Full Judgment
Charanjit Talwar, J.
(1) The petitioner G.S. Saxena is a perpetual lessee of a flat bearing No. B-128/1, Ground Floor, Dda Mig Flats, East of Kailash, New Delhi. The Conveyance Deed between the Delhi Development Authority and the petitioner herein was executed on 20th August, 1971. The plan of the flat in question as well as of the First Floor flat has been annexed with the lease deed. It has to be read as part of the deed. As per the notes in the said plan, the area under common use of the ground floor allottee and the first floor allottee has been shown in blue in the plan. The plan shows that the stair hall on the ground floor, the dimensions of which are given in the plan, is for common use of the petitioner as well as Shri Rishi Dev Sharma, respondent No. 2 herein, in whose favor a Conveyance Deed for the first floor flat was executed by the Delhi Development Authority.
(2) For the quite sometime, it is the case of the petitioner that this staircase hall was being used by the petitioner as well as respondent No. 2. There was some civil litigation between the parties with which we are not concerned. In that suit, a compromise was arrived at. Thereafter the petitioner, it appears, has filed another suit against the said respondent No. 2 seeking that he (respondent No. 2) be directed to comply with the conditions of the compromise decree. That suit, it seems, is still pending,
(3) The impugned order before us is dated the 4th January, .1989 issued by the Deputy Director, Housing Agency of the respondent No. I, i.e., Delhi Development Authority. This letter is addressed to respondent No. 2 with a copy to the petitioner herein. As the said letter has a bearing on the decision of this case, we quote the same : With reference to the letter dated 8.4.87 addressed to Vice Chairman, Dda on the above cited subject, I am directed to inform you as under: It was clearly mentioned in the brochure at the time of release of Mig Flats in East of Kailash, that first floor allottees are entitled to the exclusive use of the stair case. The independent stair case includes the entrance door, the stair hall, the space under the landing and the steps. The Security and privacy of the first floor depends on the entrance door on the ground floor which is the only locking place provided to the first floor. The door between the common wall should be closed permanently. Ground floor allottee will not experience any inconvenience, as he is having access to the flat from two sides independently. However, first floor allottee will give access to the ground floor allottee for repairs of the water tanks and pipe line etc. in the terrace.'
(4) Obviously the decision contained in the impugned letter changes or modifies the deed entered into between the parties. We may note that Mr. Jaggi, learned counsel for the respondent No. I urged that it was because of the security of the first floor allottee that the letter in question was issued. He, however, could not show us any authority vested in the D.D.A. to modify the clauses of the Conveyance Deed, which, as we have already observed, the said letter obviously purports to do. We appreciate the concern of the Delhi Development Authority that the security and privacy of the first floor , must be kept in view but while doing the same, it is not open to the authority to convert the area which has been shown in the plan, which is a part of the Deed, as an area of common use, into one which to be exclusively used by the first floor allottee.
(5) We make it clear that by this letter the compromise arrived at between the parties is not being affected in any way and this order will have no bearing on the pending suit between the parties.
(6) The Rules is made absolute. The interpretation of the authority in the impugned letter is beyond its jurisdiction. We declare that it is of no effect. The said decision is quashed. No order as to costs.