Single judge allowed the writ petition, set aside the Additional District Judge's order remanding the eviction case, and stayed the eviction and penalty orders pending a decision on the Club's representation for an alternate site.
Impugned appellate order set aside; eviction and recovery of damages stayed pending decision on representation for alternate site.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
% Date of decision: 5th July, 2018 + W.P.(C) 90/2011 & CM No.160/2011 (for stay). MCD ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Standing Counsel, Ms. Swagata Bhuvan and Ms. Shiva Pandey, Advs.
versus
BENCH AND BAR ASSOCIATION ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Rajiv Khosla with Ms. Prathistha Dobhal, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 1 of 7
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 2 of 7
Rs.12,761/- per month w.e.f. 1st April, 1991 till the date of vacation; (iv) that the respondent Club, on 26th December, 1913, had furnished an undertaking that it will vacate the land and remove the building, temporary or permanent, built thereon, immediately upon receipt of order from the municipality and will not claim compensation for loss sustained by the removal of such building; (v) that the subject land was required for road widening of S.P. Mukerji Marg and to construct a subway parking site, bus terminal and railway station; and, (vi) that the tenancy of the respondent Club had been terminated w.e.f. 31st July, 1990 vide notice dated 15th June, 1990.
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 3 of 7
aforesaid of the respondent Club being in a dilapidated condition and there being no facility for parking of vehicles for the members of the respondent Club desirous of visiting the premises of the respondent Club, the respondent Club is not being used to the potential which it should have served. He further states that the respondent Club, for this reason, has applied to the appellant MCD as well as to the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor, Delhi for allotment of an alternate site for the respondent Club but though assurances have been meted out from time to time, no decision has been taken thereon.
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 4 of 7
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 5 of 7
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 6 of 7
allotment of alternate land by the appellant NrDMC, preferably in the vicinity of the Tis Hazari Court Complex.
No costs.
Dasti under signatures of Court Master.
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.
JULY 5, 2018/ ‘pp’..
W.P.(C) 90/2011 Page 7 of 7
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the eviction order against the respondent Club under the Public Premises Act should stand aside pending a representation for an alternate site.
Whether the order of Additional District Judge setting aside the eviction due to procedural non-service of notice should be set aside.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Bench and Bar Association
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
