second floor in

the property bearing no. EA-107 (Part), Inderpuri, New

Delhi.

Show cause notice was served by way of pasting at

site on 16.02.2018. Photographs of service of pasting were

placed on record. Demolition order was passed on

22.02.2018 which was served by way of pasting at site on

27.02.2018. Photographs of service of pasting are placed

on record. Demolition action was taken against the

unauthorized construction in the shape of third floor.

The property was again booked on 28.03.2018 on

account of unauthorized construction in the third floor.

Show cause notice was issued on 28.03.2018 which was

served upon the owner / builder on 31.03.2018. No reply

was received. Accordingly, demolition order was passed on

05.04.2018 which was served by way of pasting at site on

06.04.2018.

On 23.04.2018, demolition action took place on third

floor roof and reinforcement has been cut with the help of

gas cutter (two panels). However, the property was

inspected on 06.11.2018 and it was found that the owner /

builder has repaired the portion which was demolished by

North DMC and as such the appellant is not entitled to any

relief from this Tribunal.

A.No. 719/18 - 2 -

It is further submitted that the appellant has applied

for regularization of the property and the said application for

regularization has been rejected on 21.08.2018 and the said

order has not been challenged till date.

Sealing action was initiated against the unauthorized

construction u/s 345-A of DMC Act. Show cause notice

dated 06.08.2018 was served upon the owner / builder and

sealing order has been passed on 14.09.2018.

It is stated in the original record that on 25.09.2018,

sealing action could not be taken due to shortage of time.

Neither any demolition action has been taken after

23.04.2018, nor any sealing action has been taken after

25.09.2018.

Nothing is mentioned in the record as to why required

action has not been taken till the appeal was filed on

27.09.2018.

Ld. counsel for respondent pointed out page no. 7 of

the appeal, which shows that the appellant has filed appeal

against show cause notice dated 12.02.2018 and the appeal

against the show cause notice is not maintainable.

At this stage, Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that

he doesn’t want to press interim stay application and seeks

time to inspect the record and take necessary steps to

amend the appeal.

Appellant has neither challenged the sealing

proceedings nor rejection of his regularization application.

Even demolition order has also not been challenged.

An application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by

Shri Anil Kumar stating that he has filed Writ Petition (C) No.

6749/2018 in the Hon’ble High Court in respect of the

property bearing no. EA-107 (left side), Inderpuri, New Delhi

and property bearing no. RA-4, Inderpuri, New Delhi against

the unauthorized construction vide order dated 04.07.2018,

the Hon’ble High Court has stayed the unauthorized

construction in the above said properties.

A.No. 719/18 - 3 -

Appellant has not mentioned the pendency of Writ

Petition in the appeal.

Since the applicant being petitioner in the Writ

Petition is a necessary party for just adjudication of the

present petition, it is therefore, prayed that Sh. Anil Kumar,

R/o WZ-256/EA, Second Floor, Inderpuri, New Delhi be

impleaded as respondent in the interest of justice.

I have heard the Ld. counsel for appellant as well as

counsel for applicant.

Ld. counsel for applicant submitted that since the

respondent has taken action on the complaint of applicant

therefore, he should be arranged as respondent / necessary

party.

Ld. counsel for appellant states that applicant has no

locus-standi to become party in the proceedings as appeal

is between appellant and respondent and the applicant is

harassing the innocent builder in the area.

I have considered the submissions.

Writ Petition of the applicant is stated to be pending

in the Hon’ble High Court and stated to be listed for

05.03.2019.

Concerned AE(B) submits that the booking of the

property in question was done when the complaint was

received from the applicant and the necessary action as per

the DMC Act has already been taken by the respondent.

Since on the basis of complaint of applicant necessary

action under DMC Act has already been taken by the

respondent, I do not find any ground to allow the applicant

to join the proceedings because the appeal is between

appellant and respondent.

I have gone through the contents mentioned in the

application u/o 1 rule 10 CPC.

Even if it is presumed that all the averments made in

the application is correct, then also in these proceeding

between the appellant and the MCD the applicant has no

A.No. 719/18 - 4 -

right to participate and he cannot become a party as there is

a clear-cut judgment of Delhi High Court in case Hardayal

Singh Mehta Vs MCD, AIR 1990 Delhi 170 in which it is

held that in the matter between the appellant and the MCD,

no third person can join and become a party to such

proceedings and in such proceedings the application under

order 1 Rule 10 CPC is not maintainable. Any dispute

between the applicant and the appellant has to be dealt with

and to be decided by the Civil Court separately.

In such circumstances the applicant can provide

documents, which could assist this Tribunal to decide the

case and he can be permitted to file documents and

address arguments at the final stage without impleading him

as party.

In view of above, application moved by applicant

under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is hereby dismissed. However,

the applicant is permitted to file the documents, if any and to

orally argue the matter / file written submissions at the final

arguments stage.

Put up this matter for further proceedings /

arguments on 12.02.2019.

