Delhi High Court slams trend of persons posing as property owners to file cases against illegal construction

The Delhi High Court recently warned against a "new strategy" resorted to by some litigants whereby they pose as property owners and accuse builders of carrying out illegal construction, in an apparent bid to arm-twist such builders into giving undue favors [Shri Balbir Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.]

Terming it an arm-twisting strategy, Justice Mini Pushkarna on October 6 imposed costs of ₹50,000 on one such litigant.

“The present writ petition is clearly an attempt by the present petitioner to arm twist the builder of the property in question for undesirable and dishonest considerations. The Court has to deal with such people strictly who try to use the process of the Court for dishonest considerations," the Court said.

The order was passed after the Court found reasons to suspect the litigant's claim that he owned certain property where illegal construction had taken place.

Justice Pushkarna recalled that the Court has previously laid down that only persons directly affected by unauthorized construction - the property's owners or residents in the immediate vicinity - can file cases against unauthorized construction. 

To circumvent this requirement, a new strategy is being employed by some who pretend to be the owners of property where construction activity is being carried out, the Court noted.

“A new strategy is being employed by various parties, wherein, they file petitions against the unauthorized construction on the ground that the premises where such construction is being raised, is owned by such persons,” the October 6 ruling said.

The Court added that such strategies amount to an abuse of the process of law and cannot be allowed to continue.

“Such tactics and stratagem cannot be allowed to be adopted by such unscrupulous persons, who, in order to obtain unlawful gains for themselves, try to use the solemn process of this Court. This is certainly not acceptable. This Court cannot allow the process of the Court to be misused and abused in this manner," it said.

The Court was dealing with a case where a litigant alleged that there was illegal construction taking place in an area of Jamia Nagar. The litigant claimed to be the owner of the affected property.

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) countered that similar allegations of illegal construction had already been raised in an earlier case before the High Court. The MCD added that it has taken requisite action against the alleged illegal construction.

However, the Court's attention was then drawn to whether the litigant was a genuine property owner as claimed by him.

The Court noted that despite claiming that his property had been encroached upon, the litigant had not taken any steps to get back possession of the said land, such as by filing a civil suit for possession.

The Court concluded that the petition was filed with malafide, nefarious designs and ulterior motives.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petition with costs of ₹50,000 payable by the petitioner to the Delhi High Court Bar Clerk’s Association.

Advocate Arun Kumar Verma appeared for the petitioner.

Standing Counsel Siddhant Nath with advocates Bhavishya Makhija and Amaan appeared for the MCD. 

Special Panel Counsel Raj Kumar Yadav with advocate Tripti Sinha appeared for the Station House Officer of the Delhi Police at Jamia Nagar.

Additional Standing Counsel Akhil Mittal with advocate Riddhi Jain appeared for the Delhi Development Authority.

[Read judgment]