Sukhvinder Kaur v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi & ORS.

$~4 & 10 * IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3650/2025 &CM APPL. 17064/2025, CM APPL. 47876/2025 SUKHVINDER KAUR .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sumit Gaba, Advocate (Through VC) versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS......Respondents Through:

Ms. Jagrati Singh, Standing Counsel for MCD with Mr.

Rajpal and Mr. Surendar Kumar, Advocates for MCD (Through VC) Mr.

Ankit Verma, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Dipanshu Kumar, Advocate for R-4 Mr.

Niraj Kumar, Senior Central Government Counsel with Mr. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate for Delhi Police + CONT.CAS(C) 1531/2025 & CM APPL. 64665/2025 SUKHVINDER KAUR .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sumit Gaba, Advocate (Through VC) versus ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Saroj Bidawat, Standing Counsel for MCD

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

O R D E R

% 23.04.2026 W.P.(C) 3650/2025 & CONT.CAS(C) 1531/2025 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 25/04/2026 at 13:11:44

1.

In the order passed by the Predecessor Bench on 18th December, 2025, it was noted that in terms of the status report filed by MCD on 28th August, 2025, the basement of the property in question is empty and the ground floor is being used for the commercial purposes.

2.

In the said status report, it has been stated by MCD that commercial activities being carried out from the ground floor of the said property as the commercial activities permitted from the ground floor in terms of the Mixed Land Use policy as per Master Plan for Delhi (MPD)-2021. 3.

It is further being stated that requisite misuse penalty charges, registration charges, conversion charges and parking charges have been paid for the same.

4.

An objection was raised on behalf of counsel for the petitioner that basement is also being used for commercial purposes. 5.

Accordingly, MCD was directed to file reply in contempt petition. 6.

A reply has been filed by respondent/MCD, wherein, it is categorically been stated that the basement is not being used for commercial purposes. Photographs have also been filed along with the said reply. 7.

In view thereof, the writ petition as well as the contempt petition is closed.

AMIT BANSAL, J APRIL 23, 2026 ds W.P.(C) 3650/2025 & CONT.CAS(C) 1531/2025 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 25/04/2026 at 13:11:44