* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 795 OF 2010
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .... Appellant
Through Mr. Pawan Mathur, advocate.
VERSUS
JAYSHREE BAGLEY AND ANOTHER .....Respondents
Through Mr.D.S.Narula, advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ?
ORDER
% 6th January, 2011. C.M. No. 19934/2010
This is an application for condonation of delay of 129 days in
preferring the appeal.
Mr. D.S. Narula, learned counsel for the respondents has no
objection to the condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing the
appeal is condoned.
The application stands disposed of.
LPA No.795/2010
Delhi Development Authority (the appellant, for short) assails the
judgment dated 19th May, 2010, quashing their communication dated 2nd
November, 2009 and direction/mandamus to process the application of
Ms. Jayshree Bagley and Mr. Mukul Taliya (the respondents, for short) for
conversion of leasehold rights into freehold rights in respect of plot no.B-
LPA NO.795/2010 Page 1
35, Friends Colony, New Delhi admeasuring 209.032 sq. mts (the
property, for short). Possession of the property was handed over by DDA to
its original owner/allottee Ms. Rambati on 18th March, 1980 and a lease
deed was executed on 24th August, 1980.
2. The respondents herein, Ms. Jayshree Bagley and her son – Mukul
Taluja had filed the said application for conversion into freehold rights
with the appellant-DDA on 20th December, 1999 and had deposited the
conversion charges as per the calculation made therein. The respondents
filed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 14143/2009 after waiting for nearly ten
years, when they received letter dated 28th October, 2009 from DDA [ the
date is wrongly mentioned in the impugned judgment as 2nd November,
2009] which reads :
“I am directed to draw your kind attention to the
above cited subject and to say that your conversion
application is under process and you are fully aware
that the above cited property was allotted to the legal
heirs of late Shri Bharat Singh. The matter is
subjudiced and your conversion can only be processed
after the decision of the competent court.”
3. DDA has produced the original record relating to the said property.
Few undisputed facts as culled out from the file may be noticed.
(a) Agricultural land belonging to one, late Mr. Bharat Singh was
acquired in the year 1959. Mr. Bharat Singh expired on 26th June, 1967.
Late Mr. Bharat Singh is survived by three legal heirs, namely, Mr. Kesri,
Ms. Rambati and Ms. Attari. Land & Building Department, Delhi
Administration recommended alternative allotment of three residential
LPA NO.795/2010 Page 2
plots in favour of the said three legal heirs of late Mr. Bharat Singh in
South Delhi vide following details :
” (i) Shri Kesri S/o late Shri Bharat Singh : Vide
letter No. F.32(19)3/74/L&B/Alt./23045 dated
22.11.1976 for allotment of an alternative residential
plot measuring 400 sq. yards.
(ii) Smt. Rambati W/o Shri Gopi Chand, D/o
late Shri Bharat Singh vide letter
No.F.32(19)4/74/L&B/Alt./45663 dated 22.12.1978
for allotment of an alternative residential plot
measuring 250 sq. yards
(iii) Smt. Attari D/o. late Shri Bharat Singh :
Vide letter No. F.32(19)6/74/L&B/Alt./34583 dated
21.11.1979 for allotment of an alternative residential
plot measuring 250 sq. yards”
(b) Pursuant to this recommendation, Mr. Kesri was allotted plot no. B-
7/124A, Safdarjung Development Area admeasuring 294.44 sq.mts. and
possession was handed over on 5th May, 1979 and lease deed was executed
in his favour on 13th June, 1979. Mr. Kesri, it appears, transferred the said
plot in favour of third persons, Mr. S. S. Sundaram and Ms. S. Lalita.
(c) Ms. Rambati in turn sold/transferred her rights, title, interest in the
said property in 1980 by way of Power of Attorney and other documents in
favour of Mr. Vijay Taluja, ex-husband of respondent no.1 and father of
respondent no.2. A General Power of Attorney was executed in favour of
Mr. R. L. Taluja son of Mr. Vijay Taluja.
(d) Land & Building Department, Delhi Administration, by their letter
dated 25th October, 1983 informed the appellant-DDA that the allotment of
plots in favour of Mr. Kesri, Ms. Rambati and Ms. Attari stood withdrawn
and according to the policy, the three legal heirs were entitled to one plot
and not three separate plots. As Ms. Attari had not been allotted any plot,
LPA NO.795/2010 Page 3
no allotment was made to her. Aggrieved, Ms. Attari filed Writ Petition
(Civil) No. 875/1984 for allotment of an alternative plot. It was stated at
Bar by the counsel for the appellant that the writ petition has been
dismissed and the order has attained finality.
