A.No. 897/14 & 940/14 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Parveen Sharma, counsel for MCD
alongwith Sh. Rajesh Tewatia, AE(B).
Status report has been filed in compliance of order
dated 23.07.2018. Further, status report was directed to be
file in compliance of order dated 17.01.2018.
On 17.01.2018, respondent was directed to file status
report of existing construction at the stage when the
property was booked and at the current stage alongwith
photographs of the property from all angles.
In the present status report filed today, it is stated
that the property is not covered under the provisions of
Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act,
2014 as the unauthorized construction carried out at this
property from first floor to fourth floor was booked by the
department only on 18.11.2014, which is much after the
cutoff date of protection under aforesaid Act i.e. 01.06.2014.
As per the report of JE(B), basement is a hall and it
being used for parking, ground floor is a hall which is being
used for commercial activity, first floor to fourth floor are
being used for residential purposes.
It is further stated that at present, existing structure of
the property is same as detailed in u/c files bearing no.
B/UC/EE(B)-I/CNZ/2014 dated 27.03.2014 and
768/B/UC/EE(B)-I/CNZ/2014 dated 18.11.2014. The
photographs showing the present status of the property are
also enclosed.
It is further stated that the demolition action against
the unauthorized construction in the area of Jamia Nagar is
a long pending issue and department is facing problems in
execution of demolition / sealing actions, therefore, a
demolition programme specifically against subject property
A.No. 897/14 & 940/14 - 2 -
has been planned for the 01.11.2018 and action against this
property will be taken on the said date, subject to vacation
of property and availability of police force.
Copy of status report supplied alongwith photographs
to the appellant.
In view of para no. 4 and 5 of status report, appellant
is directed to file affidavit giving details of construction with
measurements of the existing construction of entire property
alongwith existing site plan and photographs of entire
property in question and including the use of the same
within two weeks. Copy of the same will be provided to
concerned AE(B), who will file status report clarifying that
the structure and extent of construction mentioned in the
affidavit was the same at the time of booking of property as
mentioned in the status report.
Put up this matter for filing status report by the
respondent on 06.03.2019 when other connected appeals
are listed.
Status report should be signed under the hand and
signature of concerned Dy. Commissioner.
Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for
compliance.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 450/18 & 451/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Bhanu Mohan, proxy counsel for Sh. Sahil
Munjal, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC.
Adjournment sought as main counsel for appellant is
not available.
Matter was listed regarding maintainability of appeal
because the tenant has already approached the Monitoring
Committee for temporary desealing which was done as per
the orders of Monitoring Committee.
Last and final opportunity is granted for arguments on
maintainability of appeal on 31.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 802/17 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Madan Sagar, counsel for MCD.
Ms. Manorama Masih, counsel for Monitoring
Committee.
Status report filed by the respondent MCD. Copy supplied
to the Monitoring Committee as well as appellant.
Part arguments heard.
Ld. counsel for appellant, at the very outset, submitted
that in view of the status report filed today by the respondent
MCD, no penalty / misuse charges are liable to be paid by the
appellant under Clause 15.9 (V) of MPD-2021 and appellant is
entitled to use the ground floor subject matter of the present
appeal.
Ld. counsel for Monitoring Committee submitted that as
per the report of the Monitoring Committee dated 02.02.2018,
appellant is liable to pay the difference of conversion / parking
charges and existing structure against the Sanctioned Building
Plan from ground floor to third floor and unauthorized
construction at fourth floor, therefore, non-compoundable
deviations has to be removed from the existing construction or
the same is to be got regularized as per the MPD-2021 before
dealing is allowed.
Ld. counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to file
detailed report regarding any action if required regarding the
ground floor subject matter of the present appeal.
Respondent is directed to file status report for what
purpose as per MPD-2021, the ground floor has been used and
whether any difference of conversion / parking charges is to be
paid by the appellant regarding ground floor or not.
Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for
compliance.
Put up this matter for filing status report by the respondent
and arguments on 22.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 300/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Anil Yadav, proxy counsel for Sh. Kapil
Lalwani, counsel for appellant.
Sh. A.L. Agnihotri, counsel for MCD.
Status report filed stating that in compliance of order
of this Tribunal, property was desealed on 28.09.2018 for
the purpose of lifting of Malba by the appellant. The
property was inspected on 05.10.2018 and it was noticed
that removal of malba was in progress and still some malba
is lying at site.
Ld. counsel for appellant submits that entire malba
has been removed.
Respondent is directed to file status report as the
property was ordered to be resealed on 08.10.2018 at 4.00
pm.
Put up this matter for filing status report by the
respondent and arguments on 30.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 368/14, 377/15, 485/15 & 261/14 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal / Ms. Nagina Jain / Ms.
Manjusha Jha, counsel for MCD.
It is stated that the LPA is still pending and listed for
09.10.2018 before Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.
In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned for
arguments on 01.05.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 1196/15 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Akansha Dhammi, counsel for SDMC.
Status report filed stating that show cause notice was
served through speed post. Photocopy of relevant page of
register has been filed. Copy of status report supplied to
the counsel for appellant.
Ld. counsel for appellant seeks adjournment on the
ground that LPA is still pending and listed for 09.10.2018
before Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.
In the interest of justice, matter is adjourned for
arguments on 01.05.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 918/14 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Status report filed stating that regularization
application of the appellant has been received on
05.10.2018 and a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- has been deposited
and the same is under consideration.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent on 02.11.2018.
Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for
compliance.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 644/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Shreyak Gupta, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC
alongwith Sh. N.K. Meena, ALO and Sh. R.D.
Choudhary, AE(B).
Neither record produced not status report filed by the
respondent despite service was affected on 01.10.2018.
It is orally submitted by the AE(B) that after grant of
permission on 15.05.2018, public person in the locality is
made a complaint and a letter was written to the SHO.
AE(B) is present and states that he has written a
letter to the SHO, Hari Nagar.
The said letter is in contradiction of grant of sanction /
permission dated 15.05.2018 which is placed at page no. 27
& 28.
Adjournment sought by the respondent to file status
report and produce the record.
Status report will be filed under the hand and
signature of Dy. Commissioner concerned.
Concerned AE(B) is directed to place the order
passed today as well as on previous date before concerned
Dy. Commissioner for information and compliance.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 23.10.2018.
Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for
compliance.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 479/17 & 480/17 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Daman Popli, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.
Status report filed regarding verification of
measurements as mentioned in the affidavit stating that
existing construction tallies with the construction mentioned
in the affidavit filed by the appellant.
Attested copy of the PTR / house tax record has also
filed.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that entire PTR has
not been produced despite last opportunity.
Dy. A&C is directed to appear in person alongwith
PTR copy of which has been filed by the appellant alongwith
appeal.
Put up this matter for filing original record by the
respondent and arguments on 12.02.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 1064/16 & 21/17 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Daman Popli, proxy counsel for appellant.
Sh. K.K. Arora / Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel
for MCD.
An application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was filed
by the appellant to implead M/s JDM Broadband Services
Pvt. Ltd. as respondent on the ground that booster in
question was installed by them who are the owner.
Ld. proxy counsel for appellant submitted that the
appellant does not press the application and want to
withdraw the same.
The application is accordingly dismissed as
withdrawn.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that the appellant
want to dismantle the booster and is ready to deposit the
misuse charges / penalty.
Respondent is directed to calculate the misuse
charges / penalty and supply the copy of report to the
appellant within two weeks.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and final arguments on 13.12.2018.
Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for
compliance.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 176/17 08.10.2018
Present : None for appellant.
Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA.
Sh. Yogender Vashist, counsel for R-2.
