Petty cases cannot be allowed to delay work for Commonwealth Games: court

With almost each and every developmental work in the Capital being linked to the 2010 Commonwealth Games, a city court, too, has lent support to the view that the issue of national interest and prestige was of utmost importance and petty litigations could not be allowed to act as impediments in these improvements.

“The constructions or renovations, if related to the Commonwealth Games, directly involved issues of national interest. Any kind of trivial litigation had to be snubbed at the earliest stage so that these do not impinge upon the progress of work related to the historical event and/or the safety of the people affected by these construction works,” Additional District Judge Kamini Lau observed during a recent hearing.

The court was deciding a petition filed by Vasdev Motwani, owner of a shop in Hotel Janpath, accusing the hotel’s chairman-cum-managing director and general manager of violating a court order.

As per Motwani, a court had, in 2001, restrained them from trying to evict or obstruct him, his employees or his customers, from enjoying the suit property in all the normal ways till the final disposal of the matter under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act.

Motwani further claimed that the hotel’s authorities had blocked the free entry and exit, which according to him, had been done only to harass him, his staff and his customers so that they were compelled to vacate the licenced accommodation on the first floor lobby of Hotel

Janpath. Dubbing it as a “gross willful and deliberate violation” of the court order, he requested the court to pass the orders for executing the relief granted to him by the earlier directive.

Countering Motwani’s contentions, the counsel for the hotel being managed by Indian Tourism Development Co. Ltd, said that the present suit was a tool used by the petitioner to retain possession of the property, of which he was merely a licensee till 2006. The counsel further told the court that the favourable order by a court was subject to the final adjudication of the matter by the Estate Officer and he could not perpetually seek relief under the said directive.

ADJ Lau found substance in the hotel’s arguments and noted that the right of free entry and exit was protected till the time Motwani was a valid licensee under the authorities and was in lawful possession of the premises and also till such time the matter was finally adjudicated by the Estate Officer.

The court also took into account the contention of the hotel’s account head that it was not only Motwani who was prevented from entering through the common passage but all such occupants were restrained owing to the construction and renovation works being carried out for the upcoming Commonwealth Games.

He also told the court that it would take about three months to complete the work and certain areas were blocked in order to maintain the safety of the users of the hotel which included its own staff and the visitors. He also pointed out that the area around the shop of the applicant was also under massive renovation and an alternative passage has already been provided to the decree holder through the second floor.

ADJ Lau observed that the present litigation was nothing short of being frivolous, for it not only aimed at getting in the way of the work carried out as a preparation of the 2010 Games but also without any cause of action. She then threw out the petition.