The Vaish Co Operative Adarsh Bank Ltd v. Govt Of NCT Of Delhi And ORS

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6434/2017 THE VAISH CO OPERATIVE ADARSH BANK LTD ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Neeraj Jain, Advocate.

versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, ASC for GNCTD with Ms.Deboshree Mukherjee, Advocates for R-1 and R-2.

Mr.Pawan Mathur, Advocate for DDA.

Ms.Monika Arora and Mr.Kushal Kumar, Advocates for R-3/SDMC.

Mr.Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC for R-6/UOI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 28.07.2017 Petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that in spite of several representations having been made by the petitioner Bank seeking a demarcation of the land in question, no demarcation has been carried out. His application is lying pending before the Revenue Authorities since 2011. It is pointed out that a date of 03.01.2017 had been fixed and the document at page 330 of the paper book in fact evidences that even before that date the demarcation had been fixed for 16.11.2015. This is a document of the Tehsildar, Hauz Khas. Petitioner has been running pillar to post but his representation seeking demarcation has

not been answered. It is pointed out that a serious prejudice is being suffered by the petitioner as he has an Award in his favour which Award was passed in his favour way back on 25.02.1991. On advance notice learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 has put in appearance. His submission is that there is a shortage of Kanoogo before the Revenue Authorities and as such this exercise could not be carried out. He, however, ensures this Court that this exercise will positively be done within a period of three months. This outer limit of three months has not been objected to by the learned counsel for the petitioner as this is in the shape of an undertaking which has been given by the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2 (under instructions from the Department) and since this matter is lying pending with the Revenue Authorities since long this period of three months would not really prejudice and affect the rights of the petitioner.

Noting the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 and 2, it is reiterated that this demarcation be carried out positively within an outer limit of three months from today. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Order dasti under signatures of the Court Master. INDERMEET KAUR, J JULY 28, 2017 ndn