RAJPAL BAJAJ Vs. DDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order dated 1st December, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing with costs the writ petition filed by the appellants. Counsel for the appellants states that costs imposed have been paid.

(2.) The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition has referred to the pleadings of the parties.

(3.) M/s. Primco Machine Tools, a partnership firm of which appellant was also a partner and now a sole proprietor, had earlier in 1974 filed a civil suit that property bearing No.385/5A, Shahzada Bagh, Old Rohtak Road, New Delhi is not located on acquired land. The said suit was dismissed. Appeal filed was also dismissed. Findings of the Civl Court have become final and binding. The appellants again raked up the same issue by filing the aforesaid writ petition on the ground that electricity connection to plot No.308/5A, which was disconnected, should be restored. After referring to the said pleadings, the learned Single Judge has held that it was the specific case of the appellants herein in the said Suit that plot No.308/5A was a part of the Khasra No.326. In the said Suit it was established that the property No.308/5A was part of land comprising Khasra No.326. The aforesaid property was held to be an acquired land and, therefore, all the unauthorized constructions existing there were demolished by the DDA. In this view of the matter, the learned Single Judge held that no such prayer as made by the appellants in the writ petition could be granted as property No.308/5A does not belong to the appellants but was an acquired property and therefore the appellants have no right or title to seek the electricity connection restored to the said premises.