DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. NEHRU PLACE HOTELS LIMITED
LAWS(DLH)-1983-4-11
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on April 29,1983

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant
VERSUS
NEHRU PLACE HOTELS LIMITED Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

NEHRU PLACE HOTELS VS. DDA [LAWS(DLH)-1990-12-26] [CITED]
SATTAR ALI VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2011-7-239] [REFERRED TO]
AIRPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-190] [REFERRED TO]
SURAJIT NUNDY & ORS. VS. MANAGEMENT OF MIRAMBIKA FREE PROGRESS SCHOOL & ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2016-7-5] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

B.N. KIRPAL, J - (1.)This judgment will dispose of L. P.A. Nos. 9 and 25 of 1982 filed by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the D.D.A.') and Ms. Nehru Place Hotels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') from the judgment of a single Judge of this Court who had partially allowed the writ petition filed by the Company relating to the passing of its building plans on a plot of land in Nehru Place which was given on lease by the D.D.A. to the Company.
(2.)In order to understand the controversy between the parties it will be necessary to enumerate the facts of the case in some detail. These fact's can be divided into three periods. The first period being upto 17th March, 1976 on which date the plot in question was auctioned; the second period is upto 30th November, 1977 when the lease-deed was D.D.A. in favour of the Company and the other facts are with regard to the period subsequent to the execution of the lease-deed. The pre-lease facts would indicate as to what transpired between the parties till the execution of the lease-deed and the post-lease facts would indicate as to how the parties understood the terms of the lease and what was the reason for the D.D.A. not to pass the building plans submitted by the Company.
(3.)Under section 7 of the Delhi Development Act (hereinafer referred to as 'the Act'), the D.D.A. is to prepare a master plan for Delhi in which the manner in which the land is proposed to be used has to be indicated. The said plan is required to be approved by the Central Government under section 9(2) of the Act. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, the master plan of Delhi was prepared and, after it was approved by the Central Government, the same was published on 1st September, 1962. In the said plan it was, inter alia, stated that in order to decentralise commercial activity, it was proposed to develop 15 district centres in the outlined Planning Divisions. One of the 15 district centres, with which we are concerned in this case, was located at Kalkaji. It was to have a total area of 82 acres. The break-up indicated of this area was that 57 acres was to be utilised for "commercial including service industries", 15 acres was meant for "work-cum-industrial centres" while the remaining 10 acres was earmarked for Government Offices. The D.D.A. is also, simultaneously with the preparation of the master plan or soon thereafter, required to prepare zonal development plans for each of the zones into which Delhi is divided. Such a plan is prepared in accordance with the powers conferred on the D.D.A. under section 8 of the Act. Like the master plan, the zonal development plan which is prepared under section 8, also has to be approved by the Central Government. It may here be noted that before the master plan or the zonal development plan is submitted to the Central Government for approval, the D.D.A. is required to prepare draft' of the said plans and publish them. This is so provided by section 10 of the Act. The publication is necessary because opportunity has to be given to people to file objections and to make suggestions, under sub-section (3) of section 10. After considering all the objections, suggestions and representations the D.D.A. has finally to prepare a plan for submission to the Central Government for its approval under section 9. In the present case there was considerable time lag between the preparation of the master plan and the zonal development plan. Prior to the preparation of the zonal development plan, it appears, the D.D.A. passed a. resolution No. 379 on 7th August. 1963. It was, inter alia, resolved that the lay-out pian for district centre at Kalkaji should be revised so that "instead of one hotel site of 3.5 crores some 4.5 sites should he earmarked for housing hotels with a total capacity of about 500 to 700 beds". In Table III attached to the said resolution the land in question was stated be located in blocks Nos. 55 and 56. Under the sub-heading "Commercial Establishments" it was indicated in the said Table that the number of floors which could be constructed in block No. 55 were I to 12 and for land in block No. 56 it was I to 8. Whereas in the said Table there was a separate heading for "Cinemas" and "Restaurants", "Retail Shopping", "Civil Building" and "Service" Industries" besides "Commercial Establishments", there was no sub-heading for Hotels. It is evident, therefore, that hotels came under the heading of "Commercial Establishments" in the said resolution. Thereafter the lay-out plan for district centre a Kalkaji was revised. On 28th September, 1963 resolution No. 468 was passed in which it was, inter alia, resolved as follows:
"4 hotels have been provided, out of which 2 hotels are so located that they face the district park on the north-east and the remaining 2 hotels are proposed over the commercial establishment in the commercial area."
In the lay-out Plan stated to have been approved by the aforesaid resolution No. 468 dated 28th September, 1963, which has been filed by the D.D.A. before us during the course of the hearing of the appeals, two hotel buildings have been shown in the land in blocks 55 and 56. In the said plan different type of land use has been shown. Blocks 55 and 56 are part of commercial area. In the distribution of floor spaces in commercial area blocks 55 and 56 are under the heading of "Commercial Establishments". There is no separate heading of hotels though there is a separate heading of "Cinemas" and "Restaurants". It seems that this lay-out plan was as;ain revised and another lay-out plan dated 27th January, 1969 was prepared. That has been placed on record before us. That plan indicates that there are to be two hotels on the existing site of 5 acres. Even here the hotels are shown as part of "Commercial Establishments".
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.