In Brief
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's decision setting aside a land acquisition consent award from 1993 for the Narmada Project. The landowner had initially agreed to the acquisition for a fixed compensation but later refused to accept the compensation offered and requested cancellation. The Court held that a landowner who refuses compensation cannot later claim acquisition has lapsed. Possession was validly taken through panchnama documentation, and compensation was properly offered. The Court applied the Indore Development Authority precedent to hold that Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act (deemed lapse) requires both non-taking of possession AND non-payment of compensation; since both conditions were not met here, no lapse occurred.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.