In Brief
The Delhi Development Authority challenged a High Court judgment that declared land acquisition proceedings had lapsed under the 2013 Act because compensation was unpaid and possession not taken. The Supreme Court held that the respondent, who acquired an interest in the land through an Agreement to Sell years after acquisition proceedings began, was a subsequent purchaser with no standing to claim lapse. The Court further ruled that acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) when possession and compensation were delayed due to pending litigations challenging the acquisition itself. The Court set aside the High Court's judgment and allowed the appeal, holding the acquisition proceedings remained valid.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.