M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Government of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Gupta – Respondent
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 dated 06.08.2018 in Writ Petition (C) No. 9196 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the contesting respondents herein and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed by virtue of 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 Government of NCT of Delhi has preferred the present appeal.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has vehemently submitted that it was the specific case on behalf of the appellant before the High Court that as the original writ petitioners before the High Court were the subsequent purchasers, they have no locus to challenge the acquisition / lapsing of acquisition. It is submitted that, however, despite the above objection, the High Court has entertained the writ petition at the instance of the subsequent purchasers and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in que
Subsequent purchasers have no standing to challenge land acquisition or its lapsing under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Rese....
A subsequent purchaser has no standing to challenge lapsing of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
Subsequent purchasers lack standing to challenge land acquisitions under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
A subsequent purchaser has no standing to challenge the acquisition or its lapsing.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Landowners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Se....
A subsequent purchaser has no standing to challenge the acquisition or lapse of acquisition proceedings.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – If acquiring body/beneficiary was not able to take possession due to pending litigation in a proceeding initiated by land owner, thereafter land owner cannot be....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Subsequent purchaser has no locus to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – There cannot be any lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of Act, 2013 on the ground of possession could not be taken over by authority and/or compensation c....
A subsequent purchaser cannot challenge land acquisition if possession has been taken over before their purchase.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.