Satbinder Singh Bhatia v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & ORS

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 113/2014 & CM APPL. 196/2014, CM APPL. 19544/2023 SATBINDER SINGH BHATIA .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Surbhi Singh, Advocate.

versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Ms. Sneha Roy, Ms. Madhu Yadav and Ms. Gurleen Kaur Sran, Advocates for MCD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 11.05.2026 1.

Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of the Court to order passed by this Court on 8th January, 2026 in LPA No.591/2023. Para 9 of the said order is set out below:- "9.

Predicated on the aforesaid order passed by the Supreme Court, the joint decision of the Commissioner, MCD and the VC, DDA concludes as under: "6.

Discussion and Decision The matter has been discussed in detail in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(i) Predicated on the aforesaid order passed by the Supreme Court, the joint decision of the Commissioner, MCD and the VC, DDA concludes as under:

(a) The separate buildings for the co-owners may be sanctioned in such cases subject, to stipulations that FAR and Ground coverage of all the Dwelling Units in all the W.P.(C) 113/2014 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:23:20

buildings put together shall not exceed the applicable FAR and Ground Coverage of the single undivided plot. (b) Dwelling Units permissible for the entire plot and coshares would enjoy the FAR and Ground Coverage in their Dwelling Units on proportionate basis of the total FAR and Ground Coverage, permissible for that plot. This would be in line with laid down law by Hon'ble Supreme Court and the provisions of Master Plan-2021.

(ii) However, if respective shares of the co-owners are not defined in the plot, that is to say, it is not clear which portion of the plot belongs to who co-owner, then all coowners would have to apply jointly which will indicate after their mutual settlement of their respective share/portion in the plot."" 2.

In view of the aforesaid order, counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition.

3.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. 4.

Pending applications stand disposed of.

5.

All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. AMIT BANSAL, J MAY 11, 2026 Vivek/- W.P.(C) 113/2014 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/05/2026 at 12:23:20