The court found that the suit, seeking declaration of ownership and permanent injunction against demolition by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), falls under Section 20A of the Specific Relief Act as it involves an infrastructure project (such as hospital extension or road), regardless of any contractual relationship between the parties.[11000640770008][11000640770009][11000640770010][11000640770011][11000640770012][11000640770013][11000640770022][11000640770023] It interpreted Section 20A purposively and broadly to cover suits that could stall infrastructure projects, emphasizing the legislative intent to prevent delays through court proceedings.[11000640770013][11000640770014] Consequently, no injunction was granted, and the suit was ordered to be treated and renumbered as an infrastructure suit.[11000640770015][11000640770016][11000640770024] The plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as they could not identify the acquired portion of the land distinct from their claimed possession.[11000640770017][11000640770018][11000640770019] The DDA was directed to file relevant documents, including prior proceedings, and depute a senior officer familiar with the facts and site.[11000640770020][11000640770021] The court noted the lack of awareness among government counsel regarding Sections 20A to 20C and directed a copy of the order to the Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice for familiarization.[11000640770025][11000640770026]