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

Appellate Tribunal:MCD 15.11.2018

A.No. 715/18 & 783/18

15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Ikrant Sharma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal / Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,

counsel for MCD.

Sh. V.P. Kaliyar, counsel for applicant.

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent MCD filed.

Appeal no. 715/18 is against the show cause notice

whereas the appeal no. 783/18 is against sealing

proceedings.

Original record produced. Status report filed which

states that the appellant has filed an appeal against the

show cause notice u/s 343 of DMC Act dated 12.02.2018

and the appeal is not maintainable.

It is further stated that there are two demolition

orders dated 22.02.2018 and 05.04.2018 in respect of

property no. RA-4, Inderpuri, New Delhi.

On perusal of original record, it is found that the

property was initially booked on 12.02.2018 for

unauthorized construction in the shape of entire stilt, ground

and first floor without obtaining Sanctioned Building Plan.

Show cause notice dated 12.02.2018 was issued which was

pasted at site. No photographs are placed on record

regarding pasting process.

The property was again booked on 23.03.2018 in

continuation of previous booking dated 12.02.2018 due to

unauthorized construction of entire second floor raising

walls and columns at third floor without Sanctioned Building

Plan.

Show cause notice was issued on 28.03.2018 which

was stated to be served upon the owner / builder.

Photographs are placed on record.

Appellant has moved an application for regularization

of construction. The said regularization application was

dismissed as the appellant has failed to comply the

requirements of the IN dated 13.07.2018 (placed on C-53).

A.No. 715/18 & 783/18 - 2 -

Part demolition action was took place on 28.03.2018

with the help of police force wherein partition walls at

second floor and demolished the roof of first floor and

reinforcement cut down by gas cutter.

Further demolition action took place on 18.06.2018,

wherein roof slab of ground floor in the shape of one panel

and reinforcement has been cut with the help of gas cutter

and demolished the brick walls and balcony at first floor and

second floor also.

The property is stated to have been sealed on

25.09.2018 but the sealing record is not produced on the

ground that file is not traceable.

Ld. counsel for appellant seeks adjournment to

inspect the record and take necessary steps to amend the

appeal.

An application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by

Shri Anil Kumar stating that he has filed Writ Petition (C) No.

6749/2018 in the Hon’ble High Court in respect of the

property bearing no. EA-107 (left side), Inderpuri, New Delhi

and property bearing no. RA-4, Inderpuri, New Delhi against

the unauthorized construction vide order dated 04.07.2018,

the Hon’ble High Court has stayed the unauthorized

construction in the above said properties.

Appellant has not mentioned the pendency of Writ

Petition in the appeal.

Since the applicant being petitioner in the Writ

Petition is a necessary party for just adjudication of the

present petition, it is therefore, prayed that Sh. Anil Kumar,

R/o WZ-256/EA, Second Floor, Inderpuri, New Delhi be

impleaded as respondent in the interest of justice.

I have heard the Ld. counsel for appellant as well as

counsel for applicant.

Ld. counsel for applicant submitted that since the

respondent has taken action on the complaint of applicant

therefore, he should be arranged as respondent / necessary

party.

A.No. 715/18 & 783/18 - 3 -

Ld. counsel for appellant states that applicant has no

locus-standi to become party in the proceedings as appeal

is between appellant and respondent and the applicant is

harassing the innocent builder in the area.


Writ Petition of the applicant is stated to be pending

in the Hon’ble High Court and stated to be listed for

05.03.2019.

Concerned AE(B) submits that the booking of the

property in question was done when the complaint was

received from the applicant and the necessary action as per

the DMC Act has already been taken by the respondent.

Since on the basis of complaint of applicant necessary

action under DMC Act has already been taken by the

respondent, I do not find any ground to allow the applicant

to join the proceedings because the appeal is between

appellant and respondent.

Further, a clear-cut judgment of Delhi High Court in

case Hardayal Singh Mehta Vs MCD, AIR 1990 Delhi 170

in which it is held that in the matter between the appellant

and the MCD, no third person can join and become a party

to such proceedings and in such proceedings the

application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is not maintainable.

Any dispute between the applicant and the appellant has to

be dealt with and to be decided by the Civil Court

separately.

In such circumstances the applicant can provide

documents, which could assist this Tribunal to decide the

case and he can be permitted to file documents and

address arguments at the final stage without impleading him

as party.

In view of above, application moved by applicant

under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is hereby dismissed. However,

the applicant is permitted to file the documents, if any and to

orally argue the matter / file written submissions at the final

arguments stage.

A.No. 715/18 & 783/18 - 4 -

Put up this matter for filing documents / final


Respondent is at liberty to take action as per law and

file action taken report.

Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for

compliance.



A.No. 310/17 15.11.2018

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

Sh. Harbans Kaushal, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Ashish Sharma, AE(B).

AE(B) is present. Status report not filed.

AE(B) seeks adjournment to file the status report on

the ground that previous AE(B) has been transferred on

promotion.

