Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms. Rebina Rai, Adv v. ANOOP SHARMA AND ORS

.....Appellants Through: Mr. Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms. Rebina Rai, Adv. versus ANOOP SHARMA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Upmanyu Sharma, Adv. for R-1 Mr. Aaditya Vijay Kumar, Ms. Akshita Katoch and Mr. Amber Chaturvedi, Advs. for R-2,4 to 10 Mr. Arun Birbal and Mr. Sanjay Singh, Adv. for DDA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA O R D E R 23.04.2025 The hearing is being conducted through hybrid mode. % 1. CM APPL. 23539/2025 (application filed by respondents No. 2 & 4 to 10 for modification of order dated 24.03.2025)

2. This application is moved on behalf of the applicants/ respondents No. 2 and 4 to 10 for modification/correction of certain mistakes/typographical errors in the previous order dated 24.03.2025 passed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/appellant No.1 is also present. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 is also present on advance notice through video conferencing and the remaining counsels are also present. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:57:56 finds that no reply on the present application is called for from any of the parties. It appears that unchecked copy of the order dated

24.03.2025 was inadvertently signed and got uploaded on the Website. In the present application the following mistakes and/or typographical errors have been pointed out that have occurred in the previous order dated 24.03.2025: “a. The appearance of parties mentions the term advocate against Mr. Somit Makar's name. Mr. Makar appeared in person. Thus, the term Advocate would be required to be removed. In paragraph no. 2, it is stated "Respondents No. 4 and 9 to b. 21 are the office bearers of the General Body, elected pursuant to elections which were conducted on 22.07.2018, in compliance with the directions of the learned trial Court dated 09.07.2018, which were issued at the behest of defendants No.1 and 2 in the suit." The term "Respondent No. 4" would be required to be deleted as the Respondent No. 4 was not elected in the Governing Body elections conducted on 22.07.2018. Further, the term "General Body" is to be replaced with "Governing Body" as the elections of 2018 relate to the Governing Body and not the General body. c. The paragraph no. 8 states "Alluding to the rules and regulations of the CWGV, particularly Clause 9, which provides for the functions of the Governing Body and the manner in which the ad hoc committee was initially constituted when the residential units were developed by Emaar, a private builder, it is pointed out that the eligibility criterion for voting in the general election of the Governing Body has always been uniform and contingent upon the payment of CAM charges." The term "general election" is to be modified and the term "general" has to be removed, as the elections were not referred to as general elections. d. Additionally, in paragraph no. 8 the statement, "Notably, the same criterion was followed in the elections for the 2018-20 term, in which the respondent no.1/Mr. Anoop Sharma, was elected." is to be modified by replacing "20 18-20" with "2016-18". This is because Mr. Anoop Sharma was elected in the election cycle for the years 2016-18 and not for the 2018-20 term. e. In the same paragraph, in the statement of "However, after loosing respondent no.1/Mr. Anoop Sharma challenged the decision in the suit, which ultimately led to the passing of the impugned judgment dated 23.03.2019."; after the term "elections" the words "for the term 2018-20" is required to be added. f. The paragraph no. 23 of the judgment "During the course of arguments, learned counsels for the appellants contended that calling a GBM may not be an appropriate remedy, as it would be the election, This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:57:56 difficult to ensure the attendance of three-fourths of the total members/residents, which is required for decision-making." The term "three-fourths" is to be replaced with the term "two third'. g. In paragraph no. 25 the sentence "Respondent No.4, who stated that he served as the Joint Secretary of the Association for the first and second terms, appeared in person and submitted that the requirement for payment of CAM dues as a prerequisite for participation in the GBM and for exercising voting rights in the elections to the GB cannot be bypassed."; will have to modified and the term "Joint Secretary" is to be replaced "General Secretary" since Respondent No. 4 was the General Secretary and not Joint Secretary.”

5. Insofar as the corrections indicated in clauses (a) to (g) are concerned, the same are typographical mistakes and are ordered to be corrected in the previous order dated 24.03.2025. Insofar as clause (h) is concerned, although it is contended that the recovery of CAM charges is an administrative matter within the purview of the governing body, with role for the general body, the said condition was included in view of the fact that some of the members apparently have outstanding CAM charges. Therefore, as and when a governing body is elected, necessary call may be taken by it, which may or may not be put up before the general body meeting as per the rules. Hence, this Court finds no necessity to modify the aforesaid aspect vide paragraph No. 30(v). 6. Coming to the proposed modification in paragraph (31), the same is also not required, as the reference there in pertains to the issue of outstanding CAM charges, which, in any event, must be read in conjunction with the other relevant directions, contained in paragraph (30) of the Judgment. 7. The application is accordingly allowed. Let the necessary correction be done and underlined in each of the aforesaid This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:57:56 paragraphs as per clause (a) to (g). 8. The previous copy of the order dated 24.03.2025 be retrieved from the official Website of the Delhi High Court and corrected/modified copy thereof, be uploaded afresh as per rules; or in the alternative, a copy of this order be also uploaded on the Website, which be read as part and parcel of the order dated 24.03.2025. APRIL 23, 2025/sm DHARMESH SHARMA, J. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 28/04/2025 at 13:57:56