SATISH KHURANA AND ANR Vs. MCD AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are two petitioners before this Court namely Satish Khurana and Harish Khurana, both sons of Khem Chand Khurana. Their contention is that the property bearing shop No. 46, New Qutub Road, Delhi (measuring 15 X 8 feet) was allotted to their father Khem Chand Khurana in accordance with the provisions of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954. Late Khem Chand Khurana had a sole proprietary transport agency business under the name and style of Khurana Transport Company. In 1976, the respondent-MCD has issued a policy wherein the chemical traders and transporters of New Qutub Road were to be shifted out of the area. The petitioners and their father were unaware of this policy. On 13.07.1982, a perpetual lease deed (subsequent to the first lease deed dated 30.12.1967) in respect of land measuring 81.94 square feet falling behind their shop (shop No. 46) was executed in favour of late Khem Chand Khurana. Both these lease deeds made the petitioners (their predecessor in interest) namely Khem Chand Khurana a lessee of the MCD. The argument on this score of the learned counsel for the petitioner being that the rights of the petitioners could not have been varied/transferred/cancelled to the prejudice of the petitioners without the respondent Corporation having filed a suit; the submission of the respondents that they had given an alternate plot qua this shop i.e. shop No. 46 to M/s U.P. Delhi Goods Corporation (respondent No.4) in 1984 was to the prejudice of the petitioners and without their knowledge and information; their rights which were directly affected by this act of the respondent without a notice to the petitioners, is an order which calls for interference and accordingly the writ petition has prayed that the order passed by the Corporation dated 12.10.2010 wherein the petitioners have been directed to vacate the aforenoted shop is required to be set aside.

(2.) The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (respondents No. 1 & 2) have filed a counter affidavit. Their contention is that as per the policy of the Corporation which had been formulated in the year 1976 (culminating in 1987), a survey had been conducted in the year 1986 of the aforenoted shop and on the date of the survey (24.06.1986), as per the record (page 271 of the paper book) respondent No. 4 was found functioning at the site i.e. at shop No. 46, New Qutub Road, Delhi. This document had been filed on record in terms of the order dated 04.08.2012. A perusal of this survey report shows that on the date of the inspection of the site (24.06.1986), M/s U.P. Delhi Goods Corporation was found functioning there. The submission of the respondent is that as per the eligibility criteria (for allotment of an alternate plot) it was the person who was found at the site, may he be the occupier or the owner would be entitled to the alternate allotment. Additional submission being that respondent No. 4 was validly at the site in view of the additional affidavit filed by the petitioners wherein the petitioners have themselves admitted that in the year 1978, Agency Agreements (firstly on 16.01.1978 followed by subsequent renewals on 01.07.1984 and 01.08.987) were entered between the petitioners and respondent No. 4 thus was rightly found functioning at 46, Qutub Road, Delhi. This additional affidavit of the petitioners is dated 09.11.2010 (page 85 of the first paper book).

(3.) Counter affidavit of respondent No.4 is also on record. He submits that in terms of the Agency Agreements with the petitioner, he was carrying on his trade at the site at the time of inspection which was on 24.06.1986. He was earlier functioning from shop No. 45, Qutub Road, Delhi but thereafter he had shifted to 46, Qutub Road and it was for this reason that all correspondences were addressed by the Municipal Corporation to him. His submission is that the transport business at shop No. 46 was always being carried out by him under the name and style of M/s U.P. Delhi Goods Corporation. He was allotted the alternate plot at AG-23, Sanjay Gandhi Transport Nagar (SGTN) on 27.07.1986 in lieu of shop No. 46 as he was the eligible occupier carrying on the business from his site. His undertaking dated 02.09.1991 is also on record which reflects that he has received the physical possession of the alternate plot at SGTN on 27.07.1986 and he undertakes to vacate the present site i.e. 46, New Qutub Road.