Respondent is directed to file status report as

directed on 23.07.2018 positively by next date of hearing,

failing which concerned Dy. Commissioner will appear in

person on 10.12.2018.



A.No. 827/18

15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Kapil Yadav, counsel for appellant.

Fresh appeal has been instituted against the

demolition order dated 02.11.2018 wherein property has

been booked for unauthorized construction in the shape of

first floor (consist of one room + one bathroom / toilet).

Ld. counsel for appellant stated that the appellant is

residing since last 30 years. It is further submitted that only

repair work has been carried out in the premises and no

construction has been carried out and the property has

been booked on complaint made by neighbor who is a

habitual complainant and has raised unauthorized

construction in the area and running an illegal go-down.

Ld. counsel for appellant has relied upon various

documents while praying for ex-parte interim stay stating

that there is electricity bill in the name of appellant having

energizing date 10.02.2011 of house no. 8707, Mohalla

Bharghar, Roshanara Road, Delhi and water bill of Delhi Jal

Board having Bill date 10.12.2015. Election Voter Card of

her husband Sh. Shyam Lal issued on 19.09.2015 for the

same address.

The appellant is claiming ownership of the property

on the basis of General Power of Attorney dated 21.10.2014

given to her by Nanki Devi, Grand-mother of her husband.

Ld. counsel for appellant seeks adjournment to place

on record chain of documents. He further argued that the

appellant has already applied for regularization of the

premises by moving an application dated 13.11.2018

received in the office of AE(B) on 14.11.2018.


Subject to filing the chain of ownership documents, I

am satisfied for grant of ex-parte interim stay. Respondent

is restrained from taking any coercive action in the property

A.No. 827/18 - 2 -

of the appellant bearing no. 8707, Roshanara Road, Delhi in

pursuance of impugned order challenged herein by next

date of hearing.

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.

Copy of 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.

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.

Let the notice of the appeal and application be issued

to the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer.

AE(B) is directed to appear in person and file entire record

of the proceedings, reply and status report of the appeal on

the date fixed.

Put up this matter for filing reply, record and status

report by the respondent on 22.03.2019.

Copy of order be given Dasti for compliance.



A.No. 825/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Yudhister Sharma, counsel for appellant.

Fresh appeal has been filed against the demolition

order dated 30.10.2018 alleging unauthorized construction

in the shape of deviations / excess coverage against the

Sanctioned Building Plan and projections on society land.

Show cause notice dated 12.10.2018 issued and

replied vide reply dated 18.10.2018 where it is stated that

alleged balcony existing in the flat for last 15 years and no

unauthorized construction was carried out in the flat.

Ld. counsel for appellant pointed out that reply filed

has not been considered as is evident from the demolition

order where it is simply mentioned that reply received and

not found satisfactory and no reason has been assigned as

to why the reply was not satisfactory.

Ld. counsel has prayed for interim stay on the ground

that no unauthorized construction has been carried out in

the flat in question by the appellant.

The property has been booked unauthorizedly at the

instance of Ms. Rubi Gandhi.

Ld. counsel for appellant submits that he will not

press for impleadment of respondent no. 3 Ms. Rubi Gandhi

and she may be deleted as respondent no. 3 from the array

of parties.

Statement has been made by the appellant to delete

respondent no. 3 from the array of party. Ordered

accordingly.

Appellant has claimed himself to be original allottee

of the flat. Documents have been placed on record.

Let the notice of the appeal and application be issued

to the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer.

AE(B) is directed to appear in person and file entire record

of the proceedings, reply and status report of the appeal on

the date fixed.

A.No. 825/18 - 2 -

In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking

any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing

flat no. 118, Sunheri Bagh, Sector 13, Rohini, Delhi in

pursuance of impugned order challenged herein by next

date of hearing.

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.

Copy of 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.

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.

Put up this matter for filing reply, record and status

report by the respondent on 22.03.2019.

Copy of order be given Dasti for compliance.



A.No. 812/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. R.K. Sharma, counsel for appellant.

None for respondent.

Status report not filed.

Concerned AE(B) is not present.

Record not produced despite service on 14.11.2018.

Concerned Dy. Commissioner is directed to appear

in person and file record and status report on 19.11.2018.

Copy of order be sent to concerned Dy.

Commissioner through Nodal Officer for North DMC.



A.No. 762/17 15.11.2018

Present : Ms. Pooja Yadav, proxy counsel for Sh. Anuj

Kumar Garg, counsel for appellant.

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

Mohd. Elahi with Ms. Dimpal, counsel for

applicant with applicant Mohd. Hanif.

Sh. Faiz Ahmad, counsel for Delhi Waqf

Board.

Reply to the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC

not filed.

Ld. counsel for Delhi Waqf Board seeks adjournment

to move an application for become intervener on the ground

that a civil suit filed by previous owner against Delhi Waqf

Board of ownership qua the property in question has

already been dismissed by Waqf Tribunal by judgment

dated 29.09.2018. Delhi Waqf Board may take steps within

four weeks.

