In Brief
Landowners whose property was acquired in 1985 sought enhanced compensation, challenging a 1996 High Court judgment that had reduced the award. They filed the special leave petition after 21 years, claiming parity with compensation awarded to another village's landowners in 2016. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions on limitation grounds, refusing to condone the inordinate delay. The Court held that without sufficient cause explaining the delay, the doctrine of acquiescence applied. Additionally, reopening decades-old acquisition matters would impose unreasonable financial burden on the State and create cascading effects, as allotment rates had been fixed based on original acquisition costs and development expenditure years earlier."/> </invoke>
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.