Delhi High Court Upholds Single Judge Order Paving Way For Demolition Of 12 Tower Signature View Apartments

The Delhi High Court has upheld a single judge order paving way for demolition and reconstruction of Signature View Apartments in city's Mukherjee Nagar.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that it cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said that there was no relevant material before the MCD for passing the order to remove the buildings.

“Various reports of investigation by the Structural Consultants and findings of the testing agency were placed before the authority concerned who on consideration of the said material formed his opinion as per the requirement of Section 348 of the DMC Act and thereafter has passed the order for demolition of the buildings in question,” the Court said.

The Bench dismissed the plea filed by one Man Mohan Singh Attri challenging the single judge order passed in December last year. Vide the said order, the single judge had upheld the decision of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for demolition and reconstruction of Signature View Apartments.

The DDA had constructed 336 flats known as Signature View Apartments initially for the use or occupation of players and officials of the Commonwealth Games which were held in 2010. On conclusion of the games, the flats were sold by the DDA. The apartments comprised of 12 towers.

Upholding the single judge order, the Court observed that the Single Judge had taken a correct view of the matter and had rightly refused to interfere with the demolition order.

It said that the single judge gave detailed reasons and correctly relied on the legal principles governing the exercise of powers under Section 348 of the DMC Act.

The Court further noted that it was not the Attri's case that the authority which passed the demolition order was not having due delegation of powers to be exercised under Section 348 for passing an order of removal of the buildings.

“Merely because the Commissioner has not passed the order of removal of buildings; rather, it has been passed by his delegate, in our considered opinion, it will not make the order without jurisdiction or vitiated. It is to be further noticed that Section 348 empowers the authority concerned to pass an order of removal on his forming an opinion that the building is in ruinous condition or is likely to fall or it has become dangerous to the persons occupying the same or persons resorting to or passing-by such buildings,” the Court said.

It added that the material on the basis of which the order of removal of buildings was passed was based on the reports of experts, including the report by an expert from IIT, Delhi, as also the test report regarding materials submitted by Shri Ram Institute of Industrial Research.

It noted that the Single Judge had considered various reports and had returned a finding that the buildings were structurally unsafe and further that repair works undertaken by DDA had proved to be cosmetic since the very structure of the building was found to be fundamentally weak.

“For the reasons aforesaid, we do not find any good ground to interfere in the orders passed by the learned Single Judge which are under challenge in this intra-Court appeal, which accordingly fails. Resultantly, the appeal is hereby dismissed,” the Bench concluded.

Title: MAN MOHAN SINGH ATTRI v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

Click here to read order