In Brief
The Supreme Court reversed a High Court decision that had declared land acquisition proceedings to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The Court held that acquisition proceedings do not lapse merely because compensation has not been paid if possession of the land has already been taken by the State. The Court clarified that the lapse provision requires both non-possession and non-payment of compensation to subsist for five or more years. Additionally, the period of interim court orders must be excluded from the five-year computation. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's judgment was quashed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.