GMR group chief told to vacate Rs 100-crore Delhi farmhouse by HC, moves Supreme Court

Justice Subramonium Prasad, in an order on September 1, had directed DIAL and GMR group to vacate the premises following a petition by Onkar Infotech, which has now purchased the property.

The erstwhile owner of the property — M/s Indus Sor Urja Pvt. Ltd — had executed a lease deed in April 2020 in favour of GMR group and DIAL. After the purchase of the property by Onkar Infotech, it became the new lessor.

The lease deed with DIAL and GMR group was, however, unregistered — which the court factored in while ordering their eviction.

While the defendant parties were paying a rent of Rs 39.67 lakh per month (along with applicable GST) at the time of execution of the lease deed, the current rent stood at a sum of Rs 45.62 lakh per month (along with applicable GST).

DIAL and GMR Group had argued that the Pushpanjali property, being agricultural land, required NOC/permission from the authorities concerned under the Delhi Lands (Restrictions on Transfer) Act, 1972, and Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, for registration of the lease deed. It was also their case that such NOC/permission could not be taken owing to the Covid-19 pandemic at the time.

The court, however, ruled that the Delhi Land Reforms Act will not apply in the property’s case “because once the land is admittedly not being used for any agricultural/horticultural purposes and the land in question is an identified piece of land, it will automatically come outside the ambit of the Act”.

Notably, DIAL and GMR group were in talks with the erstwhile owner for purchasing the property — a fact they also mentioned in court as to why the lease deed remained unregistered.

However, in May 2024, Onkar Infotech and M/s Indus Sor Urja Pvt. Ltd. executed a registered sale deed after payment of consideration of Rs 115 crore and stamp duty and registration charges of approximately Rs 9 crore. This vested Onkar Infotech with sole, absolute, and exclusive ownership of the Pushpanjali property.

Justice Prasad, ruling in favour of Onkar Infotech, recorded, “The admission on part of the defendant in the written statement, that the subject land is being used by the CMD of defendant no.1 for his residence, coupled with the fact that the lease deed is unregistered, is sufficient to non-suit the defendant…”
“The fact that the lease is unregistered would mean that the contents of the lease deed cannot be led as evidence in court. Since the lease deed is unregistered, defendant no.1 would be only a month-to-month tenant and would be liable to be evicted by termination of the lease deed by giving a notice 15 days before the eviction, which has been done in this case,” the court said.

From the homepage

Vice President Election Results 2025 Live Updates: Counting begins after MPs vote to choose next V-P — Radhakrishnan or Sudershan Reddy?

Blasts heard in Doha as Israel targets top Hamas leadership in Qatar

Avalanche strikes Siachen base camp in Ladakh; three soldiers killed