In Brief
A property owner challenged the acquisition of her 100-square-yard plot under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claiming the acquisition had lapsed because compensation was not paid directly to her but deposited with the court due to ownership disputes. The High Court agreed. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that under the 2013 Compensation Act, acquisition does not lapse when either possession is taken OR compensation is paid. Since the State had taken possession and deposited compensation with the Reference Court, one condition was satisfied, preventing lapse. Non-recorded owners cannot claim lapse when compensation is properly deposited due to title disputes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.