In view of said judgment, ld. counsel for Delhi Waqf

Board states that the appeal is not maintainable because

the appellant has no legal right qua the property in question.

Put up this matter for filing reply to the application

under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC and final arguments on

14.01.2019.



A.No. 101/16 & 102/16 15.11.2018

Present : None for appellant.

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

Appellant is not appearing for the last 2-3 dates.

Since no one has appeared on behalf of the

appellant, the appeal is dismissed in default and for non-

prosecution.

Respondent MCD is at liberty to take action as per

law in pursuance of impugned order challenged herein.

File be consigned to record room.

Respondent is directed to file action taken report on

08.02.2019. Registrar is directed to prepare a

miscellaneous file for this purpose.



A.No. 213/13 15.11.2018

Present : None for appellant.

Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Sh. Anupam Sharma, counsel for DDA

alongwith Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA.

None has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

Let Court notice be issued to the appellant.

In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is

granted for final arguments on 21.02.2019.



A.No. 987/14 15.11.2018

Present : Ms. Manpreet, proxy counsel for Sh. K.P.

Singh, counsel for Ravinder Singh, Gurmeet

Kaur, LR of deceased Kulwant Kuar.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Sh. Jitender Pal Singh, one of the LRs of deceased

Kulwant Kaur is not served.

On 01.02.2018, notice was sent to Sh. Jitender Pal

Singh before the court of Sh. Rajender Singh, Civil Judge

where civil litigation is pending.

Applicant needs to serve the said LR. Necessary

steps be taken for his service.

Put up this matter for final arguments / dismissal of

application on 07.02.2019.



A.No. 136/15, 173/16 & 163/17 15.11.2018

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

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. R.K. Sharma, AE(B).

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, proxy counsel for Sh.

Anupam Sharma, counsel for DDA alongwith

Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA.

Copy of order of Hon’ble High Court dated

30.10.2018 filed by counsel for appellant wherein Hon’ble

High Court has directed to expedite the matter and to

decide preferably within six weeks from today.

Written submissions are already on record by the

appellant.

One week time sought to file the written submissions

by the respondent.

Due to heavy cause list, no time left for hearing oral

arguments.

Put up this matter for filing documents and oral




A.No. 934/17 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Piyush Kalra, counsel for appellant

alongwith appellant.

Ms. Beena Sharma, counsel for MCD.

AE(B), Sh. Sushil Kumar, is not present today.

Applicant, Shri Om Prakash Sangwan is present.

Counsel for applicant is not present.

Status report filed stating that status report regarding

regularization application is not filed on the ground that

matter has been referred to Chief Law Officer.

One month time sought to decide the regularization

application.

Ld. counsel for appellant has stated that appellant

has filed application four months ago and nothing has

happened with this application and they have deliberately

not deciding the same and the matter needs to be

expedited.

Respondent is directed to decide the regularization

application, failing which Chief Law Officer concerned will

appear in person for explanation.

Put up this matter for filing of status report by the

respondent and arguments on 20.12.2018.


compliance.

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



A.No. 299/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Piyush Kalra, counsel for appellant


Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Adjournment sought to file status report in connected

file bearing no. 934/18.

Put up this matter with said file and arguments on

20.12.2018.


compliance.




A.No. 750/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh. Gangaram Upadhaya proxy counsel for Sh.

B.P. Gupta, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.Amit Kumar counsel for the respondent

alongwith concerned AE(B) .

Status report filed. As per status report

property was booked for unauthorized construction. On

07.12.2017 show cause notice was issued and served by

way of pasting. Thereafter demolition order was passed

on 15.12.2017. Part demolition action took place on

19.01.2018 and projections were demolished at stilt floor

and first floor . Further demolition action was taken on

22.03.2018. Sealing proceedings were initiated on

21.12.2017 but the sealing show cause notice was issued

on 07.01.2018. The entire property was sealed on

13.07.2018 and the demolition order was passed on

13.07.2018. The demolition proceedings has not been

challenged by the appellant. The present appeal is

against the sealing order.

Counsel for the appellant seeks

adjournment to inspect the file and to take necessary

steps against the demolition proceedings because

sealing has been done in consequence of demolition

order. Since there is no stay, respondent is at liberty to

take action as per law and file status report.

Put up this matter for filing of status report

on 08.03.2019. Copy of this order be given dasti.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O. Appellate Tribunal:MCD

15.11.2018

A.No. 742/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.A.A.Ansari, counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Sahil Amar Nath, counsel for the respondent.

Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent

filed.

Counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to

produce the record and to file reply to the appeal as well as

reply to the application for seeking condonation of delay and

Vakalatnama.

Concerned AE(B) is directed to remain present

on the next date alongwith relevant record.

Put up on 10.12.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 536/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh. Rana Ranjit Singh, counsel for the appellant.

Matter is listed for early hearing application.

Notice has been served but none is present on behalf of

respodnent.

