$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 105/2012 SURESH GUPTA & ANR .....Petitioners Through: None. versus GS PATNAYAK & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhishek Wadhwa, Advocate (through VC). CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA O R D E R % 01.04.2026 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act seeks the following prayers:- “a) proceed against the Respondents and punish them for non-compliance of orders dated 10.01.2011 and 21.10.2011 passed by this Hon'ble Court as per the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971; and/or b) direct the Respondents to comply with the directions given by this Hon'ble Court in the Orders dated 10.01.2011 and 21.10.2011; and/or c) impose costs of the present Petition; d) pass any other or further orders which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Vide judgment dated 10.01.2011, learned Single Judge of this Court passed the following directions:- “9. Considering that the application from leasehold to freehold was made on 20th May 1992, it would be appropriate to direct that the DDA should recover from the Petitioners the cost prevailing on 1st January 1993 for restoring the sublease in favour of Petitioner No.2. Consequently, it is directed that the DDA will, within a period of four weeks, issue a fresh demand letter in lieu of the impugned letter dated 26th April 2006 This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 12:16:57 requiring Petitioner No. 2 to pay the cost calculated as per the current cost prevailing as on 1st January 1993. Subject to the Petitioners paying the demanded amount, in terms of the policy of the DDA, within a period.of six weeks thereafter, the cancellation of the sub-lease-communicated by the letter dated 28th September 1992 shall stand withdrawn and subject to the completion of all formalities, the conveyance deed will be executed within a further period of eight weeks thereafter.” 4. Vide order 21.10.2011, learned Single Judge of this Court further issued following directions:- “3. In view of the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the respondents, the present petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to issue a fresh demand letter in lieu of the impugned letter dated 26.04.2006 issued by the respondents to the petitioner to pay cost as per the current cost prevailing as on 01.01.1993. Needful shall be done within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall pay the demanded amount in terms of the policy of the respondent/DDA within a period of two weeks thereafter. The conveyance deed shall be executed within a further period of four weeks therefrom.” 5. The present petition was adjourned sine die by the Predecessor Bench vide order dated 19.11.2014 by observing as under:- “1. The learned counsel for the respondents has stated that a special leave petition has been filed against the orders dated 29.09.2011 and 08.03.2013 which emanate from the order dated 21.10.2011 in respect of which the present contempt petition has been filed. He has further stated that the special leave petition is likely to be taken up very soon and therefore present case may be adjourned. This fact is not disputed by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners. 2. Having regard to the aforesaid facts, the proceedings of the present contempt petition are adjourned sine die with liberty to the petitioners to file an application for fixing up a date of hearing immediately after the special leave petition is decided.” 6. The present petition is listed in view of the Circular No. 57/LISTING/DHC/2026 dated 14.01.2026, wherein it was directed that no This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 12:16:57 case shall be adjourned sine-die and in cases which cannot progress due to some intervening circumstances, a next date shall be given so that they are monitored by the Hon’ble Court regularly. 7. Report with regard to Court notice issued to the petitioners vide order dated 19.03.2026 has come back unserved with remarks ‘given address is under construction and nobody resides’. 8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on instructions, submits that the convenience deed has been executed. 9. In these circumstances, no further orders are called for. 10. The present petition is disposed of accordingly. 11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 12. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith. AMIT SHARMA, J APRIL 01, 2026/sn/sg This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 06/04/2026 at 12:16:57