Put up this matter for consideration at 2.00 pm.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
02.30 pm
Present : As above.
None has appeared on behalf of the appellant.
Put up this matter for consideration on 09.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 193/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Satish Kumar, counsel for appellant.
Prashant Bhardwaj, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Sushil Kumar, AE(B).
This is an appeal against the rejection of regularization
application vide order dated 12.02.2018.
Status report filed stating that appeal bearing no. 935/16
titled as Kailash Balani vs. SDMC is pending adjudication for
31.10.2018.
The said appeal, as submitted by AE(B), was regarding
the regularization of second floor. The second floor of the
property bearing no. B-13, Chirag Enclave, New Delhi.
It is stated that the present appeal is need to be heard
alongwith the said appeal after clubbing the same together.
Further on 11.01.2018, appellant has moved an
application for getting the portions (i.e. basement and ground
floor) in their possession regularized. Since the proposal was for
individual floors or in isolation vide letter dated 12.02.2018 the
same was rejected.
It is further stated that in the appeal no. 935/16 while
adjourning the matter for 31.10.2018 and taking note of the
submission was made by the appellant that he would take all the
efforts to file joint application for regularization and respondent
was ordered to decide the said application. But no such proposal
has been received / filed.
Original record has been produced.
Copy of status report supplied to the appellant.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 31.10.2018 alongwith appeal no.
935/16.
Concerned AE(B) is directed to appear in person on date
fixed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 488/18 08.10.2018
Present : None for appellant.
None for respondent NDMC.
The notification u/s 253 subsection (1)(2) of NDMC
Act 1994 in favour of the undersigned is not received from
the Ministry of Home Affairs and as such the appeal cannot
be entertained by this Tribunal.
Put up this matter for awaiting notification from the
Ministry of Home Affairs and further proceedings on
03.01.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 164/18 & 165/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Pranav Verma, proxy counsel for Sh.
Vishvender Verma, counsel for appellant.
Again adjournment sought to file the affidavit of
measurements and existing plan of the property which was
to be filed at the time of listing of the matter and an
objection was raised by the Registrar in that regard and
after filing of the appeal on 05.03.2018 seeking various
adjournments to comply the said requirement, adjournment
is again being sought to comply the said direction.
No reason has been assigned why the affidavit is not
filed.
Though, there are no grounds for extending the time
to comply the said direction and appeal is liable to be
dismissed for non-prosecution.
In the interest of justice, subject to costs of Rs.
10,000/- in each appeal, one last opportunity given to the
appellant to comply the directions to file the affidavit of
measurements and the existing site plan alongwith
photographs within two weeks, failing which appeal shall be
deemed to be dismissed.
Put up this matter for filing of affidavit by the
appellant on 12.11.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 203/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. G.D. Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. R.K. Singh, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. R.K. Jain, AE(B).
Sh. Vaibhav Kumar, counsel for R-2.
Status report filed stating that the said property
bearing flat no. 302, Amarpali Co-operative Group Housing
Society Ltd., Plot No. 56, I.P. Extn., Patparganj, Delhi-92
was inspected on 12.03.2015 and during the inspection, it
was noticed that unauthorized construction in the shape of
flat at the space provided for electric sub-station as per
sanctioned building plan of DDA at ground floor.
The said unauthorized construction was booked on
12.03.2015. Show cause notice was issued on 12.03.2015
which was served to the President / Secretary of the society
vide speed post dated 19.03.2015.
No reply was filed to the show cause notice.
Demolition notice dated 01.04.2015 was sent to the
President / Secretary of the Society on 06.04.2015 with the
direction to demolish the unauthorized construction within
stipulated period. The President / Secretary of the Society
neither complied with the show cause notice nor sent any
reply to the same.
Accordingly, demolition order was passed on
16.04.2015 by the competent authority. Sealing
proceedings were also initiated against the unauthorized
construction and show cause notice dated 08.09.2015 u/s
345-A of DMC Act sent to the President / Secretary of the
Society vide speed post dated 08.09.2015.