Nodal Officer Sh. Sandeep Maglik is absent.

ALO Ms. Sarita Gaur is present alongwith AE(B)

Sh. Ashish Sharma.

Service of the notice was affected upon the

respondent on 02.11.2018. Today, neither any counsel

nor record has been produced.

Concerned Dy. Commissioner is directed to

appear in person alongwith relevant record on

16.11.2018.

Copy of this order be given Dasti to ALO for

placing the same before the concerned Dy.

Commissioner.


15.11.2018

A.No. 815/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh. Sankar Sinha , counsel for the appellant


Sh. Dharmvir Gupta counsel for the respondent

with concerned AE(B).

Memo of appearance filed on behalf of

respondent.

AE(B) has produced the record and status

report not filed. The property was booked on 20.09.2018

as unauthorized construction in the shape of internal

staircase and addition/alteration at second floor and third

floor and one room at fourth floor (ground floor and first

floor old and residentially occupied). Show cause notice

was issued on the same date and sent by speed post

which was refused therefore demolition order was passed

on 20.09.2018. The demolition order was served on

28.09.2018.

On perusal of prayer clause it is found that

appellant has prayed for setting aside the order under

section 345B of the DMC Act and restraining the

respondent from demolishing the second floor and third

floor of the property. The prayer clause needs to be

amended.

Appellant wants to withdraw the present

appeal with liberty to file afresh. Statement of the

appellant has been recorded separately.

In view of the statement of the appellant, the

present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to

file fresh appeal as per law.

File be consigned to record room. Copy of

this order be given dasti.


15.11.2018

A.No. 639/16

15.11.2018 Present : None for the appellant.

Sh. H.R.Aggarwal, counsel for the respondent.

Put up for final arguments on 04.03.2019.


15.11.2018

A.No. 531/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.Vineet Jain, counsel for the appellant.

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

AE(B)Mohd. Shakil and EE(B) Sh. S.C.Meena.

Status report signed by Sh. S.C.Meena

EE(B) through it was directed to be signed by the Dy.

Commissioner concerned after approval of the

Commissioner. It is stated that approval of Commissioner

and signature of Dy. Commissioner could not be obtained

as action continued to be taken in late evening yesterday.

In the status report it is stated that special demolition

programme was fixed on 12.11.2018, 13.11.2018 and

14.11.2018 but due to directions issued by the DPCC

and EPCA action could not be taken between

01.11.2018 to 12.11.2018. On 14.11.2018 demolition

action was taken with the help of PS Nabi Karim wherein

roof of ground floor , first floor, second floor, third floor

and fourth floor were demolished and made the entire

property unusable and windows were also removed on

each floor. Photographs also placed on record.

Adjournment sought to file status report as

directed on 10.10.2018 on the next date.

Put up on 10.12.2018 for filing further action

taken report/status report in compliance of order dated

10.10.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 497/14, 54/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.Kuldeep Sharma , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta/ Sh. Amit Kumar proxy

counsel for Sh. Naveen Grover, counsel for the

respondent.

In appeal no. 497/14 status report filed

stating that property cannot be put to any commercial use

including small retail shops as the area of each shop is

more than the permitted area of 20 square meter and

there is no dwelling unit in the entire property, so as to

entitle the appellant to undertake the activity of small

retail shops as such property can only be put to the

residential use.

Arguments heard.

Put up for clarifications if any/orders on

06.12.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 297/18, 298/18

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.S.D.Ansari , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for the respondent

with AE(B) Sh Ashish Sharma.

Adjournment sought for arguments.

Compliance of previous order has not been

done by either of the parties. Adjournment sought to

comply the same.

Put up for compliance of previous order/

further proceedings/arguments on 19.11.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 198/18

15.11.2018 Present : Ms. Anupama proxy counsel for Sh. Arjun Diwan ,

counsel for the appellant.

Sh. V.K.Aggarwal, counsel for the respondent.

Reply to the application filed. Copy supplied.

Due to heavy cause list no time left for

hearing the arguments.

Put up for hearing arguments on the

pending application on 28.11.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 143/18

15.11.2018 Present : None for the appellant.

Sh.V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for the respondent

with AE(B) concerned.

Status report not filed on the ground that

property could not be located. It is stated by the

concerned AE(B) that JE(B) has visited the site

yesterday and today.

I am not convinced about the efforts made

by the AE(B) to trace the site as address is very much

clear. Respondent is directed to file status report

positively by the next date otherwise concerned Dy.

Commissioner will appear in person.

Put up this matter for filing of status report

on 05.04.2019.


15.11.2018

A.No. 73/16

15.11.2018 Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for the respondent.

Status report filed stating that site was

inspected on 02.11.2018 and pole was found dismantled.

In view of the status report, the appeal

stands disposed off.

File be consigned to Record Room.

Record if any, be returned to the

respondent.


15.11.2018

A.No. 118/17, 119/17

15.11.2018 Present : Sh. Manish Vats, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.Dharmvir Gupta, counsel for the respondent

with concerned AE(B).

