DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. KANTA MITTAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has impugned the judgment and decree dated 07.03.2003 which had dismissed the appeal of the appellant/Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on the ground of limitation. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of 523 days had been rejected; the result was that the judgment of the trial court dated 22.04.1995 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff stood endorsed.

(2.) THE plaintiff had filed the present suit claiming himself to be owner of various portions of property falling in Khasra Nos.445, 447, 374, 508, 668, 520, 525, 530, 534, 568, 543, 446 and 541 situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Tehkhand, Tehsil Mehrauli, Delhi having purchased it from one Khacheru. The facts need not be further detailed for the disposal of this appeal. It is however noted that the land comprising of about 34,070 acres qua one Award and 18,008 acres qua the second Award are the subject matter of the present suit. The trial judge has passed a decree for permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants i.e.<APL> Delhi Development Authority </APL>and Union of India (Respondent No.1 and 2 respectively) from interfering with or dispossessing the plaintiff from the suit property.

(3.) THE prayer made in the present application has been vehemently opposed by the counsel for respondent. It is pointed out that the impugned judgment had noted that in the first affidavit filed by the department (dated 06.01.97) and their supplementary affidavit (dated January, 1999) contrary stands had been taken; in the first affidavit, it had been stated that the file has been tagged and mixed with the other files; in the second affidavit it was stated that the file was in movement; these conflicting stands amount to a fraud being played upon this court.