PANNI LAL Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE principal question involved in this appeal is whether the house and Gher belonging to the appellant since the time of his fore -fathers, situated in Lal Dora abadi of village Badarpur, New Delhi falls in Khasra No. 48 or Khasra No. 31 or 31/27. Khasra No. 31 has been acquired by the DDA. The DDA claims that the above suit property falls in Khasra No. 31 whereas the case of the appellant is that it falls in Khasra No. 48, which is not an acquired land. The following substantial question of law was formulated by brother Mr.Justice B.N. Chaturvedi on 19.07.2007. The same is reproduced as follows: Whether the learned trial court and the first appellate court were justified in overlooking the local commissioner's report dated 28.02.1995 for arriving at a finding that the suit land did not fall in Khasra No. 48 rather it fell in Khasra No. 31 of revenue estate of village Badarpur, Delhi

(2.) THERE can be no conflictions on the point that if the property in dispute falls in Khasra No. 48, the appellant/plaintiff would be entitled to get the relief of permanent injunction prayed by him in the plaint, otherwise not.

(3.) THE order sheet dated 04.01.1991 pertaining to the trial court reveals that tehsildar Mehrauli was appointed as Local Commissioner vide order dated 09.05.1994 with the specific directions to visit the suit property after giving the notices to both the parties and report in which Khasra No. the above said land falls. On 16.11.1994, Tehsildar Mehrauli reported that he was busy in the election duties and was unable to demarcate the suit premises. Consequently, Nayab Tehsildar Mehrauli Mr. M.N. Sharma was directed to demarcate the suit land as per directions given on 09.05.1994.