Legal Analysis: Locus of Subsequent Purchaser to Challenge Acquisition

From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court it appears that and even from the counter filed on behalf of the LAC before the High Court, it was the case on behalf of the LAC that possession of the land in question was taken over on 12.07.2004. Manav Dharma Trust (2017) 6 SCC 751, the High Court has overruled the objection that the writ petitioners being subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the acquisition and/or to pray for deemed lapse of acquisition, thereafter, on the ground that the compensation has not been paid/tendered, the High Court has allowed the writ petition. Appeal is accordingly allowed.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/courts-analysis-on-existence-and-validity-of-arbitration-agreement/

Case Title: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN (2023 INSC 501)

Case Number: C.A. No.-003340-003340 / 2023

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *