Dismissed

Shri Ravinder Pal Singh v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Delhi HC4 Feb 2019W.P.(C)/1109/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a petition challenging the sanction of a building plan and issuance of completion-cum-occupancy certificate, the Court observed a substantial overlap between the claims in the writ petition and a concurrent civil suit filed by the petitioner seeking identical relief. Consequently, no justification was found to entertain the instant petition. The House dismissed the writ petition, holding that t

What did the court decide?

No relief granted. The petitioner was directed to proceed with the pending civil suit.

Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Vs North Delhi Municipal… — Property and Title | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~29

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) No. 1109/2019

¶4

SHRI RAVINDER PAL SINGH ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. A.S. Dateer, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

Through: Mr. Kartik Jindal, Adv. for R1 to 4. Ms. Shefali Vohra, Adv. for R6 & 7 for GNCTD.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 04.02.2019 CM APPL. No. 5043/2019 (for exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶13

Application stands disposed of.

¶14

W.P.(C) No. 1109/2019 & CM APPL. No. 5042/2019 (for interim relief)

¶15

At the outset, Mr. A.S. Dateer, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to delete respondent No. 5/Monitoring Committee appointed by the Supreme Court in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985 from the array of party-respondents.

¶16

The prayer is allowed. Respondent No. 5/Monitoring Committee is deleted from the array of party-respondents.

¶17

Mr. Kartik Jindal, learned Panel Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 to

¶18

4/ North DMC appears on advance copy. Ms. Shefali Vohra, learned Panel Advocate appears for respondents Nos. 6 and 7/Additional Commissioner – Police and SHO P.S. Subzi Mandi on advance copy.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for respondents Nos. 1 to 4 points-out that, as stated in paragraph 8 of the writ petition, the petitioner has already filed a civil suit bearing CS No. 3011/2017 seeking the same relief against the same parties in respect of the self-same property, as in the present petition.

¶20

Paragraph 8 of the writ petition reads as under:

¶21

“8. That the Petitioner has left with no alternative but to file a Civil Suit No. 3011/2017 with a prayer that the two sale deeds which state false measurement may be declared as null and void and cancelled as per provisions of Section 31/32 read with Section 34 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 and Section 151 CPC. It was further prayed that the site plan which was sanctioned on the basis of false documents submitted on behalf of the alleged purchasers may be also cancelled. The Respondents were also arrayed in the said proceeding.”

¶22

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶23

The main prayer in this writ petition reads as under:

¶24

“to issue a writ of certiorari thereby quashing the impugned building plan, which was sanctioned vide sanction No. D- 441/AE(B)/SPZ/16 dated 05.04.2016 w.r.t. file submitted vide file No. 16/SBP/SPZ/2016 dated 22.03.2016 and also completion-cumoccupancy certificate file No. 10050203 dated 08.06.2018 issued by Executive Engineer, North Zone, NDMC.”

¶25

On a perusal of paragraph 8 of the petition and the main prayer made therein, it is averred by respondents Nos. 1 to 4, that there is a substantial overlap if not identity as between the claims made in the civil suit filed by the petitioner and the prayer made in this writ petition.

¶26

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is unable to point-out any material distinction between the prayer in the suit and in this writ petition. Accordingly, there is no reason or justification to entertain the present petition, which is accordingly dismissed, since the petitioner has already invoked an alternate, efficacious remedy on the same cause of action. The petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶27

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

¶28

FEBRUARY 04, 2019/ uj

Shri Ravinder Pal Singh v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Ravinder Pal Singh v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

General Manager, District Industries Centre Vs M/S Jai Rapid Rollers Ltd. and Anr.

Master Hridaan Kumar Minor through and Ors. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Sumitra and Ors. Vs Competent Authority for Land Acquisition for National Highway Authority of India and Anr.

Md. Usman Vs National Highways Authority of India

Lifecare Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Dr. Mahmuda Ahmad Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Shri Satya Narain Prakash Punj and Anr. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi

Ms. T. Uma (Ifs) Vs Union of India and Ors.

Karanjeet Singh & Ors. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Mohd Naseem Vs the Commissioner North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Antonday Sarv Samaj Kalian Sanstha (Ngo) Vs the Deputy Commissioner, South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Rajesh Kumar Vs Akhlaque & Ors.

V M Singh Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Brij Nanda Gupta Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.