In Brief
Delhi Development Authority challenged a High Court order that had declared land acquisition proceedings lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Resettlement Act because compensation details were unclear. The Supreme Court held that Section 24(2) requires both possession NOT to be taken AND compensation NOT to be paid for a deemed lapse to occur. Since the DDA had taken possession through panchnama and possession reports, the acquisition did not lapse merely due to unclear compensation records. Following the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, the Court quashed the High Court's judgment and allowed the appeal, clarifying that taking possession prevents deemed lapse regardless of compensation payment disputes.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.