Chandra Finance Vs Delhi Development Authority — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

Chandra Finance Vs Delhi Development Authority — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of: the petitioner's application for leasehold-to-freehold conversion stands deemed restored following rectification of the NOC; DDA directed to act expeditiously and not later than 4 weeks, with the petitioner to comply with procedural formalities; liberty to revive the petition in case of non-compliance.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to conversion of property no. DGL 201, 2nd floor, DLF Galleria, Mayur Vihar, New Delhi, from leasehold to freehold at the old rates already paid, notwithstanding the NOC having been issued in another entity's name and the lapse of the application.

Court's answer

Since the respondent's objection (the NOC discrepancy) has been complied with and rectified, the petitioner's lapsed application shall be deemed to have been restored; the Court declined to insist on technical formalities.

Ratio / Principle

The respondent/DDA is directed to do the needful (process the conversion) expeditiously and not later than 4 weeks, and the petitioner shall comply with all procedural formalities.

Key takeaways

If the order is not complied with, the petitioner shall be at liberty to revive the petition.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Jasmeet Singh, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which Chandra Finance sought a mandamus directing DDA to convert property no. DGL 201, 2nd floor, DLF Galleria, Mayur Vihar, New Delhi, from leasehold to freehold at the old rates already paid. Conversion had stalled because the Indian Overseas Bank NOC was issued in the name of M/s Power Tech Energy Pvt. Ltd. instead of M/s Chandra Finance. As the NOC had since been rectified, the Court held that the respondent and the Court should move away from technical formalities, deemed the lapsed application restored, directed DDA to do the needful expeditiously and not later than 4 weeks (with the petitioner to comply with procedural formalities), and granted liberty to revive the petition in case of non-compliance.

$~145

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 1096/2026 CHANDRA FINANCE ....Petitioner Through:

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Arjun Mahajan, SC , Mr. Apoorv Upmanyu, Adv. , Mr. Ravikant Kumar, Adv. , Mr. Vishal Sejwar, Adv.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R

% 13.07.2026

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

“a) Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other writ or direction to the respondent/DDA to allow the conversion of the property no. DGL 201, 2nd floor, DLF Galleria, located at Mayur Vihar, New Delhi, from Lease hold to free hold at the old rate already paid by the petitioner.

b) Direct DDA to grant conversion to freehold based on old rates already paid.

c) Direct the disposal of the application in time bound manner filed by the petitioner. ...”

Mr. Mahajan, learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent states that the conversion could not take place as the mortgage permission was granted to M/s Chandra Finance to mortgage the above property in favour of the Indian Overseas Bank but the NOC was submitted in the name of M/s

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/07/2026 at 11:43:46

Power Tech Energy Pvt. Ltd. by Indian Overseas Bank.

In view of this submission, the petitioner has already got the NOC rectified in the name of M/s Chandra Finance.

Mr. Mahajan, in this regard, states that since the application has lapsed, an application for restoration will have to be moved. I am of the view that the respondent and this Court should move away from technical formalities and come to the issue-in-controversy.

Since the objection of respondent has already been complied with and rectified, the application of the petitioner shall deemed to have been restored.

The respondent shall do the needful expeditiously and not later than 4 weeks from today and the petitioner shall comply with all procedural formalities.

In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of.

In case the Order is not complied with, the petitioner shall be at liberty to revive the petition.

JASMEET SINGH, J

JULY 13, 2026/AS

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/07/2026 at 11:43:46