In Brief
This case concerns conflicting interpretations of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, specifically Section 24 (conditions for lapse of acquisition). A three-Judge Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Shailendra had created divergence from prior precedent. The Supreme Court constituted a Constitution Bench to resolve multiple issues: whether 'payment' requires court deposit or mere tender suffices; the proper mode of taking possession; revival of stale claims; and exclusion of litigation periods from statutory timeframes. The matter was remanded for substantive hearing after completion of other pending proceedings.", <parameter name="subject_tags">["Land Acquisition", "Constitutional Law", "Statutory Interpretation", "Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013"]
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.