MAMAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTT JUDGE DELHI
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ADDITIONAL DISTT. JUDGE DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE writ Petitioner claims for a quashing order in respect of the proceedings commenced under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 against six persons, namely, S/shri Baleshwar, Sita Ram, Hukum Singh, Maggar Singh, Dalip Singh and Aziz Rehana who are his tenants. In the alternative, it is claimed that instead of the tenants, the Respondents should be directed only to proceed against the Petitioner. A declaratory order that the proceedings are void, ab initio, have also been claimed.
(2.) THE Petitioner claims that he became a Bhumidar in respect of four bighas and 4 biswas, falling within the Revenue Estate, Village Malikpur, Chawni, Delhi. He relied upon extracts of Jamabandi for the year 1924-25 where his father Sh. Dhahiya was shown as Bhumidar; Jamabandi for the Year 1939-40 have also been relied upon. It is alleged that from that period onwards till the filing of the writ petition, the Petitioner and prior to his occupation, his father (the Predecessor in interest) were in continuous and uninterrupted and peaceful possession of the suit lands. It is claimed that the Respondents sought to disburse this position by issuing notice under Section 4 of the Act.
(3.) THE Petitioner filed a suit for permanent injunction to restrain the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) as well as the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) from illegally dispossessing him. It is averred that initially the ad-interim injunction application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 was rejected. However, the Appellate Court reversed the trial Court's order, dated 8. 11. 1978. The matter was carried in revision by the Respondent. This Court by its order dated 14. 2. 2980 modified the Appellate Court's order to the extent that the respondents were restrained from dispossessing the Petitioner-Plaintiff except through authority of law.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.