In Brief
The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a land acquisition challenge. The appellant sought exclusion of their residential area from land acquisition proceedings initiated in 1997. The Financial Commissioner, following Court remand, found that no structure existed on the land before the acquisition notification based on physical inspection and contemporaneous revenue records. Revenue entries claiming structures existed were made in different ink without authorization and were rejected as tampered. Since the award had been passed and possession taken, and the appellant failed to collect tendered compensation, the statutory lapse provision under Section 24 of the 2013 Act did not apply. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.