Property Dispute – Delhi Court Seeks MCD Deputy’s Explanation
Property Dispute – A Delhi court has taken a firm stand in an ongoing property dispute, questioning the Municipal Corporation of Delhi over its failure to submit a proper status report as previously directed.
Court Flags Incomplete Compliance
During a hearing related to the proposed demolition of an allegedly unauthorised property, Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller Animesh Bhaskar Mani Tripathi expressed dissatisfaction with the report filed by the civic body. In an order dated February 17, the court directed that a notice be issued to the deputy commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The official has been asked either to submit a revised and compliant status report in line with the court’s December 2, 2025 directions or to appear personally at the next hearing.
The case stems from a civil suit concerning construction activity at a disputed site. Earlier proceedings had resulted in the court restraining the defendants from carrying out any further building work at the property until the matter was resolved.
Earlier Observations on ‘Mechanical’ Report
On December 2, 2025, the court had already voiced concerns over the manner in which the Municipal Corporation of Delhi presented its initial report. At that time, the judge described the submission as “cursory and mechanical,” indicating that it appeared to be a routine filing rather than a detailed response addressing the court’s specific concerns.
To ensure accountability, the court had then instructed the executive engineer, assistant engineer and junior engineer concerned with the matter to provide written explanations. These explanations were to be formally forwarded by the deputy commissioner. Additionally, the civic body was directed to place an updated and comprehensive status report on record by February 17.
Fresh Report Lacks Required Endorsement
When the matter was taken up again on February 17, the court found that the new submission fell short of its expectations. The report bore the signatures of only the assistant engineer and junior engineer. There were no written explanations attached from the concerned officials, and crucially, the document had not been forwarded or endorsed by the deputy commissioner, as explicitly ordered earlier.
After reviewing the file, the court noted that the report did not comply with its previous instructions. It observed that the document could not be considered a proper or valid status report in the absence of the mandated explanations and authorisation.
Interim Relief to Continue
Given the incomplete compliance, the court declined to lift the interim protection that had earlier been granted in the case. The interim relief restrains further construction activity at the disputed property. The judge stated that without a satisfactory report from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the plea seeking modification or vacation of the stay could not be examined.
The court has now directed the concerned officials to appear in person on the next date of hearing. The interim stay on the property will remain in force until April 18, ensuring that the status quo is maintained while the court awaits a complete and duly endorsed report.
The matter will next be heard after the deputy commissioner either files a compliant submission or appears before the court to explain the lapses. The proceedings highlight the judiciary’s insistence on strict adherence to its orders, particularly in cases involving alleged unauthorised construction and municipal oversight.