In Brief
The Delhi Development Authority challenged a High Court judgment that declared land acquisition proceedings lapsed because compensation was unpaid. The Supreme Court held that a subsequent purchaser lacks standing to challenge acquisition proceedings. More fundamentally, Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act requires both non-possession and non-payment of compensation for deemed lapse; if possession has been taken, the acquisition does not lapse merely for non-payment. Once possession is taken and an award passed, the land vests in the State. The Court quashed the High Court's judgment and dismissed the original petition.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.