IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION)

I.A. No. of 2023

IN

CS(OS) No. 440 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Commonwealth Games Village Apartment Owners Association …Plaintiff

VERSUS

Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Others

….Defendants

INDEX
S. No Particulars Pg No.
1. Urgent Application

2. Application under Order I Rule (3)(10) of Code of Civil procedure

read with Section 53-B of Delhi Development Act on behalf of
Defendant No. 7
3. Proof of Service

Defendant
Through

Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate

ashutoshkaushik123@gmail.com
7-C, Block B
Place: New Delhi Green View Apartments
Date: Sector -99, Noida -201304
Mobile:-9711070545
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
(ORDINARY ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION)
I.A. No. of 2023

IN

CS(OS) No. 440 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Commonwealth Games Village Apartment Owners Association …Plaintiff

VERSUS

Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Others

….Defendants

URGENT APPLICATION

To,
The Deputy Registrar,
High Court of Delhi,
New Delhi- 110503

Sir,

Kindly treat the accompanying Petition as an urgent one in accordance with

the High Court Rules and Orders as there is an urgency of the requirement
of urgent orders.

Defendant
Through

Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate

ashutoshkaushik123@gmail.com
7-C, Block B
Place: New Delhi Green View Apartments
Date: Sector -99, Noida -201304
Mobile:-9711070545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION)
I.A. No. of 2023

IN

CS(OS) No. 440 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Commonwealth Games Village Apartment Owners Association …Plaintiff

VERSUS

Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Others

….Defendants

APPLICATION UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 3 (10) OF THE CODE OF

CIVIL PROCEDURE READ WITH SECTION 53-B, OF DELHI
DEVELOPMENT ACT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

(1) That the plaintiff has filed the present suit for recovery of
Rs.19,56,52,783/- (Rupees Nineteen Crores Fifty Six Lakhs Fifty
Two Thousand Seven Hundred Eighty Three Only) along with pre-
suit, pendente lite and future interest @ 18% per annum seeking the
said amount from the defendant no. 1 i.e Emaar MGF Construction
Pvt. Ltd.
(2) That the plaintiff has also impleaded the defendant no. 2 to
defendant no. 8, who were the members of the erstwhile Nominated
Governing Body of Residents Welfare Association which was
formed as an Ad hoc Residents Welfare Association of the
Commonwealth Games Village pursuant to clause 8.14.1 of the
Project Development Agreement dated 14.09.2007.

(3) That the defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7, who were the
employees of the defendant no. 8 - Delhi Development Authority
were nominated in the erstwhile Governing Body of the Residents
Welfare Association, have also been impleaded as defendants in the
present suit.

(4) That the plaintiff has impleaded the defendant no. 6 & defendant no.
7 and have shown them to be representatives of the Delhi
Development Authority without disclosing the correct and factual
details qua the said defendants.

(5) That the plaintiff has not issued any legal notice as enshrined under
the provisions of section 53-8 of the 'The Delhi Development Act,
1957 and as such the present suit is not maintainable against the
applicant- defendant herein.

(6) That the relevant details of the officials of the Delhi Development
Authority impleaded as defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7 are given
as under-

