In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court, held that in the present case, the Respondent/Plaintiff had been in settled possession not only since before the institution of suit but for the last 35 years.
The said ruling was delivered in the matter of DDA vs. Engineering & Industrial Corporation Pvt. Ltd., RSA No. 153 of 2015 decided on 30.11.2018.
The Respondent/Plaintiff had instituted the present suit for permanent injunction to restrain the Appellant/Defendant from interfering with the possession of subject property, without following the due process of law. A decree was passed in favour of the Respondent/Plaintiff of permanent injunction restraining DDA from dispossessing the Respondent/Plaintiff except by due process. The Appellate Court, thereon, dismissed the appeal of DDA. The Appellant/DDA had pleaded that the subject property did not exist, however, there existed a green belt in that place, thereby putting a cloud on the title of the Plaintiff.
The High Court held that since the suit of the Respondent/Plaintiff was aware that the DDA had disputed the title of the Respondent/Plaintiff in the subject property, this suit was not maintainable and was also liable to be rejected at the threshold. However, it was also noted by the Hon’ble Court that during the pendency of the suit, the Local Commissioner appointed by the Trial Court came to the conclusion that the subject property was indeed where the same was claimed by the Respondent/Plaintiff. Therefore, it was reiterated that a person in settled possession of a property cannot be disposed of the same even by any governmental authorities save by due process of law. The present appeal was dismissed, however, the DDA was given liberty to invoke due process of law.