DEEPALI AGGARWAL vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 12th February, 2025 + CONT.CAS(C) 1456/2024 DEEPALI AGGARWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Raghavendra Mohan Bajaj, Advocate. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu with Mr. Shivam, Advocates for DDA. Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, ASC with Mr. Arman Monga, Advocate. Mr. Avadh Bihari Kaushik, Advocates for R- 4 to 9. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that adjournment may be given to file rejoinder. 2. However, learned counsel for respondent No.1/MCD submits that pursuant to the directions contained in the last order, they have already taken a decision with respect to projection of balconies and have issued demolition order(s). 3. Such orders were passed on 09.01.2025 and 10.01.2025 with respect to the flats in question. 4. Mr. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 9 submits Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed CONT.CAS(C) 1456/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:13.02.2025 12:44:00 that against the above said fresh demolition orders they have already lodged appeals which are pending consideration before the learned Appellate Tribunal, MCD. He submits that earlier also, the demolition orders were issued by MCD against them which were challenged by filing appeal before the learned Appellate Tribunal, MCD and during the pendency of those appeals, the petitioner herein had moved an application seeking intervention and such application was allowed by the learned Appellate Tribunal. 5. Mr. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 to 9 submits that similar kind of application can be moved by them, if they so desire, with respect to the fresh appeals filed by them. 6. He als