In 2009, the civil court ruled in favour of Sir Sobha Singh and Sons and injuncted the government from re-entry. (File Photo)The Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to immediately stay eviction proceedings against Sujan Singh Park North Block, an upscale residential complex near Delhi’s Khan Market, while hearing a petition filed by Sir Sobha Singh and Sons, the real estate company that built and runs the complex. The court issued notice to the government seeking its response and posted the matter for hearing on August 17.On June 11, the Estate Officer of the Land and Development Office under the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs had issued an eviction notice under the Public Premises (PP) (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, to the firm. The notice stated the company had breached the 1945 lease and the lease had been “re-entered”, or terminated, in 1960.The firm has sought to quash and set aside this notice.Arguing before Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar on Thursday, senior advocate Sudhir Nandrajog requested that the court stay the eviction proceedings, noting that a hearing before the estate officer is scheduled for Friday.The central government’s standing counsel, Ashish Dixit, however, contended that the petition is not maintainable, relying on a recent division bench order of the Delhi High Court in the Delhi Race Club case. That judgment had held that eviction of unauthorised occupants under provisions of the PP Act is a “statutory vested right available” with the government.The northern block of Sujan Singh Park, a large government housing project built during the British era, has been caught in a legal dispute for nearly 70 years. The 7.58-acre complex, which overlooks the upscale Khan Market, includes the iconic hotel Ambassador.The hotel is one of the key violations now being cited by the government.Story continues below this adAccording to Sir Sobha Singh and Sons, the block was built under a registered Agreement to Lease dated October 8, 1945. The firm said one of the agreement’s key clauses required the government to execute a perpetual lease in its favour once construction was completed. Under the agreement, Sir Sobha Singh and Sons was required to construct residential buildings, including three residential blocks, for “officials and non-officials of good standing”.However, in 1960, the government alleging misuse and breaches, sought re-entry — termination of the agreement.In January 3, 1956, the government wrote to Sir Sobha Singh and Sons that the buildings erected on the northern plot were not in accordance with the terms of the ‘Agreement to Lease’ dated October 8, 1945, since a public hotel was constructed with a profit motive.Sir Sobha Singh and Sons had moved a civil court with a suit seeking injunction against such re-entry.Story continues below this adIn 2009, the civil court ruled in favour of Sir Sobha Singh and Sons and injuncted the government from re-entry.On June 11 this year, a district court overturned the 2009 verdict.It observed that the “agreement nowhere speaks of constructing a hotel block,” and the real estate firm breached the conditions of the agreement by constructing a commercial public hotel where residences had to be built.In June, the firm had moved the Delhi HC, seeking a stay on a district court’s verdict that ruled that the northern part of the complex was in breach of conditions of the lease agreement.Story continues below this adThough proceedings under PP Act had already been initiated by then, the government had submitted that proceedings under the PP Act shall be conducted without reference to or being influenced by the district court’s judgment.Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More Tags:delhidelhi high court