In Brief
Petitioners claimed land compensation from a 1911–1912 land acquisition award in Raisina, New Delhi, filed a writ petition 105 years later, invoking Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act to lapse the proceedings. The High Court dismissed the petition, noting such stale claims cannot be adjudicated. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that delay and laches bar relief; Section 24(2) does not revive dead or legally barred claims; it protects only those deprived of compensation, not those who deliberately refused collection. Failure to deposit compensation triggers interest liability only, not lapse of acquisition. The Court dismissed the petition as an abuse of process.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.