Remanded

D.D.A. v. Shanta Prasad

Delhi HC20 Oct 2016RSA/145/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of an appeal by consent, remanding the matter to the trial court to decide the suit afresh. The court directed the appellant DDA to file its policy on alternative allotment within two weeks for the benefit of the respondents/plaintiffs to prove compliance with the policy.

What did the court decide?

The matter was remanded to the trial court to decide the suit afresh after the appellant files the policy on alternative allotment within two weeks.

D.D.A. Vs Shanta Prasad — Specific Performance | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

RSA 145/2010

¶3

D.D.A.

¶4

..... Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. Pawan Mathur, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

SHANTA PRASAD & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Gaurav Arora, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 8 with respondent Nos.1,5, 6 and 7 in person.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA O R D E R

¶9

% 20.10.2016

¶10

Out of seven respondents, four respondents, namely Sh. Shanta Prasad/respondent no.1, Sh. Vijay Kumar/respondent no.5, Sh. Sobh Nath/respondent no.6 and Sh. Desh Raj/respondent no.7 are appearing in the Court and they will file their identification proofs within a period of three

¶11

days from today. Sh. Sat Paul/respondent no.3, Sh. Mohan Lal/respondent no.4 and Sh. Daulat Ram/respondent no.8 are said to be not well and hence not appearing in person. These respondents will also file their identification

¶12

proofs within three days from today.

¶13

RSA No.145/2010

¶14

page 1 of 4

¶15

After hearing the arguments of both the parties at length, it transpires that the issue in the present case is entitlement of the respondents/plaintiffs to alternative allotment in case of demolishing of their jhuggies situated on the land of the appellant and which is in accordance with the policy of the appellant and which has not been filed and proved by the respondents/plaintiffs. Filing and proving of the policy for alternative allotment was necessary inasmuch as unless the terms of the policy are satisfied, respondents/plaintiffs cannot get alternative allotment in terms of the said policy. The suit has been decided without the policy having come on record or as to how the respondents/plaintiffs comply with the terms of the policy for grant of alternative allotment.

¶16

At this stage, it is agreed that the appellant/defendant no.1/DDA will file its policy with respect to alternative allotment in case of removal of jhuggies situated on land of the appellant/DDA and the respondents/plaintiffs will now be allowed to lead evidence before the trial court to show that how they comply with the requirements of the policy for the respondents/plaintiffs to be granted alternative allotment in terms of the policy of the appellant/DDA.

¶17

page 2 of 4

¶18

RSA No.145/2010

¶19

This appeal is accordingly disposed of with consent by remanding the matter to the trial court for deciding the suit afresh in accordance with law. Suit will proceed from the stage of the respondents/plaintiffs’ evidence. Appellant/defendant no.1/DDA will file the subject policy as applicable at the time when the respondents/plaintiffs were evicted from the jhuggies situated on the land of the appellant/DDA and which be done by the appellant/DDA within a period of two weeks of the first date which will be fixed before the trial court.

¶20

This order is passed without prejudice to the respective rights of the parties as to entitlement or otherwise of the respondents/plaintiffs to alternative plots in terms of the policy of the appellant/DDA.

¶21

Parties to appear before the District & Sessions Judge (West), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 16^th November, 2016 and the District & Sessions Judge will mark the suit for disposal to a competent court in accordance with law. Trial court record be sent back to the concerned District & Sessions Judge for being sent to the competent court which will hear and dispose of the suit. Trial court is requested to expedite the disposal of the suit and the suit be disposed of preferably within a period of one year

¶22

RSA No.145/2010

¶23

page 3 of 4

¶24

of the first date which is fixed by the competent trial court provided, of

¶25

course, the respondents/plaintiffs complete their evidence within two dates

¶26

of hearing.

¶27

Appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of aforesaid consent

¶28

order.

¶29

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J

¶30

OCTOBER 20, 2016 Ne

¶31

RSA No.145/2010

¶32

page 4 of 4

D.D.A. v. Shanta Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.D.A. v. Shanta Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kishore Kumar & Anr. Vs Kiran Sankla

M/S Mita India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Vivek Sagar Gupta

Maharani Devi Vs MCD and Anr.

Rai Singh & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Deepak @ Kalu & Ors. Vs Sangeeta

Ram Avtar Tyagi Vs Narender Singh