The owner of Ambassador Hotel has moved the Delhi High Court against an eviction notice under the Public Premises Act, passed shortly after an appellate court order in a decades old suit ruled in favour of Centre— holding that the owner had violated a government grant by constructing and running a public hotel at the property in question.

The owner of the hotel, Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt. Ltd has moved an appeal before the high court challenging a June 9 judgment of District Judge Tis Hazari Courts, Central District allowing the Union's plea against a 2009 order passed by Senior Civil Judge-Cum- Rent Controller (Central).

The 2009 judgment had found the hotel construction to be lawful.

Urging for a stay, the appellant's counsel argued that there is an imminent threat of eviction in view of the notice dated June 11 issued by the Respondent under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act.

The Centre's counsel however argued that Notice dated 11.06.2026 issued under the PP Act is independent and has no relation to the trial court judgment.

Justice Tejas Karia issued notice on application for interim relief and said:

"The learned CGSC, on instructions, makes a statement that the proceedings under the PP Act shall be conducted without reference to or being influenced by the Impugned Judgment and all the rights and contentions of the Parties are reserved in that respect. The statement made by the learned CGSC is taken on record and the Respondent is directed to be bound by the said statement".

In view of the statement by Centre's counsel the court said that there was no requirement to pass any ad-interim order granting stay of the appellate court Judgment during the pendency of the interim application.

The appellate court had held that Agreement for Lease dated 08.10.1945 executed between Governor General In Council and Sardar Bahadur Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Limited was in the nature of Government Grant under the provisions of the Government Grant Act.

It had said that the appellant had willfully violated the covenants and conditions of the Agreement by constructing and running a public hotel. Further the appellant had failed to remedy the breaches despite issuance and service of written notice dated 24.02.1959 and within reasonable time.

The appellate court had thus held that the Union of India had validly and legally exercised its right to re-enter the suit property and retain possession thereof in terms of the express covenant contained in Clause XVIII of the Grant/Agreement for Lease.

For context, after the Union re-entered the property, the company filed a suit before the trial court in 1960 which had eventually ruled in favour of the company. Against this the Union had approached the appellate court arguing that the agreement for lease had specifically provided that the company would only construct residential units in the building. However in breach of the agreement the company had constructed the hotel, the Union said.

The high court has now admitted the appeal and listed the matter on July 23.

Case title: SIR SOBHA SINGH AND SONS PVT. LTD v/s UNION OF INDIA

RSA 108/2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order