Desraj v. DDA and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
The Delhi High Court allowed a writ petition for delivery of possession of a Delhi Development Authority flat. It rejected the respondent's claim of an inadvertent mistake regarding an allotment letter issued years after alleged cancellation.
What did the court decide?
Respondent No. 1 to deliver possession of LIG plot bearing No. 168, Pocket No. C1, Sector 37, Rohini, Delhi to the petitioner immediately and not later than 4 weeks from the date of the order.
What the court decided
$~2
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
- W.P.(C) 14845/2024
- DESRAJ .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Reny Chauhan, Adv. versus
DDA AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr.Anubhav Gupta ,Mr Kartik Sharma, Mr Siddharth Arora, Advs. for R-1
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R
%
26.02.2026
- This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-
- “1. Issue an appropriate Writ/Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus to the Respondents to deliver possession to the Petitioner of the above-mentioned plot bearing No. 168, Pocket No. C1, Sector 37, Rohini, Delhi, allotted to the Petitioner against the allotment price paid by the Petitioner;
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to possession of the allotted plot.
Whether the issuance of a demand-cum-allotment letter years after alleged cancellation amounts to inadvertent mistake.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Desraj
- respondent
DDA
Coram
Jasmeet Singh
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court