Status report filed. Copy supplied.

Status report will be considered on the next

date as due to heavy cause list no time left for perusing

the same. Photocopies of the desealing proceedings on

the application of the appellant also filed.

Put up for consideration on 25.04.2019.


15.11.2018

A.No. 286/18

15.11.2018 Present : Counsel for the parties.

Status report was filed on previous date. As

per status report on account of misuse of the property

show cause notice was issued and no reply was received

and sealing order was passed on 04.04.2018 where

owner was using the property for commercial purposes in

the name and style of M/s Ravi Sanitary shop and the

said shop was being run in violation of MPD-2021 on

non-notified road.

Respondent is directed to ascertain the

misuse charges and will intimate the appellant within 4

weeks. Respondent is further directed to clarify as to

what purpose subject property can be used by the

appellant as per MPD-2021 .

Put up on 05.04.2019.


15.11.2018

M.No.65/13

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.S.D.Ansari , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for the respondent.

In view of the statement of Sh. S.D.Anari

made on 01.11.2018, the application of the appellant filed

on 29.08.2018 is dismissed as withdrawn.

Registrar was directed to attach the original

file of Misc. no. 65/13. As per Ropkar the said file has

been sent to the court of Ld District & Sessions Judge

(HQ), Delhi which is not received back till date. Registrar

is directed to personally summon the file from the court of

Ld District & Sessions Judge (HQ), Delhi for perusal.

Put up for further proceedings on

17.12.2018.


15.11.2018

A.No. 847/14

15.11.2018 Present : Sh.Vimal Dhingra , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for the

respondent.

On perusal of file it is found that caveator

has placed on record copy of the order in Cont.Cas(C)no.

300/14 of High Court of Delhi. Outcome of the said

contempt petition is not known as final order is not on

record.

Both the counsel for the parties are directed

to clarify on that aspect and relevancy of those

proceedings to the present appeal.

Put up for further proceedings on

11.01.2019.


15.11.2018

A.No. 804/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Sankar Sinha Advocate alongwith

appellant in person.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith AE(B) Sh. B.P. Singh.

Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.

AE(B) submits that as per record, sealing order in the

present appeal has not been passed till today. Sealing show

cause notice was issued and further sealing proceeding will

be conducted as per law. His statement has been recorded

separately in this regard.

In view of the statement of the AE(B), the appeal is

pre-mature. The appellant is directed to appear before the

Dy. Commissioner concerned on 20.11.2018 at 3.00 p.m. to

file reply to the sealing show cause notice. The appeal is

accordingly dismissed being pre-mature.

Original record brought is returned to the AE(B)

concerned.

File be consigned to record room.



A.No. 812/18 15.11.2018

Present : Counsel for appellant.

None for respondent.

Put up again.



A.No. 453/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, proxy counsel for Sh. Dalip

Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Meenakshi Sharma, counsel for

respondent alongwith Sh. Hament Kumar,

JE(B).

Order of the Hon’ble High Court dated 13.09.2018

has been placed on record by the appellant.

Copy of the contempt petition not filed.

Status report filed on 06.09.2018.

Adjournment sought to file the further status report

after receiving of the file / record from the Hon’ble High

Court.

Adjournment sought to produce the copy of the

contempt proceedings.

Connected matter is stated to be listed on

11.01.2019. Put up this matter alongwith connected appeal

on 11.01.2019.



M. in A.No. 485/12 15.11.2018

Present : None for the appellant.

None for the respondent.

Status report / action taken report not filed.

Concerned AE(B) to appear in person alongwith

status report on 18.04.2019.



M. in A.No. 298/16 15.11.2018

Present : None for the appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, proxy counsel for Ms.

Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD.


Respondent is directed to file action taken report/

status report on 10.04.2019.



A.No. 661/18 to 665/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Deepak Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey counsel for respondent

alongwith Sh. Jagbir Singh AE(B).

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.

Status report filed stating that relevant record is

already submitted in appeal No.437/14 & 438/14.

Ld. counsel argued the matter without producing

record to the Tribunal stating that how the appeal is

maintainable.

Ld. counsel for appellant is directed to inform the

Registrar regarding next date of hearing in appeal

No.437/14 & 438/14.

Registrar is directed to attach the record of those

appeals with the present matters.

Ld. counsel for is not aware of the next date of

hearing and next date of hearing could not be ascertained

from the Registrar.

Appellant is directed to inform the Registrar about the

date next date of hearing in appeal No.437/18 & 438/18.

Put up this matter for arguments on 08.01.2019.

AE(B) to remain present on date fixed.



A.No. 123/16 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Saurabh Sachdeva, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC.

Ld. counsel for appellant seeks adjournment to

produce the Sanctioned Building Plan.

Registrar has attached the concerned file.

Adjournment sought by the respondent to comply the

order dated 11.10.2018 and the directions given therein.

