Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) – High Court relying on Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. reported as [2014] 1 SCR 783, and observing that as compensation has not been paid and/or tendered to the recorded owners/petitioners, declared that the acquisition w.r.t the land in question is deemed to have lapsed by virtue of s.24(2) – On appeal, held: The case relied upon by High Court has been overruled in the Constitution Bench case of Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 wherein it has been held that the deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings u/s.24(2) takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the 2013 Act, the possession of land has not been taken nor compensation has been paid – Thus, in case possession has been taken, compensation has not been paid then there is no lapse – Similarly, if compensation has been paid, possession has not been taken then there is no lapse – In the present case, possession of the land in question was taken over in 2005, as also observed by High Court – Further, according to the original writ petitioner, she acquired the right in the land in question pursuant to Agreement to Sell dtd. 09.05.05 – Agreement to Sell by itself does not confer any right, title, or interest – Original writ petitioner can be said to be subsequent purchaser and/or has acquired the right subsequently – Subsequent purchaser has no right to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings – Impugned judgment set aside – Writ petition filed by the original writ petitioner before High Court, dismissed – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – s.4.
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed. Delhi Development Authority v. Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. & Ors., Decision of Supreme Court in Civil appeal No. 3073 of 2022 – relied on.
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014]
1 SCR 783; Meera Sahni v. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors., (2008) 9 SCC 173 and M. Venkatesh & Ors. v. Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority (2015) 17 SCC 1 : [2015] 11 SCR 454; Shiv Kumar & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (2019) 10 SCC 229 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.