New Delhi: While the tree-lined lanes surrounding the Ambassador Hotel in the lush expanse of Sujan Singh Park appear largely unchanged—with patrons continuing to frequent the boutique establishment — a quiet sense of uncertainty lingers after the Centre moved to reclaim the property.The uncertainty follows an eviction notice issued by the Land and Development Office (L&DO) on June 11, days after a district court judgment strengthened the Centre’s claim that the hotel was built on land originally earmarked for residential use. In its June 9 order, district judge Ajay Singh Shekhawat observed that the “agreement nowhere speaks of constructing a hotel block” and held that the real estate firm had breached the terms by constructing a commercial hotel where residential units were to be developed.For many associated with the landmark property, the legal battle has immediate, personal consequences.“I don’t know about the legal intricacies regarding the establishment; like you, I will also get to know about our case status after July 23. Though yes, if it doesn’t get resolved, it might affect many jobs,” said Ratan Singh, who was manning the hotel’s front desk, assisting guests and overseeing staff operations.The dispute over the 7.8-acre property stretches back nearly 70 years. Its origins date to the 1940s, when the govt allotted two plots near the junction of Cornwallis and Humayun Roads for constructing residential flats for govt officials and other persons of standing. A lease agreement executed in 1945 required developer Sir Sobha Singh to build residential blocks in accordance with approved plans, which later housed his son, Khushwant Singh.The dispute formally surfaced on Jan 3, 1956, when the govt informed Sir Sobha Singh & Sons that structures on the northern plot violated the Oct 8, 1945 agreement to lease. It alleged that a public hotel had been constructed for commercial use and that garages and servants’ quarters were being misused. While the govt offered to condone the breaches subject to a revised agreement and additional charges, the company opposed the move, maintaining in Feb 1956 that all construction had official approval.In 1960, the company approached a civil court and secured a status quo order, which remained in force until 2009 in favour of the hotel owners. The matter resurfaced this year after the Centre challenged the 2009 verdict. While the southern plot remains undisputed, the govt contends that the hotel block and related structures on the northern plot violate the original terms of allotment.Supporting the Centre’s stand, the district court observed: “The construction of a public hotel for commercial purpose, logically, would have been the last priority of any govt in the times of World War-II. And, again, to put it logically as well as a necessary corollary, construction of residential units and blocks by any govt during such times of World War-II would certainly have been a top propriety matter.”Sir Sobha Singh & Sons Pvt Ltd has challenged the trial court’s order before the Delhi High Court, which has admitted the appeal and listed the matter for hearing on July 23.Meanwhile, a sense of unease can be felt among neighbouring businesses that have long coexisted with the hotel. “Even though the talk regarding eviction has mellowed after the high court’s order, we are hoping both parties arrive at a resolution. After all, this is one of the most sought-after establishments,” said Kishan Singh (name changed), who runs a café-cum-grocery store adjoining the hotel.For regular visitors, the Ambassador Hotel is closely tied to personal memories. “Back then, when we had no Zomato or Swiggy, this was one of the few cafés that would run 24/7, and we would unwind after a long day at work,” recalled a patron who has been visiting the Yellow Brick Road café for over two decades.Another patron spoke of the space it offered in a busy city. “After a long day at office, when I would meet my friends there, we never felt rushed. Even at 1.30 am, they would let us sit and relax, and that meant a lot to us.”For now, life at the landmark property continues much as before, even as its future remains uncertain and tied to the outcome of the long-running legal battle.
