Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

september 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-09-09

MANNO DEVI vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-13833/2025 2025:DHC:7882
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
MANNO DEVI
Respondent
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

Judgment text excerpt

$~80 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 09.09.2025 + W.P.(C) 13833/2025 & CM APPL. 56733/2025 MANNO DEVI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajesh Yadav, Sr. Adv.with Mr. V.P. Rana and Mr. Harvinder Das, Advs. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Bharat Malhotra, Adv. for MCD (Through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) not to carry out any demolition in the property, i.e., Khasra No. 113/2, Near Gali NO. 16, Village Wazirabad, Delhi-110084, until the Appeal No. 597/2025, and the interim application for stay filed therein, is taken up for hearing by the Appellate Tribunal MCD (“ATMCD”). 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner and in possession of the property in question, consisting of basement, ground, first, second and third floors. It is submitted that the said building was constructed prior to 2011, and, therefore, is protected under the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 13833/2025 Page 1 of 4 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:09.09.2025 19:05:56 3. It is submitted that vide Show Cause Notice dated 06th August, 2025, issued under Section 345A of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (“DMC Act”), the respondent has directed the petitioner to submit a reply/show cause within three days as to why the property of the petitioner may not be sealed. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner has already filed a reply dated 08 th August, 2025, wherein, the petitioner has sought further time to submit the supporting documents, and ha

MANNO DEVI vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI · Niyam