In case the status report not file regarding the

directions dated 11.10.2018, Dy. Commissioner concerned

will appear in person on next date of hearing.

Ld. counsel for respondent has never appeared in

this case. Dy. Commissioner to take note in this regard.





A.No. 693/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Feroz Ahmad, counsel for appellant.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Tirath, L.I.



Record produced. Let the same be deposited with

the Registrar of this Tribunal.

On perusal of the record it is noticed that sealing

show cause notice dated 19.09.2017 was issued to Abdul

Majid Book Binding alleging that the property No.395, Chitla

Gate Chawri Bazar, Delhi-6 was being used for the purpose

other than residential by running trade/factory/industrial

activities in the name and style of M/s Abdul Majid Book

Binding in violation of existing policy of MCD and MPD-

2021.

Sealing order has been passed on 17.04.2018.

Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appellant

wants to use the premises as per MPD-2021 and is ready to

deposit the misuse charges. He has denied the allegation

of premises was being used for any Industrial activities

stating that books were bounded manually for their

livelihood.

Respondent is directed to calculate the misuse

charges and supply the copy of the same to the appellant

within 15 days who shall take necessary steps for

depositing the same, if any.

It is submitted on behalf of the respondent as well as

appellant that properly be directed to be desealed for the

purpose of calculation of misuse charges by the respondent

and for removal of articles/goods. Accordingly the property

is directed to be desealed by the respondent for the above

said purpose on 19.11.2018 from 11.00 to 4.00 p.m.

Thereafter property be resealed.

A.No. 693/18

Appellant is directed to get the commercial meter dis-

connected from the premises and file proof of the same on

date fixed.



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

as prayed.



A.No. 153/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Anish Nijami proxy counsel for Sh. Sanjay

Agnihotri, counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Main counsel for the appellant is not present, will

appear after 15 minutes.

Put up again.



15.11.2018 3.15 p.m.

Present : Sh. Sanjay Agnihotri, counsel for the

appellant.


Arguments on behalf of the appellant heard.

It is already 4.00 p.m.

Put up for arguments by the respondent on

19.11.2018.



A.No. 476/18 15.11.2018

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

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Manoj Kumar, AE(B).


Status report filed stating that measurement of

existing construction were checked and found almost

correct.

Written submissions has been filed on behalf of the

respondent. Copy supplied.

Appellant sought adjournment to file the written

submissions.



Put up this matter for final arguments on 11.04.2019.




A.No. 995/17 15.11.2018

Present : Appellant in person.


While dictating the order it is found that original

record has not been produced by the respondent.

Put up this matter for filing original record on

26.11.2018.

AE(B) to appear in person alongwith record.



A.No. 77/18 & 78/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Veerpal Singh, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Nazma Akhtar, counsel for respondent.

Status report filed stating that the property can be

used under residence or 24 categories as per MPD-2021

after paying necessary conversion charges etc., if used

other than residence, as reported by Building Department,

City SP Zone. Copy of 24 items that can be run in the

residential properties as per MPD-2021 is enclosed.

Break-up of the calculation of mis-use charges not

given. Original record also not filed.

Put up this matter for filing of break-up of misuse

charges and original record by the respondent on

26.11.2018.



M 23//18 & A.No. 629/18 15.11.2018




Sh. Rajesh Sharma, applicant in person.

Put up for further proceedings on 05.12.2018.



A.No.97/18 15.11.2018




Sh. Rajesh Sharma, applicant in person.

Vide separate detailed order, application Under

Order 1 Rule 10 is dismissed.

Put up for final arguments on 05.12.2018.



M.No. 66/13 15.11.2018

Present : None for the applicant.

Ahlmad is directed to place on record proof of service

of the notice.

Put up this matter for that purpose on 10.04.2019.



A.No. 322/17 15.11.2018


Sh. Amit Kumar, proxy counsel for Sh. Naveen

Grover, counsel for MCD.

Reply to the application under order VI Rule 17 has

been filed.

Advocate for the appellant is not present.

Adjournment sought.

Put up for arguments on the said application on

02.05.2019.



A.No. 858/17 15.11.2018


Sh. A.L. Agnihotri, counsel for respondent.

Put up for arguments alongwith connected appeal

No.322/17 on 02.05.2019.



A.No. 396/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. B.B. Jain, counsel for appellant.



Status report not filed. AE(B) is not present.



Record shows that proceedings u/s 345A of the DMC

Act were initiated against the property bearing No.D-20,

ground floor, Khajan Basti, New Delhi which was being used

godown of steel plate in total violation of permissible /

sanctioned use of the property and also against the MPD-

2021 / Zonal Plan / Sanctioned Plan.

The appellant is ready to use the premise as per

MPD-2021 and further is ready to deposit the misuse

charges, if any.

Respondent is directed to calculate the misuse

charges and supply the copy of the same to the appellant

who shall take necessary steps for depositing the same.

