Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12837 (DEL)

SANJANA KAPOOR v. MCD AND ORS

W.P.(C)/9663/2026 · 2026-07-20

Amit Bansal

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

W.P.(C) 9663/2026 $~43 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9663/2026 & CM APPL. 44989/2026 SANJANA KAPOOR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaspreet Singh Rai, Senior Advocate with Mr. Devinder Singh and Mr. Piyush Ranjan, Advocates. versus MCD AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Arti Bansal and Ms. Shruti Goel, Advocates for DDA. Mr. Umang Tyagi and Mr. Zuber Ali, Advocates for R-3 & 4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R % 20.07.2026 CM APPL. 44989/2026 (exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 9663/2026 2. The present writ petition has been filed alleging that the private respondents no.3 and 4 are misusing the garage floor and the ground floor of the property bearing no. 39, Banarsi Das Estate, Timarpur, Delhi – 110054 (hereinafter ‘subject property’) for commercial activities, which is not permissible in a residential area. Accordingly, the petitioner, who is related to the respondents no.3 and 4 and resides on the First and Second Floor of the subject property, seeks a direction to the respondents no. 1 and 2 for preventing the misuse of the same. 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 23/07/2026 at 12:19:51 W.P.(C) 9663/2026 3. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-MCD submits that an inspection of the subject property has been conducted and no commercial activity was found therein. 4. Counsel appears on advance notice on behalf of the private respondents no.3 and 4 and submits that as on date, no commercial activity is being carried out from the garage. It is stated that, in fact, daughter of the private respondent no.3 who is a lawyer is using the subject premises as her office. 5. Counsel undertakes on behalf of the private respondents no.3 and 4 that they will not use the aforesaid premises for any commercial activity and the advertisement (Annexure P-9 to the writ petition) shall be duly removed/modified so that it does not convey that there is no impression that commercial activity relating to mushroom industry is being carried out in the subject premises. 6. Taking the aforesaid statement on record, and binding the private respondents to the same the present writ petition is disposed of. AMIT BANSAL, J JULY 20, 2026 Rzu 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 23/07/2026 at 12:19:51