DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs SHISH PAL

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHIATNEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 14.01.2026 + FAO 390/2017 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Appellant Through: Ms.Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms.Aditi Singh and Mr.Aman, Advocates versus SHISH PAL .....Respondent Through: Mr.P.S. Gullia and Mr.Varun Verma, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The present appeal has been preferred assailing the judgment dated 27.01.2017 passed by the learned ADJ-01 (South), Saket Courts, New Delhi in RCA No.8885/16. 2. Vide the impugned judgment, the learned ADJ partly allowed the appeal. While learned ADJ upheld the order passed by the Trial Court insofar as reliefs of declaration and mandatory injunction sought in the Suit was held to be barred by law and consequently the plaint qua the said reliefs was rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), the suit insofar as relief of permanent injunction is concerned, was held to be maintainable. 3. Briefly put, the Shish Pal/respondent, had approached the Trial Court by way of a Suit seeking declaration and permanent injunction in respect of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NIJAMUDDEEN ANSARI FAO 390/2017 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:05.02.2026 17:41:56 property bearing No. T-93/1, Khirki Village, New Delhi, stated to be falling in Khasra No. 1097/228. It was averred that he along with his family members was residing in the said property for the last 70–80 years and thus had perfected title thereto by way of adverse possession. He further claimed that the DDA, without issuance of any notice, trespassed upon the said property and attempted to carry out forceful demolition in the existing construction. It was claimed that the suit property originally belonged to the District