The Supreme Court upheld that municipal bylaws and the Master Plan permitting mixed land use are enabling, not compulsory. Property owners cannot be forced to convert residential use to commercial use. A deemed sanction for purely residential reconstruction plans is valid if the applicant chooses not to avail the option for commercial activity.
Facts Of The Case:
The respondents, owners of an 85-year-old dilapidated residential house in Delhi, applied for sanction to demolish and reconstruct it in 2010. The Municipal Corporation failed to decide, leading the owners to obtain a deemed sanction from the Appellate Tribunal under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. The Corporation challenged this order successively before the Additional District Judge, the Delhi High Court (via writ and review petitions), and finally the Supreme Court. The Corporation’s core contention was that the property, located on a notified mixed-use street, mandated that any new construction must include a commercial unit on the ground floor, with residence only permitted on upper floors. The owners argued they had a right to use their property exclusively for residence and could not be compelled to undertake commercial activity. The High Court had dismissed the Corporation’s petitions, noting that mixed-use regulations were optional. The Supreme Court appeal centred on whether the bylaws compelled mixed-use development or merely enabled it as an owner’s choice.
Procedural History:
The legal journey began in 2010 when the respondents, after receiving no decision from the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) on their building plans, approached the Appellate Tribunal under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. The Tribunal granted deemed sanction in their favour. Dissatisfied, the SDMC appealed to the Additional District Judge, who dismissed the appeal in February 2012. The SDMC then filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court, which was dismissed in May 2015. A subsequent Letters Patent Appeal was rejected as non-maintainable. The SDMC later obtained liberty from the Supreme Court to file a review petition before the High Court, which was also dismissed in June 2017. The present civil appeals before the Supreme Court arose from the SDMC’s challenge to these concurrent dismissals by the Tribunal, the District Court, and the High Court, culminating in the Supreme Court’s final adjudication in November 2025.
READ ALSO:Supreme Court Revives Forgery Case: Fake Stamp Paper Probe Must Go On
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court observed that the municipal bylaws and the Master Plan provisions permitting mixed land use are enabling in nature, designed to offer an option to property owners, not to compel them to use their property commercially. The Court emphasized that an owner with a vested residential right cannot be forced to incorporate a commercial unit, especially when intending to use the property solely for residence. It found the Corporation’s stance—allowing occupation of a dilapidated house but mandating commercial use upon reconstruction—to be illogical and without legal basis. The Court strongly criticized the prolonged litigation as “nothing short of harassment,” noting the civic body’s failure to consider occupant safety. It upheld the principle that planning regulations must not be applied in an arbitrary or high-handed manner to deprive citizens of their legitimate rights.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the High Court’s order and affirming the deemed sanction for the respondents’ residential construction plans. It ruled that the owners cannot be compelled to build a commercial unit and have the right to reconstruct their property for purely residential use. The Court directed the municipal authority to sanction fresh or previously approved plans within four weeks. Criticizing the appellant’s conduct as arbitrary and harassing, it imposed costs of ₹10,00,000 on the South Delhi Municipal Corporation, payable to the respondents. Consequently, the connected Civil Appeal No. 6078 of 2018 was also disposed of.
Case Details:
Case Title: South Delhi Municipal Corporation Through Its Commissioner vs. Bharat Bhushan Jain (Dead) Thr. LRs. Citation: 2025 INSC 1324 Appeal No.: Civil Appeal No. 6077 of 2018 Date of Judgement: 6th November, 2025 Judges/Justices: Justice J.B. Pardiwala & Justice K.V. Viswanathan
Download The Judgement Here