In Brief

The Supreme Court set aside a High Court order that had granted relief to a writ petitioner claiming land acquisition had lapsed due to non-payment of compensation. The Court held that under the 2013 land acquisition law, acquisition does not lapse merely because compensation was unpaid if the State had taken possession of the land. Since possession was established and title to the land was disputed, no compensation could be paid. The Court overruled a prior precedent and upheld the principle that either taking possession or paying compensation is sufficient to sustain acquisition."

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.