$~48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010455702026 + W.P.(C) 14028/2026, CM APPL. 65642/2026 DEEPAK BHARADWAJ .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Akshya, Mr. Ashish Sheoran and Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advs. versus MUNCIPIAL CORPORATION DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh Phore, Adv. for R1 Mr. Deepender Banger, CGSC with Ms. Sakshi Rastogi, Adv. with Ms. Mrinalini Khatri for R3 Mr. Prabhat Ranjan, Adv. for R4 and R5 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 23.09.2026 1. By virtue of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks following reliefs: “A. Issue an appropriate writ/ order/ direction to the respondents or any other person who is found responsible for the same to demolish the illegal /unauthorized installation & construction of a Lift in the building in which the petitioner is residing i.e: 102, First Floor, Mausam Apartment, West Enclave, VTC, Pitampura, North West, Delhi, Delhi-110 034; and” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the DDA submits that though original construction of the premises was undertaken by the DDA, 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 25/09/2026 at 12:25:01 however, the same has since been handed over to the MCD. As such, since the respondent no.2/ DDA is neither a necessary party to the present petition and the petitioner has no objection if the respondent no.2/ DDA is deleted from the array of parties. 3. Thus, respondent no.2/ DDA is hereby deleted from the array of parties. 4. Issue notice. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent nos.1, 3 to 5 respectively accept notice. 6. At the outset, learned counsel for the MCD has handed over a copy of order dated 29.07.2026, arising from an appeal preferred by the residents of the ground floor of the premises involved. The said order is taken on record. 7. A perusal of the said order reflects that after hearing the parties at length the said appeal had been disposed of whilst categorically recording as under: “5. I have perused the record. The appellants did not approach this Court with clean hands. In para 13 of the appeal it is mentioned that the site where lift is being installed will permanently blocked the only way for the residents of the ground floor. The private respondent has placed on record the site map which shows that the passage where the lift is being installed is on the rear side of the block and the appellants have full access to their flats from the front side. Further, their flats have doors at ground floor at the rear side and the appellants can access their flat from those doors. Further, the proposed lift shall have two doors and the lift itself can be used as a passage for going to the flats from the rear side. The appellants deliberately concealed the fact that they can approach their flats not only 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 25/09/2026 at 12:25:01 from the front side but also from the two doors on the rear side of their flats. 6. Further, there is no alternate site in this block where the lift can be installed and two lifts are already functional in other blocks of the society at the same site and has not caused any inconvenience to the ground floor residents of those blocks. 7. The lift is being installed on a blind wall as per the lift policy and shall not cause any damage to the flats of the appellants as alleged. Further, there is no window in the flats of the appellants towards the site where the proposed lift is being installed and shall not affect any easementary rights of the appellants as alleged. 8. It is now settled law that lift is an essential amenity and not a luxury. The ground floor flat owners may face some inconvenience but that cannot be a reason to deny the residents of the upper floors to have the benefit of lift which is essential for them not only for movement but also for availing medical facilities in old age. 9. The Hon’ble High Court in the judgment of Shaik Abdul Hameed (Supra), held that liberal interpretation should be given to the clauses of procedure of issuance of NOC for installation of lift so that the aged and sick can enjoy their flats to the fullest extent. More than 50% of the residents of the block excluding ground floor flats have given their consent and the Managing Society has also no objection for installation of lift. The appellants may suffer some inconvenience like shifting the air-conditioning unit but that cannot be a ground to revoke the NOC for installation of lift. The lift is now a necessity and not a luxury and the upper floor residents cannot be deprived of this necessity.” 8. In the wake of the above, though the learned counsel for the petitioner claims that the petitioner was unaware of the said proceedings, however, considering that the petitioner himself was residing on the first floor of the very same premises qua which the appeal was preferred by the 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 25/09/2026 at 12:25:01 residents of the ground floor, it is strange that the petitioner was unaware of the same, and/ or the subsequent order dated 29.07.2026 passed therein. 9. In any event, on merits also the photographs annexed alongwith the present petition are bereft of germane particulars, so much so, no affidavit in support thereof qua the details and/ or the dates have been filed. Thus, they cannot be considered by this Court. Interestingly, learned counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5 submits that the photographs, allegedly filed alongwith the present petition, are the very same ones which were actually filed by the residents of the ground floor alongwith their appeal. In fact, he has identified one of the residents of the ground floor who filed the appeal earlier, is himself visible in the photographs therein. 10. Lastly, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 4 and 5 submits that the photographs annexed herewith by the petitioner are not in fact belonging to the property in issue. To this, learned counsel for the petitioner is able to give an evasive response. 11. Considering the aforesaid factual matrix involved, wherefrom it is clear that the petitioner has approached this Court with unclean hand and deliberately withheld germane facts and/ or documents, the present petition, alongwith pending application, is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the Delhi High Court Bar Association Lawyers Social Security and Welfare Fund [A/C 155530100009730; IFSC UCBA0001553] within a period of two weeks. SAURABH BANERJEE, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026/Ab 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 25/09/2026 at 12:25:01