The case of Delhi’s prestigious Hotel Ambassador has reached the High Court. The owner of Ambassador Hotel has filed an appeal in the Delhi High Court against the eviction notice received under the ‘Public Premises Act’. This notice was issued sometime after the decision of the appellate court in a decades-old case, in which the verdict was given in favor of the central government. The court had accepted that the owner had grossly violated the terms of the government grant by building and running a public hotel on that property. The hearing of the case is to be held next week.
The hotel’s owner, ‘Sir Shobha Singh & Sons Private Limited’, has filed an appeal in the High Court challenging the June 9 decision of the District Judge of Tis Hazari Court. In this decision, the Central Government’s petition against the 2009 order of the Senior Civil Judge-cum-Rent Controller (Central) was approved. In the decision of 2009, the construction of the hotel was considered legal.
Threat of immediate eviction looms
Seeking a stay on the judgement, the counsel for the appellant argued before the Court that there was an immediate threat of eviction due to the notice issued by the respondent on June 11 under the provisions of the ‘Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act’. Whereas the counsel for the Central Government presented its stand that the notice issued on June 11 under the Public Premises Act is independent and has nothing to do with the decision of the trial court.
Issuing notice on the application for interim relief, Justice Tejas Karia said, “On receiving instructions, the Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) gave a statement that the proceedings under the PP Act will be taken without referring to the disputed decision or being influenced by it. All the rights and arguments of both the parties will be protected in this regard. The statement of the CGSC has been taken on record and the defendant has been directed to follow that statement.”
what is the whole matter
Considering the statement of the Central Government counsel, the Court also said that during the hearing of the interim application, there is no need to pass any interim order staying the decision of the appellate court.
The appellate court had held that the lease agreement dated 8 October 1945 between the ‘Governor General in Council’ and ‘Sardar Bahadur Sir Shobha Singh and Sons Limited’ was in the nature of a government grant under the provisions of the ‘Government Grant Act’.
The court had said that the appellant has deliberately violated the terms and conditions of the agreement by building and running a public hotel here. Not only this, even after the written notice was issued and received on 24 February 1959, the appellant failed to rectify the violation of the conditions within a reasonable time. The Appellate Court held that the Government of India had rightly and legally exercised its right to repossess and retain the property in dispute under the express terms and conditions contained in Clause XVIII of the lease agreement or grant.
After the government took possession of the property again, the company filed a case in the trial court in 1960, the decision of which was later in the company’s favor. The government went to the appellate court against this and argued that it was clearly stated in the lease agreement that the company would build only residential units in the building. But the company violated the agreement and built the hotel. The High Court has now accepted the appeal and fixed July 23 for hearing the case.
Leave a Reply