ARUN KUMAR DAWAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order, we will dispose of above 8 Regular First Appeals preferred under call against the judgment and decree dated 3rd May, 2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Delhi.

(2.) For the sake of brevity and to avoid intermingling of facts, we would be referring to the facts of the case of Arun Kumar Dawar. The father of the plaintiff namely Mr. M.R. Dawar was given a land bearing plot No.3/2 Industrial Area, Najafgarh Road, New Delhi admeasuring 611.29 sq.yards vide perpetual lease deed dated 31.7.1969. A property was constructed thereupon and the father of the plaintiff started business of sale of timber therein. After the death of his father, the plaintiff took over the business. This is stated to be the only source of income. This shop was allotted to the plaintiff and his predecessor in interest by way of compensation as he was a refugee from Pakistan. The plaintiff made huge investments in developing the said business. The defendants, in the guise of widening the road, issued a show cause notice including notice dated 6th September, 2002 directing the plaintiff to hand over peaceful possession of the part of the land bearing No.3/2 Industrial Area, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi to the officers of the defendants on 23rd September, 2002. For carrying out this project, no acquisition proceedings were taken and it was stated that land, which is required for public purpose, could be taken by the defendants(lessor) in terms of clause 1(xii) of the lease deed by which the property was allotted to the plaintiff. Representation was moved collectively by the persons on 28th September, 2002 but all these contentions were rejected and an order dated 7th October, 2002 was passed to re-enter the property to that extent. According to the plaintiffs, these actions of the defendants were illegal, unjustified and notice was beyond the scope and purview of the lease deed and as such, they filed suits in the High Court. These suits were transferred to the Court of District Judge, Delhi because the valuation of the suits was less than Rs.20 lakhs.

(3.) Various authorities filed written statements/amended written statements to the plaints/amended plaints filed by the plaintiffs. It was stated that the notices were issued in terms of the lease deed and orders passed by the authorities were in consonance with the lease deed and they were entitled to take possession of the property as per the lease deed even on as is where is basis. It was prayed that the suits of the plaintiffs be dismissed. Learned trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 3rd May, 2005 held that the suits of the plaintiffs were not maintainable and the suits were dismissed while leaving the parties to bear their own costs. This judgment and decree of the trial Court is challenged by way of present appeals.