For that purpose the property is ordered to be

temporarily desealed on 19.11.2018 from 11.00 a.m. to 4.00

p.m. Thereafter reseal the same on the same day.




as prayed.



A.No. 601/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Saurabh Sachdeva, proxy counsel for Ms.

Radha Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. P.K. Chauhan, AE(B).


Main counsel for appellant is not available.

Counsel for respondent submitted affidavit in

compliance of the order dated 30.08.2018 not filed.

AE(B) is present and states that he has not received

the affidavit.

Appellant is directed to comply the order dated

30.08.2018 failing which respondent will be at liberty to take

action in terms of the order dated 30.08.2018.






A.No. 602/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Saurabh Sachdeva, proxy counsel for Ms.

Radha Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Kamla Singh, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. P.K. Chauhan, AE(B).


Main counsel for appellant is not available.

Status report filed stating that property was booked

for unauthorized construction as a complaint was received

from the Monitoring Committee dated 06.06.2018 for

unauthorized construction. Accordingly the property was

booked on 11.06.2018. After following the due process of

law demolition order was passed on 19.06.2018.

Part demolition action took place on 16.08.2018.

The demolition proceedings has been challenged in

appeal No.601/18.

Sealing action was initiated vide show cause notice

u/s 345A of the DMC Act dated 10.07.2018 and sealing

order was passed on 24.09.2018. No sealing action has

been taken because the demolition order was stayed vide

order dated 30.08.2016 in appeal No.601/18.



Put up alongwith connected appeal on 06.05.2019.



as prayed.



A.No. 694/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Mohit Dagar, proxy counsel for Sh. Ajay

Dabas, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Surinder Singh, counsel for respondent

alongwith Sh. Ashok Kumar, AE(B).





Sealing proceedings were initiated on 14.08.2018 on

account of unauthorized construction in the property No.C-

1/76, Sanjay Enclave, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi as there was

unauthorized construction at first floor to fourth floor in

continuations of previous booking No.44 dated 22.01.2018

for ground floor.

Sealing show cause notice was issued u/s 345A on

07.08.2018. No reply was received. Accordingly sealing

order was passed on 24.08.2018.

Vacation notice has been issued on 27.08.2018.

On 24.08.2018 during the sealing action fourth floor

sealed at two points. Third floor was sealed at one point

main entry in the presence of police staff. Rest of the

building found occupied.

Proxy counsel for appellant submits that demolition

proceedings have not been challenged as appellant is not

aware of the said proceedings.

The entire second and third floor of the property were

sealed in pursuance of the sealing order dated 24.08.2018.

Today record regarding the demolition proceedings

has not been produced. Respondent is directed to produce

the entire record regarding demolition proceedings for

perusal.

Since the demolition order has not been challenged

the respondent directed to file action taken report / status

report.

A.No. 694/18

Dy. Commissioner concerned is directed to appear in

person for explanation as to why no action has been taken

as the demolition order has not yet been challenged.

As per their record, the property has been sealed at

third floor and fourth floor whereas appellant is claiming that

second floor and third floor were sealed. This contradiction

needs to be verified and inaction on the part of the officials

of the respondent needs to be explained.

Put up this matter for that purpose on 30.01.2019.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for

respondent for compliance.



A.No. 705/18 & 706/18 15.11.2018

Present : Sh. Anis proxy counsel for appellant.

Sh. Surinder Singh counsel for respondent in

appeal No.706/18 and Sh.Amardeep Maini,

counsel for respondent in appeal No.705/18.


Status report not filed. AE(B) is absent.

It is stated that original record has already been

attached with appeal No.728/18 listed on 11.12.2018.

This is an appeal against the sealing order.

Ld. counsel for appellant further stated that appeal

against the demolition order has already been filed

regarding the same property vide appeal No.727/18 &

728/18.

At request, put up with connected matter on

11.12.2018.

AE(B) concerned to appear in person alongwith

status report on next date of hearing.



A.No. 825/18 Statement of Sh. R.K. Vij S/o Late Sh. Lakhraj Vij aged about 76 years, r/o 118, Sunheri Bagh, Sector 13, Rohini, Delhi ON SA

I am the appellant in present appeal. I want to delete the

respondent No.3 from the array of the parties. I may be allowed to delete

the respondent No.3 i.e. Ms. Ruby Gandhi from the array of the parties.

RO&AC



A.No. 815/18 Statement of Sh. Rajeev Anand S/o Sh. Ram Prakash Anand aged about 45 years, R/o 38/09, II & III floor, Shakti Nagar, Delhi-35 alongwith counsel Sh. Sankar Sinha, Adv. ON SA

I am the appellant in the present appeal. I may be allowed to

withdraw the present appeal with the liberty to file afresh.

RO&AC



A.No. 804/18 Statement of Sh. B.P. Singh, AE(B) Keshav Puram Zone, North DMC.

ON SA

As per record, sealing order in the present appeal has not been

passed till today. Sealing show cause notice was issued and further

sealing proceeding will be conducted as per law.

RO&AC