(a) Defendant No. 6- : At that time was Assistant

Mr R.K. Verma Engineer- Electrical Division-
(Rakesh Kumar Verma) 2 and now Executive
Engineer- Electric Division-I
(b) Defendant No. 7- : At the time was the Junior
Mr. P.K. Sudhir Engineer in CGD- I and
retired on 31.12.2014 as
Assistant Engineer(Civil)
CGD- I
(7) That pursuant to the provisions of clause 8.14.1 of the Project
Development Agreement dated 14.09.2007, the Governing Body of
the Residents Welfare Association was nominated comprising of the
representative of the defendant no. 1 i.e. Emaar MGF Construction
Pvt. Ltd. and the defendant no. 8 ie. Delhi Development Authority.
defendant nos. 2 to 5 were nominated to the Governing Body of the
Residents Welfare Association by the defendant no. 1 while the
defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7 were nominated to the Governing
Body of the Residents Welfare Association by the defendant no. 10 -
DDA.
(8) That in term of clause 8.14.1 of the Project Development
Agreement, the Residents Welfare Association comprised of a
committee of the representatives of all the residential apartments
including the DDA's share of residential apartments. Initially the
committee was to comprise of the representatives of the Project
Development and DDA until aResidents Welfare Association was
formed by the residents of the residential apartments by an election
process.
(9) That in terms of clause 8.14.1 of the Project Development
Agreement, the elected body of the Residents Welfare Association
was elected and the defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7 tendered their
resignation from the nominated body of the Commonwealth Games
Village Apartment Owners Association vide their letters dated
09.08.2014 which was accepted. The accounts of the Residents
Welfare Association were handed over to the elected body and the
same were audited by the elected Residents Welfare Association.
(10) That subsequently the next election of the Residents Welfare
Association was conducted in the year 2016 and a new Governing
Body took over.
(11) That there is no cause of action that arose in favour of the
plaintiff to sue the defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7 in the present
case nor has any cause of action pleaded against them in the present
suit.
(12) That the plaintiff has also sought no relief against the
defendant no 6 & defendant no. 7. The plaintiff has sought the only
relief claimed by it from the defendant no. 1.
(13) That the plaintiff is only seeking the relief against the
defendant no.1 as detailed in the prayer clause.
(14) That the cause of action has been detailed by the plaintiff in
the present suit in para no. 9 and as per the plaintiff, the cause of
action to institute the present suit lies only against the defendant no.
1.
(15) That the defendant no. 6 & 7 being the employees of the
defendant no. 8- DDA were merely nominated as representatives of
the defendant no. 8 in the Residents Welfare Association and have
not done any acts in their individual capacity.
(16) That the acts of the defendant no. 6 & 7 in the Governing
Body of the Residents Welfare Association were that of the
defendant no. 10 - DDA. Further the defendant no. 6 and 8 have
already retired from the service of the defendant no. 8- Delhi
Development Authority, while the defendant no. 6 and 7 are still
employees of the DDA.
(17) That no suit can be instituted against the officers of the Delhi
Development Authority under the provisions of the Delhi
Development Act.
(18) That the defendant nos. 6 & 7 are not necessary and proper
parties to the present suit in terms of provision to the Order I Rule 3
of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is stated that there is no right to
relief against the defendant no. 6 & 7 and the defendant no. 6 & 7
cannot be impleaded as the defendants in the present suit.
(19) That names of the defendant no. 6 & 7 need to be struck off
from the array of the defendants in the present suit since the
presence of the defendant no. 6 & 7 is not necessary to enable this
Hon'ble Court to effectually and completely adjudicate upon and
settle the issue involved in the present suit.
(20) That defendant no. 6 & 7 has filed an application under
Order I Rule (3) (10) of code of civil procedure read with section
53-B of Delhi Development Act on behalf of defendant no. 6. The
 defendants have requested deletion of Defendant no. 6 & 9 from
previous memos of parties and the Hon’ble High Court has granted
the request and amended the said memos of parties.
(21) That the defendant no. 6 and 7 individually filed their
Application under Order I Rule (3), (10) of the Civil Procedure Code
read with section 53-B of Delhi Development Act on 24 th of July,
2018 vide dairy no. 126163/2018. Whereas on the 5th of May, 2018,
a defect list was duly annotated to the aforementioned application,
accompanied by certain objections. Subsequently, diligent efforts
were made to rectify the mentioned defects promptly, but unforeseen
delays arose, and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the
timely physical submission of the duly cured copy. Presently, due to
the implementation of a new filing system mandating exclusively
online submissions, the physical filing of the said cured copy is
rendered unfeasible. Consequently, the present application is being
submitted afresh to the e-filing section of the Delhi High Court.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court in the

above premises be pleased to delete / strike off the names of the
defendant no. 7 i.e. Mr. P.K. Sudhir from the array of defendants in the
present suit.

Any other order(s) which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper be
passed in favour of defendant no. 6 & defendant no. 7.

Defendant
Through

Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate

ashutoshkaushik123@gmail.com
 7-C, Block B
Place: New Delhi Green View Apartments
Date: Sector -99, Noida -201304
Mobile :- 9711070545

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION)
I.A. No. of 2023

IN

CS(OS) No. 440 of 2017

IN THE MATTER OF:

Commonwealth Games Village Apartment Owners Association …Plaintiff

VERSUS

Emaar MGF Construction Pvt. Ltd. and Others

….Defendants

AFFIDAVIT

AFFIDAVIT OF SON OF AGED

YEARS,

1, the above named deponent do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as

under:-

(1) I say that I am the defendant no. 7 and retired as Executive

Engineer(Civil) – Electrical Division I, Delhi Development
Authority and I am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances
 of the present case on the basis of the records maintained in the
office of the Delhi Development Authority, and I am competent to
file the accompanying application and swear this affidavit on behalf
of the Delhi Development Authority.
(2) That the accompanying application on behalf of the defendant no. 7
has been drafted by our counsel under our instructions, the contents
of which are true and correct.
(3) That the contents of the same be read as a part of this affidavit, the
contents of which may be read as a part of this affidavit, the contents
of which are not being reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:

Verified at New Delhi on this ___ day of July 2023 that the contents of the
above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge on the basis of the
records and no part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.

DEPONENT