Under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, where possession of the acquired land was taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department, can the acquisition still be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) because compensation was not tendered?

No. For attracting Section 24(2), twin conditions of not taking possession and not tendering compensation have to be satisfied, and if one of the conditions is not satisfied there shall not be any lapse. Possession having been taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department on 23.09.1981, there was no lapse even though payment of compensation could not be ascertained.

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — s.24(2) — Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s.4 — Deemed lapse of acquisition — Twin conditions — Possession taken over — Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — s.24(2) — Deemed lapse — Twin conditions — Held: A deemed lapse under Section 24(2) is attracted only where twin conditions are satisfied — possession not taken and compensation not tendered; if one of them fails, there is no lapse. (¶2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — s.24(2) — Possession handed over — Belated grievance — Held further: Possession taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department defeats a lapse, though payment of compensation could not be ascertained. Appeal allowed. (¶2, 3)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of The Secretary, Land & Building Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. v. Om Prakash (Dead) Through LRs. & Ors. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India