STATE OF U.P. vs SURENDRA PRATAP .

The Supreme Court examined the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, determining that the High Court erred in interpreting 'possession' under Section 3(2)(a) of the Repeal Act. The Court held that actual physical possession must be established for the benefit of the Repeal Act to apply, and since the Competent Authority had taken possession, the respondents were not entitled to relief. The appeal was allowed, reversing the High Court's decision.