No reply was filed and the competent authority has
passed the sealing order dated 15.09.2015 and property in
question was sealed on 08.06.2017 at one point.
A.No. 203/18 - 2 -
Original record regarding sealing as well as
demolition has been produced.
After passing the demolition order on 12.03.2015, no
demolition action took place as on two days due to non-
availability of time, action could not be taken, however, on
08.06.2017, property has been sealed.
Ld. counsel for appellant states that they have not
challenged the demolition order on the ground that the
property in question was allotted by respondent no. 2 i.e.
Amarpali Cooperative Society as mentioned in the file.
It is not cleared by the appellant in the appeal if she
has any intention to challenge the demolition order because
the sealing has been done on account of unauthorized
construction having been booked u/s 343 of the DMC Act.
Respondent is directed to file detailed reply to the
contentions of the appeal where it is being claimed that the
structure in question is existing since inception of the
construction in the society and the question regarding
maintainability of the petition against the sealing order which
apparently came into the knowledge when the property was
sealed on 08.06.2017 and the appeal has been filed on
19.03.2018 which is highly barred by limitation.
Respondent is also directed to file detailed reply to
the application seeking condonation of delay on next date of
hearing. The said application will be heard on merits.
Adjournment sought to file the reply on behalf of the
respondent no. 2.
Appellant is further directed to file the documents of
ownership of the property in question in original.
Put up this matter for filing reply / status report by the
respondent and arguments on 14.01.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 178/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. B. Khan, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Sanjay Sethi, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Jitender Panchal, JE(B).
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Status report filed.
Original record produced alleging unauthorized
construction at first floor and second floor of property no.
10020, Gali Nawab Ganj, Delhi-06. Show cause notice was
issued on 11.01.2018 and served by way of pasting.
Work stop notice was issued on 15.01.2018.
Demolition order was passed on 22.01.2018 and no reply
was received to the show cause notice. Demolition action
took place on 12.02.2018 whereas roof of second floor was
demolished partly. Further action took place on 20.06.2018
and roof of two rooms at second floor was almost
demolished and made it inhabitable.
Thereafter on three dates, action could not be taken
due to shortage of time.
Ld. counsel for appellant does not press for any
interim stay and seeks adjournment to inspect the record.
Respondent is at liberty to take action and file action
taken report.
Respondent is further directed to file detailed reply to
the application seeking condonation of delay.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 11.01.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 712/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Kailash Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD
alongwith Sh. Vinod Bansal, AE(B).
Status report filed
Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.
Record produced. Let the same be deposited with
the Registrar of this Tribunal.
As per FIR dated 07.07.2018 the property bearing
No. 8850, Gali Nal Wali, Naya Mohalla was booked for
unauthorized construction at entire ground floor with
projection on mpl. Land. Show cause notice was issued
on07.07.2018 sent through speed post. Appellant sent a
reply received on 12.07.2018 stating that property was very
old and was in dilapidated condition and require immediate
repair as permitted under Building Bye Laws. Intimation
was sent regarding repair of the property to the respondent.
Copy placed.
Vide letter dated 31.07.2018 in view of the reply
received, the appellant was directed to appear for personal
hearing fixed on 08.08.2018 at 3.00 p.m. The said letter
was sent by speed post. Speaking order was passed on
19.09.2018 stating that on 08.08.2018 none appeared to
attend the personal hearing but Nooruddin filed a reply
dated 08.08.2018. Again hearing notice was issued to him
on 06.09.20118 to attend the hearing on 13.09.2018 at 2.30
p.m. when he attended the hearing and filed some affidavit.
Hearing proceedings were closed on 13.09.2018.
The concerned AE(B) inspected the site on
19.09.2018 and submitted that owner/occupier has further
carried out unauthorized construction on first floor, second
floor and third floor. He has attached the photographs.
Hence, the demolition order has been passed from ground
floor to third floor.
A.No. 712/18 -2-
A police complaint was also received from the SHO
Bara Hindu Rao in this regard.
A Writ Petition No.9471 titled as Mohd. Laieq vs
North DMC was filed before the Hon’ble High Court and
vide order dated 10.09.2018 of the Hon’ble High Court
complete demolition of the entire unauthorized construction
existing in the property is to be filed within four weeks and
the matter is fixed for 12.11.2018. Copy of the order is
enclosed.
In the order dated 10.09.2018 the Hon’ble High Court
directed North DMC to take action for complete demolition
of the entire unauthorized construction, existing in the
subject property hearing No.8850, Naya Mohallah, Azad
Market, Delhi-6 expeditiously and ensure that no further
unauthorized construction is allowed to be carried out
thereon. The matter is listed for 09.11.2018. Copy of the
High Court order is attached.
The said order was passed in the said Writ Petition
on the application No. 36778/2018 (Interim Relief).
Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that the notice
was given for alleged unauthorized construction on the
ground floor, however, speaking order has been passed
from ground floor to third floor and no notice of the
construction above ground floor has ever been given and as
such impugned order is illegal.
On the other hand stand is being taken by the
appellant that he has only carried out repairs and the
property existed from ground floor to second floor as is
evident from the record placed at page No.59-60 where
property has been described as double storey building i.e.
shop pucca ground floor; shop Bala Khanna IInd floor.
Ld. counsel for respondent submitted that this is a
case of fresh construction after demolishing the old
structure. Police report dated 06.08.2018 placed at page
33/C of the record received in the office of the respondent
also alleging new construction in the property in question.
A.No. 712/18 -3-
On perusal of the affidavit placed at page 24 of the
appeal filed regarding description and measurement of the
property mentioned in the affidavit, the same property has
been described as :
a) Ground floor one room measuring 14.6x10.3, one
room measuring 12x12, one kitchen 11x6, one
store 12x6.4, bathroom measuring 6x4, latrine
5.6x4, dining room 18.9x7.7, main entrance lobby
14.6x8 1 ½ main lobby 14x8, shaft 2x6.
b) First floor one room measuring 14.6x10.3, one
room measuring 12x12, one kitchen 11x6, one
store 12x6.4, bathroom measuring 6x4, latrine
5.6x4, dining room 18.9x7.7, main entrance lobby
14.6x8, 1 ½ main lobby 14x8, shaft 2x6 and one
chajja measuring 19.6x2.5
c) second floor one room measuring 14.6x10.3, one
room measuring 12x12, one kitchen 11x6, one
store 12x6.4, bathroom measuring 6x4, latrine
5.6x4, dining room 18.9x7.7, main entrance lobby
14.6x8, 1 ½ main lobby 14x8, shaft 2x6 and one
chajja measuring 19.6x2.5
d) third floor one room measuring 14.6x10.3, one
store room 11x6, bathroom measuring 6x4, latrine
5.6x4, dining room 18.9x7.7, main entrance lobby
14.6x8, 1 ½ main lobby 14x8, shaft 2x6 and one
chajja measuring 19.6x2.5
Admittedly the description in the affidavit does not
tally with the description of the property mentioned in the
document placed at page 60 of the paperbook on the basis
of which appellant is seeking stay against the demolition
order.
I have heard the ld. counsel for the parties on the
interim stay application.
A.No. 712/18 -4-
In view of the above facts and circumstances and
pendency of the Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court
wherein direction has been issued to the North DMC to
demolish the illegal construction completely, no ground are
made out for stay of the impugned order. The interim stay
application is accordingly dismissed.
Commissioner concerned is directed to look into the
matter that how the construction has been raised up to third
floor when construction was of ground floor only when the
property was booked on 07.07.2018. There seems to be
some connivance on the part of the AE(B) and JE(B)
concerned and necessary action be taken against them and
to file action taken report on next date of hearing.
