JUDGMENT :

M.R. SHAH, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 3357 of 2016 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the original writ petitioner- subsequent purchaser and has declared that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 1894”) with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”), the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has preferred the present appeal.

2. We have heard Shri Nitin Mishra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Shri Amit Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1.

3. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, and even as per the counter affidavit filed by the Land Acquisition Collector and the DDA, it appears that the possession of the subject land had been taken on 26.11.2012 and was handed over to DDA. However, thereafte