Disposed¶27

Sh. Balbir Singh Maan v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC17 Mar 2026CONT.CAS(C)/1234/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007; abatement of proceedings on death of senior citizen complainant; Divisional Commissioner eviction order challenged in writ petition; Article 226 — no adjudication of disputed questions of right, title or possession; contempt proceedings disposed; interim undertaking dated 28.05.2025 to vacate premises; portion of property No.133/9 Kishangarh Mehrauli Vasant Kunj vacated by S.D.M. Mehrauli on 20.06.2025 and sealed by Tehsildar; unsound mind disputed question of fact; competing claims of sons and daughters; pending civil suit; Balbir Singh Maan; Pawan Maan; GNCTD; Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J; decided 17.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

The Court declined to continue with the contempt proceedings in CONT.CAS(C) 1234/2025 and disposed of the same. ¶23

Sh. Balbir Singh Maan Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether Sh. Balbir Singh Maan was of unsound mind and unable to take independent decisions, such that the complaint leading to the eviction order was validly instituted at his instance. +1 more

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The Court declined to continue with the contempt proceedings in CONT.CAS(C) 1234/2025 and disposed of the same.

¶23

Key takeaways

The proceedings initiated by Sh. Balbir Singh Maan, who has since expired, will have to abate.ratio¶23
The disputed questions of fact, including whether Sh. Balbir Singh Maan was in the portion which stood vacated, can only be appropriately adjudicated by a competent Civil Court on the basis of evidence to be led by the respective parties.ratio¶24
In exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court is not required to undertake an adjudication of disputed questions relating to right, title, or possession of the parties in respect of the subject property.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J.) disposed of a contempt petition (CONT.CAS(C) 1234/2025) and a writ petition (W.P.(C) 7177/2025) arising out of eviction proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 initiated by Sh. Balbir Singh Maan against his two sons (the writ petitioners), in a dispute with his three daughters over property No.133/9, Kishangarh, Mehrauli, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Held: upon Balbir Singh Maan's death on 04.09.2025, the proceedings initiated at his instance stand abated. The disputed questions — whether he was of unsound mind, and which portion of the property stood vacated (a portion was vacated by S.D.M. Mehrauli staff on 20.06.2025 and sealed by the Tehsildar) — could only be adjudicated by the competent Civil Court in the pending civil suit, this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India not being required to adjudicate disputed questions of right, title or possession. The sealed portion of the property remains subject to further directions of the Civil Court. Both petitions disposed of along with all pending applications.

¶1

$~1&2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 1234/2025 & CM APPL. 50265/2025

¶4

SH. BALBIR SINGH MAAN .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Samman Vardhan Gautam, Advocate. Versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Singh and Mr. Rishab Mittal Advocates for GNCTD. Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Arjun Singh Bawa, Mr. Sahil Gupta, Mr. Siddharth & Ms Apoorva Pradhan Advocates for respondent no. 3 and 4.

¶6

AND

¶7

- W.P.(C) 7177/2025 & CM APPLs. 32351/2025, 32352/2025, 40297/2025, 40827/2025, 55033/2025, 61460/2025, 61461/2025, 61467/2025, 16469/2026, 16194/2026.

¶8

MR. PAWAN MAAN & ANR.

¶9

.....Petitioners

¶10

Through: Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Arjun Singh Bawa, Mr. Sahil Gupta, Mr. Siddharth & Ms Apoorva Pradhan Advocates versus

¶11

This is a digitally signed order.

¶12

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 25/03/2026 at 12:27:28

¶13

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents

¶14

Through: Mr. Tanveer Ahmed Ansari SPC

¶15

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 17.03.2026

¶16

It is seen that Sh. Balbir Singh Maan, had invoked the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (“ the Act ”). He had two sons, and they are the petitioners in W.P.(C). 7177/2025. He also had three daughters, who are contesting against two sons. It appears that there are competing claims over the property in question between sons and daughters. It also remains undisputed that a civil suit is pending between them before this Court. In the W.P.(C). 7177/2025 the sons have challenged the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner for their eviction.

¶17

It is their primary contention that Sh. Balbir Singh Maan, was of unsound mind, and resultantly was unable to take independent decisions. The complaint which ultimately led to the passing of the impugned order was also instituted at the insistence of the sisters. The Court earlier appointed the team of the doctors who examined Sh. Balbir Singh Maan and the report was submitted. That report is objected to by the other side. It is further noted that there remain disputed question of facts that, as to whether Sh. Balbir Singh Maan was of unsound mind or otherwise. Both the parties have made their submissions contrary to each other.

¶18

This is a digitally signed order.

¶19

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 25/03/2026 at 12:27:28

¶20

Sh. Balbir Singh Maan has expired on 04.09.2025. The proceedings which were initiated at his instance stand abated. The rights and contentions of the sons and daughters will have to be adjudicated by the Civil Court.

¶21

The Court vide interim order dated 28.05.2025 recorded the undertaking of the sons for vacating the premises in question. The order dated 05.07.2025 has been placed on record by the Tehsildar who states that a portion of the property bearing No.133/9, Kishangarh, Mehrauli, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi was vacated by the staff of S.D.M. Mehrauli on 20.06.2025 and the vacated portion was sealed by the Tehsildar.

¶22

It is submitted by Mr. Kirti Uppal, learned senior counsel, that the entire property was to be vacated, whereas, a portion of the property has been vacated by the other side. Mr. Jeevesh Nagrath, learned senior counsel for respondent no. 3 and 4, contends that the portion in possession of Sh. Balbir Singh Maan was vacated and the remaining portion was owned by the petitioners’ wife. Even these aspects are disputed by Mr. Uppal.

¶23

In view thereof, the Court does not deem it appropriate to continue with the contempt proceedings, the same is accordingly disposed of. The proceedings which were initiated by Sh. Balbir Singh Maan, who has since expired, will have to abate.

¶24

The issues arising for consideration in the present proceedings as to the factum of whether Sh. Balbir Singh Maan was in the portion which stood vacated or otherwise involve disputed questions of fact, which can only be appropriately adjudicated by a competent Civil

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 25/03/2026 at 12:27:28

¶27

Court, on the basis of evidence to be led by the respective parties. 8. It is well settled that this Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is not required to undertake an adjudication of disputed questions relating to right, title, or possession of the parties in respect of the subject property 9. The sealed property shall remain subject to further directions that may be passed by the Civil Court in the pending civil suit. 10. Accordingly, both petitions stand disposed of in the above terms, along with all pending applications.

¶28

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶29

MARCH 17, 2026/ar

¶30

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 25/03/2026 at 12:27:28

Sh. Balbir Singh Maan v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. Balbir Singh Maan v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sushila Sharma Vs Sunil Kumar Sharma

Muntazmia Comittee Madasra Behrul Ulum Kabarstan Mehrauli Vs Shri Subhasish Panda and Ors.

Abhishek Kumar, Advocate Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Naresh Kumar Gupta Vs R a Sankra Narayan

Raj Rani Vs Satto Devi & Ors.

Upender Bhardwaj Vs Shri Sanjay Goyal and Ors.

Charu Singh Rathore Vs Mr. a. Raja Singh & Ors.

Smt Anjali Anr. & Anr. Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

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

Mohd Wasim & Ors. Vs Delhi Agriculture Marketing Board through Its Vice Chairman & Ors.

M/S Vinayak Manufacturers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Government E-Market Place & Ors.

Aps Hydro Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Mukesh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Manish Kumar & Ors. Vs Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi & Ors.