Respondent is also directed to take demolition action
in pursuance of the impugned order and file action taken
report on next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for filing of status report, action
taken report by the respondent and arguments on
19.11.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,
as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 562/18 08.10.2018
Present : None for the appellant.
Dasti Process not taken as was directed on
09.08.2018 as well as 05.09.2018.
The appeal is dismissed for non prosecution.
File be consigned to record room.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 389/18 08.10.2018
Present : None for the appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. Jitender Kr. PFdanchal, JE(B).
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Status report filed.
Record produced. Let the same be deposited with the
Registrar of this Tribunal.
As per record the property in question was booked vide
FIR dated 23.03.2018 for unauthorized construction in the shape
of amalgamation of 3 shops into one hall and encroachment upon
common passage and unauthorized construction of additional
floor in between first floor and ground floor in the shape as per
rough sketch. Show cause notice was issued on 23.03.2018 to
Deepak Jain served by speed post. Reply to the show cause
notice was received on 03.04.2018. Demolition order was
passed on 10.03.2018. demolition action was fixed on various
dates between 01.06.2018 to 24.09.2018 but on each date i.e. on
9 dates no demolition action took place due to various reasons,
mostly due to shortage of time.
The appellant has filed the Appeal on 10.07.2017. No one
appeared after filing of the appeal except on 27.08.2018.
Dy. Commissioner concerned is directed to file action
taken report alongwith action taken against the concerned AE(B)
and JE(B) , for not taking action by them due to shortage of time
on nine dates.
Put up for filing of action taken report by the respondent
under the hand and signature of the Dy. Commissioner
concerned on 11.12.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for
respondent, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 529/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Abid Ujer, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Sanjay Sethi, counsel for respondent
alongwith Sh. J.K. Khullar, AE(B).
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Status report filed stating that property has been
verified for the purpose of construction and the
accommodation shown in the affidavit are as per site.
However, dimensions of lobby-store do not match with
existing dimensions. As per affidavit, the size of lobby-store
is stated to be 6.6” whereas the actual inner dimension of
this structure comes to 14’-2”x6’8”. Copy of the status
report given.
Appellant is directed to clarify the said anomaly in the
affidavit regarding the lapse in the dimensions as per the
status report.
Record produced. Let the same be deposited with
the Registrar of this Tribunal.
As per the record the property was booked on
14.03.2018 for unauthorized construction in the form of
deviations in the original allotted structure in flat No.8, LIG
flat DDA Badarpur. Show cause notice was given on
14.03.2018. Reply was sent and received on 28.03.2018.
In pursuance of the reply, personal hearing notice was
issued on 03.04.2018 where appellant was asked to attend
the personal hearing on 10.04.2018 at 3.30 p.m.
On 10.04.2018 no further reply to the show cause
notice was submitted, however, copy of the registry of
ownership was sought to be submitted on next date of
hearing. Accordingly hearing was closed. Speaking order
was passed on 28.06.2018.
A.No. 529/18 -2-
The next contention of ld counsel for appellant is that
the property is protected under The National Capital
Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second
(Amendment) Act, 2017 dated 31.12.2017 and also
compoundable and the existing construction was carried out
with the consent of the ground floor owner and the same is
very old having been constructed prior to 13.02.2005.
Contention of ld. counsel for respondent is that there
are two storied DDA flats and the norms/permissibility in
respect of DDA flats are governed by standard plan of DDA.
The flat in question is situated at first floor and the owner
has raised construction on the terrace of the first floor
unauthorizedly. As per DDA policy in two storied DDA flats,
only barsati at terrace is permissible that too with prior
sanction of SDMC. The existing construction at terrace is
much more than the permissible limit.
