A nearly seven-decade-old dispute over one of Delhi’s most prominent residential estates has entered a fresh legal phase, with the Centre’s Land and Development Office (L&DO) initiating eviction proceedings against Sujan Singh Park North, the Colonial-era complex next to Khan Market that includes Ambassador Hotel.
The property is associated with Sir Sobha Singh, one of the principal contractors involved in building New Delhi after the British shifted their capital to the city from Calcutta in 1911. He played a key role in the construction of several landmark projects, including Rashtrapati Bhavan and a major chunk of India Gate. Sujan Singh Park, named after Sobha Singh’s father Sujan Singh, was developed by his family run company, which continues to manage the estate.
The Centre had recently initiated eviction proceedings against the Gymkhana Club and Jaipur Polo Ground in Delhi.
In a notice issued on June 11 under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, the L&DO asked Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt Ltd to explain why an eviction order should not be passed against it.
The government has alleged that the lease was “re-entered” on August 5, 1960, following alleged breach of conditions attached to the 1945 lease. According to the notice, no fresh lease, renewal or allotment was granted thereafter and the company’s continued occupation of the property was “unauthorised”.
An L&DO official said the proceedings had been initiated in accordance with the government’s position that the lease stood terminated following the alleged re-entry in 1960.
The dispute traces its roots to the final years of the British rule. In 1944, two adjoining plots spread over 7.58 acres were allotted for the construction of around 100 residential flats for government use during World War II. Sir Sobha Singh and Sons was incorporated to execute the project and was to receive a perpetual lease upon completion.
Over the years, however, differences emerged over the nature of the development. Government authorities allegedly objected to the construction of a public hotel and the use of certain garages and servant quarters for commercial purposes. The company contested those allegations and maintained that the development had been undertaken with official knowledge and approval.
The matter reached the court in 1960 when the company sought to restrain the government from acting on the alleged re-entry. An interim status quo order remained in force for decades and was followed by a 2009 civil court judgment in favour of the company.
Earlier this month, a district court set aside that verdict, paving the way for the government to initiate proceedings under the Public Premises Act. The latest action comes weeks after the Supreme Court, in a separate dispute, held that the property was a “government grant" governed by the Government Grants Act, 1895. It also follows a revised demand notice of around Rs 940 crore issued by the government in April over alleged breaches of lease conditions.
Sir Sobha Singh and Sons has challenged the June 11 eviction notice before the Delhi High Court. Its counsel Shaunak Kashyap said the company had obtained “substantive relief" after questioning the legal basis of the notice and would place its position before the Estate Officer.
“Any eviction must now begin afresh, on a fresh notice, with the government proving that its 1960 ‘re-entry’ was valid, something it failed to establish during the 49 years of trial, through a full inquiry with evidence and cross-examination, in which the residents, Hotel Ambassador, the Traders’ Association and the RWA are each entitled to be heard before the Director of Estates," Kashyap said.
However, later in the day, during proceedings before the Estate Officer of the L&DO on Friday, Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt Ltd challenged the government’s claim that it has been in unauthorised occupation of Sujan Singh Park North since an alleged re-entry of the lease in 1960. The company argued that the re-entry was “invalid and inoperative” and contended that there had been no breach of lease conditions, no valid notice or opportunity to remedy any alleged breach, and that possession of the property was never taken by the government. According to advocate Shaunak Kashyap, the firm placed more than 100 exhibits on record, including a 1951 sanctioned map that incorporated the hotel block, to support its contention that the disputed structures had been built with official approval. The matter is now scheduled to be heard again on July 3.
