Accused Loses Right To Default Bail By Acquiescence If Extension Orders Are Challenged Only After Chargesheet Filing: Supreme Court AP High Court Orders Release Of Vehicle Seized For Mineral Transport Violations Upon Payment Of Penalty, Says Rules Don't Mandate Indefinite Detention Short Time Gap Between 'Last Seen' And Death Clinches Murder Conviction Against Fired Driver: Allahabad High Court Court Must Restore Possession To Dispossessed Party If Ex-Parte Decree Is Set Aside Even If Property Descriptions Differ: Andhra Pradesh High Court Management Cannot Deny Compassionate Appointment Citing Delay If It Failed To Maintain Service Records: Calcutta High Court Long Possession Alone Does Not Establish Tenancy; Burden Of Proof Lies On Person Claiming Status Of Tenant: Bombay High Court Consent Of Minor Immaterial: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction But Acquits Man Of Kidnapping Charges Notional Income Of Minor In Motor Accident Claims Must Be Based On Minimum Wages Of Skilled Workmen: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹56.8 Lakhs Revenue Records Serve Only Fiscal Purpose, Cannot Be Treated As Proof Of Title To Property: Supreme Court Executing Court Cannot Grant 'Deemed Extension' Of Time For Deposit In Specific Performance Decree: Supreme Court Specific Performance Decree Becomes Inexecutable If Balance Sale Consideration Not Deposited Within Stipulated Time: Supreme Court Supreme Court Protects MSMEs From Closure Over Missing Environmental Clearance If Pollution Boards Were Unaware Of Requirement Industrial Units Operating With Valid PCB Consents Can't Be Closed Merely For Technical Want Of Prior Environmental Clearance: Supreme Court Punishment On Charge Not Framed In Show Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Supreme Court Reduces Doctor's Penalty To Censure Plea Of Acquiescence Cannot Defeat Lawful Title Claim When Encroachment Is Established: Madras High Court Board Of Revenue Can't Quash Unchallenged Orders While Exercising Revisional Jurisdiction: Orissa High Court Penetration To Any Extent Sufficient For Offence Under POCSO Act; Intact Hymen No Bar For Conviction: Meghalaya High Court Expeditious Conclusion Of Summary Force Court Trial Not Arbitrary If Procedure Followed; ITBPF Act Self-Contained: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Doesn't Bar Appeal Filed Prior To Withdrawal Of Earlier Defective Appeal Against Same Order: Madhya Pradesh High Court Appointment Of Receiver Is An 'Extreme Remedy', Cannot Be Ordered Lightly Especially After Decades Of Inaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Delhi High Court Grants Permission for Property Repairs Post-MCD Demolition: A Move Towards Amicable Resolution and Regularisation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment that clarifies the rights of property owners to undertake repairs, the High Court of Delhi, led by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, has set a precedent in the case of Lakhbir Singh (since deceased) & Ors. Versus Kawaljeet Singh Bhatia & Anr. The court decisively ruled in favor of allowing property owners to conduct self-funded repairs on their properties, especially in cases where damage is incurred due to actions by municipal bodies.

The judgment, pronounced on 24th November 2023, addresses a dispute where the petitioner’s property was damaged due to demolition activities carried out by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) on an adjacent property. The petitioner approached the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India after their application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking permission to repair their property, was dismissed by the Trial Court.

In her landmark observation, Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora noted, “There is no legal impediment in the Petitioner carrying out the repairs proposed by them in this petition.” This statement underlines the court’s stance on the fundamental right of property owners to maintain and repair their premises, especially in scenarios where external factors have caused damage.

The case also highlighted the issue of unauthorized constructions, with the court confirming that no current proceedings were pending against the petitioner’s property for such violations. Moreover, the judgment laid out a clear path for both the petitioner and the respondent to apply for regularization of any unauthorized constructions under the existing policy.

The court’s decision, setting aside the previous order of the Trial Court, has been widely welcomed by legal experts and property owners alike. It not only reinforces the rights of individuals to maintain their properties but also delineates the responsibilities and processes involved in such circumstances.

In conclusion, this ruling by the High Court of Delhi serves as a guiding principle for similar cases, ensuring that property owners are not unduly hindered from undertaking necessary repairs and maintenance of their properties.

Date of Decision: 24th November 2023

LAKHBIR SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) & ORS. VS KAWALJEET SINGH BHATIA & ANR

Latest Legal News