Ravi Gupta Alias Ravi Prakash v. Director Directorate of Health Services

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. JANUARY 15, 2020 "gsr".. (Corrected and released on 10th February, 2020)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 15th January, 2020 + RAVI GUPTA ALIAS RAVI PRAKASH .... Plaintiff Through: Mr. Pravir Kumar Jain & Mr. Arjan Jain, Advs. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. …...Defendants Through: Mr. Shadan Farasat, Ms. Hafsa Khan & Mr. Bharat Gupta, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The plaintiff, as per the amended plaint dated 14th October, 2019, has sued the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) and the Director, Directorate of Health Services, Delhi Administration, for permanent injunction to restrain the defendants from interfering with the use and occupation of the plaintiff of and from dispossessing the plaintiff from, the plot of land measuring 1000 sq. yds. bearing No. A-2, out of Field Nos.401 to 405, 407 to 414, 415/2, village Siraspur, in the colony known as Indra Enclave, Block- A, Delhi. 2. It is the case of the plaintiff that, (i) the plaintiff, since prior to 1980, is engaged in the business of giving on hire, earthmoving equipment for agriculture and development, in various parts of India and is carrying on the said business either in his own name or in the name of M/s Madhav Developers (India) Pvt. Ltd.; (ii) for the said business, the plaintiff is required to store / park heavy earthmoving machineries such as bulldozers, excavators, dumpers etc.; the said machines are given on hire to various contractors to work at site and are returned to the plaintiff after completion of the work at site; (iii) to meet the requirement for storage / parking of the said heavy machines and also for other purposes, the plaintiff purchased the plot of land aforesaid vide Agreement to Sell dated 31st October, 1981, for a total sale consideration of Rs.25,000/-; registered payment receipt and registered Will etc. from the erstwhile registered owner of the land viz. Mohan Lal Shelly were obtained; (iv) the plaintiff, besides parking his machinery and equipment on the said land, has since the year 1981-82, been also growing crops thereon and the name of the plaintiff is shown in the Khasra Girdawari for the year 1982-83; (v) the plaintiff has constructed a hutment / structure on the said land, where staff / employees of the plaintiff reside; the said hutment has been in existence for the last more than 35 years; (vi) the plaintiff has been in continuous and uninterrupted use and occupation of the property since the date of its purchase in the year 1981, till date; (vii) in or around 1987-88, the defendants for the first time started claiming leasehold rights on a larger plot of land, including the plot aforesaid and started representing that a hospital was required to be constructed on the said larger plot and from time to time started calling upon the plaintiff to remove his machines and equipment therefrom; (viii) the plaintiff, in or about 1987-88 initiated legal action by filing a writ petition challenging the claim of the defendants of having acquired leasehold rights with respect to the larger piece of land or the subject land and seeking to protect his valuable rights and possession thereof; however the said writ petition was dismissed on 24th May, 1988; (ix) the defendants, vide letter dated 8th March, 1989 admitted the possession of the plaintiff of the subject land but claimed the plaintiff to be a trespasser and called upon the plaintiff to remove the machinery; (x) however, no action as threatened, of dispossession of the plaintiff was taken thereafter and the plaintiff till date continues in possession; (xi) however in August, 2019, the defendants again started threatening the plaintiff with forcible dispossession; (xii) there has been no effort whatsoever on the part of the defendants to construct a hospital on the subject land and the long delay leads the plaintiff to infer that there is no plan of construction of hospital on the subject land; and, (xiii) the officials of the defendants last came to the subject property on 4th Se