It is further stated that as per The National Capital
Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second
(Amendment) Act, 2017 dated 31.12.2017 the status in
respect of unauthorized construction as on 07.02.2018 is to
be maintained till 31.12.2020. To seek protection under the
said Act, onus is upon owner to establish that alleged
unauthorized construction has been raised before the date
of protection i.e. 07.02.2007. The appellant did not file any
document, which categorically establishes that existing
status of alleged booked structure is similar to what it had
on or before 07.02.2007.
The owner has filed an application for regularization
of alleged unauthorized construction which was processed
and as per policy, the existing structure comprises of non
compoundable structure and the competent authority
rejected the application 20.06.2018. It is concluded that
alleged construction on the terrace of the first floor is
absolutely unauthorized and non compoundable and does
not fulfill the requirement to seeks protection under the said
Act.
A.No. 529/18 -3-
Ld. counsel for appellant has already placed on record
various documents in support of seeking protection under
The National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special
Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act, 2017 dated
31.12.2017 and seeks further adjournment to file further
documents, if any.
Put up for final arguments on 05.12.2018. Interim
stay, if any, is extended till next date.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,
as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 146/16 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Mohit Sharma, proxy counsel for Sh.
Ashok Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Praveen Sharma, proxy counsel for Sh.
V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Counsel for appellant is not available. Adjournment
sought.
Put up for arguments on the application under order
6 Rule 17 CPC as well as on main appeal on 06.02.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 346/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Ayush Gupta, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD
alongwith Mohd. Ahmad, AE(B).
Sh. Vaibhav Asthana, counsel for intervener.
An application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by
Ms. Raj Mohini through her attorney / son Ranjan Mago.
Copy supplied for filing reply by the appellant well as
respondent.
Status report filed stating that for the purpose of
verification details of construction as given by the appellant
in his affidavit, inspection was carried out which revealed
unevenness in the structure/construction as in the affidavit
vis-à-vis existing at site. In para 3(1), the appellant has
stated 04 bedrooms whereas at site there are 03 bed rooms
and similarly there are 03 toilets whereas in the affidavit the
appellant stated 02 toilets. Out of three toilets one toilet
was found blocked with ply sheet. The rest of
accommodations as revealed in the affidavit are as per site,
however there is unevenness in the sizes of such
accommodations.
Regarding removal of fourth floor status report is to
be filed by the respondent, however, nothing is mentioned in
that regard.
Appellant is directed to explain the discrepancies with
regard to the construction at site and as mentioned in the
affidavit.
Put up for filing status report by the respondent
regarding removal of fourth floor and arguments on
18.12.2018. Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 200/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Amit Sethi, counsel for appellant alongwith
appellant in person.
File taken up today on the application moved on
behalf of the appellant u/s 347-C of DMC Act read with Rule
17 of DMC Act for interim relief and issuance of directions to
the respondent.
Notice of the application be issued to the respondent
for date already fixed i.e. 14.11.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 913/17 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Dinesh Tiwari, counsel for appellant.
File taken up today on the application moved u/s 151
CPC on behalf of appellant No.2 for permission to
construction toilet and bathroom.
Notice of the application be issued to the respondent
for date already fixed i.e. 04.12.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 716/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Prashant, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against sealing order dated
22.03.2018. The property is stated to be sealed on
05.04.2018.
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 13.12.2018.
Notice be given Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 721/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Satish Kumar, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against sealing order dated
19.09.2017.
An application seeking condonation of delay has also
been filed.
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 14.01.2019.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 736/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against demoltion order dated
22.05.2017.
An application seeking condonation of delay has also
been filed. Appellant is claiming ownership by way gift deed
dated 09.07.2012.
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 14.12.2018. Notice be given
Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 727/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Sanjay Agnihotri, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against sealing order dated
05.07.2017.
An application seeking condonation of delay has also
been filed.
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 15.10.2018. Notice be given
Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 718/18 08.10.2018
Present : Ms. Sweta Badola, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against sealing notice dated
14.08.2015.
