Delhi High Court Stays Eviction of Delhi Race Club and Indian Polo Association

The Delhi High Court has granted interim protection to the Delhi Race Club and the Indian Polo Association by staying their eviction from historic premises in the national capital, underscoring that even the government must follow due process before dispossessing occupants.

In two separate orders dated March 25, Justice Mini Pushkarna restrained the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs from taking “forcible possession” of the Delhi Race Club property at Kamal Ataturk Marg and the Jaipur Polo Ground located in the Race Course area. The directions came in response to eviction notices issued on March 12, 2026.

Court observed that both petitioners had established a prima facie case warranting interim relief. It held that the balance of convenience lay in their favour and that irreparable harm would be caused if eviction were allowed at this stage. Accordingly, the Centre has been restrained from dispossessing the entities until the next date of hearing on April 9.

In the case of the Delhi Race Club, court took note of its long and continuous occupation of the premises, which spans nearly a century. The club has been operating on approximately 53.242 acres of land since a lease was first granted in 1926. During the hearing, court specifically asked whether the government would assure that it would not dispossess the club without following due process of law, similar to its stance in related matters.

Senior Advocate Suhail Dutt, appearing for the club, argued that the occupation was lawful and that ground rent had been regularly paid. He contended that under Section 116 of the Transfer of Property Act, the club qualified as a “holding over” tenant, and therefore the eviction notice was legally untenable.

In the parallel matter concerning the Jaipur Polo Ground, court dealt with a petition filed by the Indian Polo Association. The association submitted that it had been in uninterrupted possession of the ground for over four decades and had already made lease payments extending up to March 2030.

Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar, representing the association, argued that the eviction action was arbitrary and violated established legal principles. The Centre, on the other hand, maintained that the lease had expired as far back as 1993 and that the association was merely a licensee with no enforceable right to continue in possession.

Rejecting the notion of summary eviction, court reiterated that even where the government seeks to reclaim land for a larger public purpose, it must act strictly in accordance with law. It relied on settled legal principles that prohibit the use of force to evict individuals or entities in settled possession without following proper legal procedures.

“This court binds the government not to evict the petitioner on the basis of the Eviction Notice dated 12th March, 2026. In case the government seeks to resume the land in question, the government shall initiate appropriate proceedings, in accordance with law, and follow due process of law,” court observed.

The ruling reinforces the principle that executive action must conform to procedural safeguards, particularly in cases involving longstanding possession and disputed property rights. It also highlights the judiciary’s role in ensuring that administrative authorities do not bypass legal processes, even when asserting ownership or public interest claims.

The high court has issued notice to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs in both matters and directed it to file its response. The cases are scheduled for further hearing on April 9, when the court will examine the legality of the eviction notices and the competing claims of the parties in greater detail.

Case Title: Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors.