$~46 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010439782026 + LPA 737/2026 & CM APPL. 63213-16/2026 RAVINDER SINGH .....Appellant Through: Mr.J.S.Rana with Mr.Milan Verma, Mr.Aman Sharma, Mr.Priye Rana, Mr.Chirag Sharma, Advs. versus SURENDER PAL SINGH & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Mr.Shubham Prajapati, Adv for R-1. Mr.Raghvendra Upadhyay, Panel Counsel with Ms.Purnima Jain, Mr.Madhur, Mr.Swaraj Maurya, Mr.Yash Singh, Advs for R-2. Mr.Siddhant Nath with Mr.Amaan, Advs for R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 16.09.2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This intra-Court appeal seeks to challenge the order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby W.P.(C) No. 12754/2025 instituted by the respondent no.1 was disposed of with the direction to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to decide the representation dated 13.08.2025 and 18.08.2025, which were made by the respondent no.1. 3. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said 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 18/09/2026 at 11:24:03 order was passed by the learned Single Judge in respect of the prayer of demolition concerning the property of the appellant, however the appellant was not impleaded as a party-respondent and as a result the case of the appellant could not be put forth before the learned Single Judge. 4. Be that as it may, the appeal has been filed with considerable delay of 334 days, for which we do not find any plausible explanation. 5. Accordingly, the appeal along with pending applications is dismissed on the ground of delay. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has, at this juncture, stated that pursuant to the order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge demolition order was passed and property belonging to the appellant was also demolished on 03.02.2026. 7. The said submission, in the facts of the case, is highly misconceived for the reason that the learned Single Judge had only directed the MCD to decide the representation preferred by the respondent no.1. 8. The appellant will, however, be at liberty to challenge the order and action of demolition by taking recourse to appropriate remedy, which may be available to him in law and in case any such remedy is invoked, the same shall be decided on its own merit without being influenced by the order dated 22.08.2025. DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TEJAS KARIA, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2026 S.Rawat 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 18/09/2026 at 11:24:03