The appeal filed today is apparently barred by
limitation.
An application seeking condonation of delay has also
been filed.
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 14.01.2019.
Appellant is directed to place on record chain of
original title documents on date fixed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 720/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against demolition order dated
14.08.2018.
Appellant is attorney of one Sajjan who is allegedly
purchased the suit property from Raj Singh in the year
2006.
Ld. counsel for appellant pointed out that one
Dharampal has already instituted a civil suit for possession
and permanent injunction in the court of Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Saket (South) where respondent
SDMC has filed written submissions.
The appellant has challenged the impugned order
dated 14.08.2018 alleging unauthorized construction in the
shape of temporary structure at ground floor with roof of
cement shed.
In view of the documents placed on record and in
view of pendency of the civil suit, ld. counsel has not
insisted upon exparte stay.
The interim stay application will be considered after
filing of the record as well as status report by the
respondent and chain of documents filed by the appellant.
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 23.10.2018. Notice be given
Dasti, as prayed.
Appellant is directed to place on record entire order
sheet passed in the civil suit on date fixed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 78/18 08.10.2018
Present : Counsel for appellant.
Sh. Abdul Haq, JLO alongwith Sh. Pradeep
Sharma, L.I.
Status report filed regarding deposit of misuse
charges stating that misuse and penalty have been
calculated to the tune of Rs.36,390/- and the appellant has
already allotted industrial plot by DSIIDC and she cannot be
allowed to run any industrial activity at the site in question.
Ld. counsel for appellant has placed on record copy
of G-8 receipt regarding deposit of the said amount.
Put up this matter for 29.10.2018 for clarification, if
any / orders.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 77/18 08.10.2018
Present : Counsel for appellant.
Sh. Abdul Haq, JLO alongwith Sh. Pradeep
Sharma, L.I.
Status report filed regarding deposit of misuse
charges stating that misuse and penalty have been
calculated to the tune of Rs.99,790/- and the appellant has
already allotted industrial plot by DSIIDC and she cannot be
allowed to run any industrial activity at the site in question.
Ld. counsel for appellant has placed on record copy
of G-8 receipt regarding deposit of the said amount.
Put up this matter for 29.10.2018 for clarification, if
any / orders.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 809/17 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Ayush Gupta, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Shekhar, proxy counsel for Sh. Sandeep
Kaushik, counsel for respondent alongwith Sh.
Jagrat JE(B).
Sh. Animesh Mishra, counsel for respondent.
Reply to the application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC
has not been filed.
Ld. counsel for applicant pointed out that matter in
the Hon’ble High Court is listed on 15.10.2018. The interim
order dated 07.09.2018 is subject to any order passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court or Hon’ble High Court for
demolition/sealing qua the property in question.
Ld. counsel for respondent also not present stated to
have gone to High Court.
Various matters are listed for arguments. No time
left for hearing arguments on the application under order 1
Rule 10 CPC.
Put up for arguments on the application under order
1 Rule 10 CPC and for final arguments on 26.11.2018.
Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
A.No. 126/18 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. Prayas, proxy counsel for appellant.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD
alongwith Sh. Jagbir Singh, AE(B).
Status report filed stating that original record/ file
regarding order dated 18.12.2017 is not traceable and will
be produced on next date of hearing.
The matter was listed for arguments on the
maintainability of the appeal because appeal is barred by
limitation and the application for condonation of delay has
been filed.
Respondent is directed to produce the original record
alongwith detailed reply as well as reply to the application
for condonation of delay. In case record is not produced,
Dy. Commissioner concerned will appear in person.
Put up for arguments on the maintainability of the
appeal, filing status report, record and arguments on
26.11.2018. Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018
M.No. 65/13 08.10.2018
Present : Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant.
At request for counsel for appellant, put up on
10.10.2018 for filing certified copy of the orders in appeal
No.2/17.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 08.10.2018