ARUN SOOD vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 29.10.2025 + W.P.(C) 173/2023, CM APPL. 1217/2023 & CM APPL. 73291/2024 ARUN SOOD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Atul Gupta, Adv. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddhant Nath, SC with Mr. Bhavishya Makhija and Mr. Amaan Khan, Advs. for MCD Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, SPC for UOI Mr. Krish Kalra, Adv. for R-4 (Through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL): 1. The present writ petition is a disposed of case in which applications have been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4, to apprise this Court of the fact that the present writ petition had been filed by the petitioner on the basis of false averment that the petitioner is the owner of the property bearing No. 1/777, Nicholson Road, Delhi-110006. 2. The averment made by the petitioner in this regard, in the present writ petition, is reproduced as under: Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 1 of 5 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:31.10.2025 09:38:30 “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx” 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.4 has brought to the notice of this Court a judgment dated 10th August, 2023, of this Court, passed in RC. REV. No. 71/2022, titled as “Arun Sood Versus Hardit Kaur & Ors.”. The said revision petition had been filed by the petitioner herein, assailing an order dated 23rd October, 2021, of the Learned Rent Controller, Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi, whereby, an eviction order was passed against the petitioner herein in his capacity as a tenant. 4. Reading of the aforesaid judgment clearly shows that there is a categorical finding that the petitioner herein was not in occupation of the property in question and that the said property was lying vacant in a dilapidated