Disposed

Gurdeep Khera v. Balwinder Kumar Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Delhi HC2 Sept 2026CONT.CAS(C)/818/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition filed under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, challenging non-compliance of a 2013 order was disposed of. The Court found that the Respondent had adjusted a sum of Rs. 9,30,000 and issued a possession letter, deeming there was no willful disobedience or non-compliance, particularly noting the Petitioner's repeated absence.

What did the court decide?

No orders required; the petition disposed of noting Respondent's compliance.

Gurdeep Khera Vs Balwinder Kumar Delhi Development Authority… — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~24

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CNR No. DLHC012255602014

¶4

- CONT.CAS(C) 818/2014

¶5

GURDEEP KHERA .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: None.

¶7

versus

¶8

BALWINDER KUMAR DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, ASC along with Ms. Saumya Soni, Mr. Vishal Vaid, Mr. Haj Doning, and Mr. Chandan Kumar, Advocate for DDA.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶10

O R D E R % 02.09.2026

¶11

The present Petition has been filed under Section 2(b) read with Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for the noncompliance of the Order dated 11.11.2013 passed by this Court in W.P(C) No. 3236 of 2013 titled as “ Gurdeep Khera versus Delhi Development Authority”.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents submits that a Compliance Affidavit dated 22.06.2026 [“ Compliance Affidavit ”] has been filed. The contents of the said Affidavit indicate that, according to the Respondents, the directions passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 3236 of 2013 have been duly complied with.

¶13

The relevant direction, passed in W.P.(C) No. 3236 of 2013,

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 05/09/2026 at 11:15:31

¶16

mentioned in Paragraph No. 4 of the Compliance Affidavit reads as follows:

¶17

“Relying on the judgment in Smt. Kamlesh, the writ petition is allowed. The DDA is directed not to charge any interest from the Petitioner and to issue a fresh demand letter within a period of six weeks from today, after adjusting a sum of 9,30,000/- already deposited by the Petitioner with the DDA.”

¶18

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents relies upon Paragraph Nos. 7 and 8 of the Compliance Affidavit, which, according to them, indicate that the directions passed by this Court have been duly complied with. The said relevant paragraphs read as follows:

¶19

“7. 1 say that as Order dated 11.11.2013 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 3236 of 2013 has attained finality. It is pertinent to submit that the Answering Respondent, in due compliance with the directions contained in the aforesaid Order, duly adjusted the sum of Rs. 9,30,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs and Thirty Thousand Only), which had already been deposited by the Petitioner with the Answering Respondent. It is further submitted that, after duly adjusting the amount payable in terms of the aforesaid directions, the Answering Respondent also issued the Possession Letter to the Petitioner on 29.12.2015.

¶20

I say that the Answering Respondent has complied with the directions issued by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 3236 of 2013 vide Order dated 11.11.2013, both in letter and spirit. In light of the facts and circumstances set out hereinabove, it is most respectfully submitted that no case of willful disobedience, deliberate default, or non-compliance with the directions is made out against the Answering Respondent.”

¶21

It is also noted that none has appeared on behalf of the Petitioner on the last four (04) dates of hearing.

¶22

Taking into consideration the averments contained in the Compliance Affidavit as well as the continued absence of the Petitioner, this Court, keeping in mind the averments that the Respondents have complied with the directions passed by this Court, is of the opinion that no further Orders are required to be passed in the

¶23

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 05/09/2026 at 11:15:31

¶24

present Petition and the same can accordingly be disposed of.

¶25

However, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to seek revival of the present Petition in the event that any non-compliance on the part of the Respondents persists.

¶26

The present Petition, along with all pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶27

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J

¶28

SEPTEMBER 2, 2026/nd/jk

¶29

Gurdeep Khera v. Balwinder Kumar Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurdeep Khera v. Balwinder Kumar Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravesh Yadav Vs Principal Registrar Cat & Anr.

Tilak Teacher Training College (for Women) Vs Professor Shailesh N. Zala, Chairman Western Regional Committee National Council for Teacher Educat

Mrs. Manmeet Sumra Chonker Vs Mr. Vipal Kumar Farmah & Anr.

Ms Anita Rai & Ors. Vs Mr Paramvir Singh Rai & Anr.

Nirmal Tower Building Occupants Welfare Society (Regd) Vs Sumit Gakhar & Anr.

Shri Raj Kumar Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Jaya Ramraj Upadhyay Balika Mahavidyalaya Vs Ms. Sukhgeet Kaur, Iofs, Member Secretary, Ncte and Anr.

Naval Kumar Rai Vs Sh Gyanesh Bharti and Anr.