(e) By Order dated 31st December, 1983, Lt. Governor was pleased to
cancel the lease in respect of the plot no. B-7/124A, Safdarjung
Development Area allotted/leased to Mr. Kesri. As noticed above, by the
said date Mr. Kesri had already transferred his rights in favour of Mr. S.S.
Sundaram and Ms. S. Lalita. There is inter se litigation which is pending
between Mr. S.S. Sundaram and Ms. S. Lalita and DDA in respect of the
said cancellation. We are not concerned with the said litigation.
(f) However, as far as property no. B-35, Friends Colony, New Delhi is
concerned, the appellant-DDA did not cancel the allotment/lease in favour
of Ms. Rambati. No letter or communication was written by the appellant-
DDA in respect of the said property either to Ms. Rambati or the
respondents herein. There has been complete silence and lack of
communication. The Original file produced by the appellant-DDA reveals
that the file was processed for cancellation of the allotment of the property
but it was decided to await the decision of the court in the case of plot no.
B-7/124A, Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi and no final order of
cancellation was passed.
4. The property has been constructed upon and the respondents are in
possession of the said property since 1980 onwards. The appellant-DDA
rose from slumber after more than 20 years when the respondents filed
their application seeking conversion of leasehold right into freehold right
in 1999. The application remained pending for want of decision till the
LPA NO.795/2010 Page 4
letter dated 28th October, 2009 quoted above was issued by the appellant-
DDA.
5. It may be interesting to note that after the application for
conversion into freehold was filed in 1999, the matter was put up through
proper channel to Director (RL), Commissioner (LD), Vice Chairman, and
the then Lt. Governor for consideration/approval. The Lt. Governor in his
note dated 27th February, 2002 has stated that the proposal for
cancellation of allotment of plot no.B-35, Friends Colony, New Delhi did
not hold any ground and the plot had been allotted to Ms. Rambati. The
said order further recorded that the other two legal heirs, Ms. Attari and
Mr. Kesri were entitled to equal rights on the property no.B-35, Friends
Colony, New Delhi.
6. Till date, neither, Ms. Attari or Mr. Kesri has staked any claim or
right in respect of the plot no. B-35, Friends Colony, New Delhi. As noticed
above, Mr. Kesri has already sold the plot allotted to him in Safdarjung
Development Area and has received consideration. Ms. Attari had filed a
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 875/1984 for allotment of alternative plot but the
said writ petition has been dismissed and the order has become final. She
has not staked any claim in the plot no.B-35, Friends Colony, New Delhi.
Their names have not been substituted or added in the lease deed.
7. The Respondents herein have already constructed upon the
property and have been in possession for nearly last 30 years. The
appellant-DDA did not communicate or write to them or Ms. Rambati that
Mr. Kesri or Ms. Attari have any right on the plot. Allotment of the plot at
Safdarjung Enclave in favour of Ms. Kesri was cancelled in 1983 but no
steps have been taken in respect of the plot/property in question by the
appellant-DDA since 1983. This prolonged delay has been to prejudice of
the respondents. If the appellant-DDA had taken action in 1983 for joint
LPA NO.795/2010 Page 5
allotment in favour of Ms. Rambati, Mr. Kesri and Ms. Attari, the
respondents could have taken legal action or obtained documents from Ms.
Attari and Mr. Kesri in 1983 or soon thereafter. Asking the respondents
herein to now obtain no objection certificates or consent from Mr. Kesri or
Ms. Attari when the land prices have increased manifold is completely
unjustified and unwarranted. The appellant, if they wanted to take action,
should have acted with promptitude and diligently. Inaction and silence on
the part of the appellant for nearly 30 years will cause hardship and punish
the respondents. There is no litigation or claim by Ms. Attari or Mr. Kesri.
They have not filed any litigation or even written letters to DDA staking
any claim in the property. Learned counsel for the respondents have
agreed that they shall furnish an indemnity bond to appellant-DDA and
indemnify them against loss or damage if Mr. Kesri or Ms. Attari stake any
right or make any claim/or initiate any litigation. The statement made on
behalf of the respondents is taken on record and the respondents will be
bound by the same.
8. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any reason to interfere with
the impugned Order dated 19th May, 2010. The appeal filed by the
appellant-DDA is dismissed subject ofcourse to the respondents furnishing
indemnity bond in terms of the statement.
No costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE
JANUARY 06, 2011.
P LPA NO.795/2010 Page 6