Deepak Kalra v. Delhi Development Authority & ORS.

$~84 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 6975/2026, CM APPL. 34276-34277/2026 DEEPAK KALRA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Goyal, Mr. M. Minhal Mehdi, Advocates.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. .....Respondents Through:

Mr. R.K. Dhawan, Standing Counsel for DDA with Ms. Nisha Dhawan, Mr. Pawan Karan Deo, Advocates.

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Mrs. K.K. Kiran Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. Mohd.

Sueb Akhtar, Mr. Kushagra Dixit, Advocates for R-2/LAC.

Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel for GNCTD (Civil) with Mr.

Anubhav Gupta, Ms. Rashi Aggarwal, Advocates for R-3 & 4.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 19.05.2026 1.

The Petitioner claims to be the recorded Bhumidhar and owner in settled and continuous possession of approximately 2,200 sq. yards of land comprised in Khasra No. 609, situated in Village Maidangarhi, Tehsil Saket, New Delhi, and asserts possession thereof since 1954-55. 2.

The Petitioner has also filed a civil suit being CS(OS) No. 968/2025 against Respondent No.

1/Delhi Development Authority,1 seeking 1 "DDA"

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 20/05/2026 at 17:06:22

declaration and injunction.

3.

The case of the Petitioner is that during the pendency of the aforesaid suit, DDA relied upon a survey/demarcation conducted on 06th January, 2026 through an external agency, namely Habib Surveyor & Design Pvt. Ltd., using the Total Station Method. According to the Petitioner, the said survey is erroneous insofar as it reflects the Petitioner's property as falling in Khasra No. 608 instead of Khasra No. 609. Aggrieved, the present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the demarcation report dated 06th January, 2026.

4.

It is further contended on behalf of the Petitioner that the demarcation was carried out through an agency which had been blacklisted and that, historically, DDA as well as the revenue authorities have acknowledged the Petitioner's possession in Khasra No. 609.

5.

However, after advancing submissions for some time, counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the present petition with liberty to urge all grounds raised herein before the Civil Court, wherein DDA has relied upon the demarcation report.

6.

Leave and liberty as prayed for are granted.

7.

Dismissed as withdrawn along with pending application(s). 8.

It is clarified that this Court has not examined on the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open. SANJEEV NARULA, J MAY 19, 2026/ab 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 20/05/2026 at 17:06:22