MUNNI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(DLH)-2012-2-267
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on February 15,2012

MUNNI DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

HIMA KOHLI - (1.)THE present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for directions to respondents No.1 to 7 to take appropriate action of demolition/removal of encroachment and unauthorized construction carried out by respondents No.11 to 17 in Mukandpur Extension Village, now known as Himgiri Enclave, Delhi and to initiate appropriate action against erring officials who have permitted the aforesaid encroachment and illegal/unauthorized construction in the area. Lastly, the petitioner has sought directions to set up an independent and impartial enquiry by the CBI to look into this whole purported scam.
(2.)A perusal of the writ petition reveals that in para-1, the petitioner has simply described herself "as a law abiding citizen of India and a permanent resident of Delhi".
A perusal of the memo of parties reveals that the petitioner is not a resident of Mundka Extension Village, where she claims that rampant unauthorized construction/encroachment is going on. When learned counsel for the petitioner was asked as to why the petitioner was particularly interested in the area in question, when it is situated at a distance of about 8-10 kms from the address at which she resides and as to whether there is any litigation pending between her and the respondents, the Court is reluctantly informed that the petitioner does have a pending litigation with respondents No. 11 and 12. Upon a query as to the nature of the litigation and whether the same finds mention in the writ petition, counsel for the petitioner states, on instructions, that the petitioner had purchased some land in the aforesaid area, i.e., Himgiri Enclave, Village Mukandpur Extension, Delhi from respondents No.11 and 12 and though possession thereof had been handed over to her, later on the said respondents had dispossessed her therefrom, which had compelled her to file a civil suit for possession against them. The aforesaid suit is stated to be pending adjudication before the District Court, Tis Hazari, Delhi and is presently at the stage of recording of ex-parte evidence. However, no stay order has been granted in favour of the petitioner in the aforesaid proceedings.

No mention whatsoever has been made of the aforesaid pending litigation in the present petition, much less any document placed on record relating to the suit proceedings. On further prodding, counsel for the petitioner reveals that the petitioner had also lodged an FIR against respondents No.11 and 12 which was registered as FIR No.465/2008 at P.S. Burari and is pending investigation.

(3.)IT is pertinent to note that yet again, there is not a whisper about the aforesaid facts in the present petition. The writ petition is absolutely silent as to the pending civil and criminal case between the petitioner and respondents No.11 and 12. Instead, the petitioner portrays herself to be a law abiding citizen of the country and claims to have filed the present petition as a responsible citizen praying inter alia for directions to the civic authorities to undertake demolition of the unauthorized/illegal construction allegedly being carried out at the instance of respondent No.11 to 17 in the entire area of Himgiri Encalve, Mukandpur Extension, Delhi and for initiation of a probe by the CBI.
On the face of it, the present petition is a gross abuse of the process of law. It is quite evident that under the garb of filing the present petition, the petitioner is out to settle her personal scores with respondents No.11 to 17. She has approached the Court with unclean hands and has deliberately suppressed and concealed material information from the Court that she is already in litigation with respondents No.11 and 12 and the civil suit is at an advanced stage of recording of ex-parte evidence. Besides the above, she has also lodged an FIR against the private respondents. All the above can only be termed as an attempt to mislead the Court.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.