High CourtsSingle Bench

Hari Ram vs Union Of India & Anr

Delhi High Court · Decided on 11 January 2021 · Citation: (2021) 01 DEL CK 0055

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 296 Of 2021

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

22 paragraphs · 398 words

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J

1.

The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2.

Petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 17.10.2020 passed by the District Judge dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the

Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 on the ground of limitation.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the proceedings were taken up through video conferencing on account of COVID-19 lockdown

and no notice was received by the petitioner and they were not heard at the time when the impugned order was passed.

4.

Learned counsel submits that the advocate for the petitioner who had filed the appeal had expired on 17.04.2020 and no notice had been received of

the hearing of the appeal.

5.

Learned counsel points out to the impugned order dated 17.10.2020 which also records that none had appeared for the appellant and the Court had

passed the order merely on the basis of written arguments which were filed in August, 2019.

6.

Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents. With the consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final

disposal today.

7.

Petitioner has contended that at the time when the appeal was taken up for disposal none was present on behalf of the petitioner. He has also

placed on record documents to show that the advocate for the petitioner who had filed the appeal i.e. Mr. Shiv Prasad Verma had already expired.

8.

Since ex facie the petitioner was not heard at the time when the impugned order dated 17.10.2020 was passed and even the advocate who had filed

the appeal had expired, the order dated 17.10.2020 is not sustainable solely on that count.

9.

In view of the above, order dated 17.10.2020 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Court of the District Judge for a fresh hearing on the appeal.

10.

It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented upon the merits of the order and the order has been set aside solely on the

ground that petitioner was not heard at the time when the order was passed.

11.

List the appeal before the District Judge on 27.01.2021.

12.

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

13.

Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.