Land acquisition lapses only if possession not taken and compensation not paid - Supreme Court.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin

The Supreme Court of India on 13th March has decided Eight Appeals

Land Acquisition Collector & Anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors.

Land Acquisition Collector & Anr. Vs. B.S. Dhillon & Ors.

UOI through Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Rajesh Kumar and Ors.

Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Vs. M/s. Beads Properties Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Vs. Dayanand & Anr.

Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Vs. Jai Pal

Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Vs. Manjeet Kaur & Anr.

Government of NCT of Delhi Vs. Siddharth Kapoor & Ors.

And all these appeals have against the Judgements/orders of High Court of Delhi, previously declared that the acquisition of land in question had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act as neither the possession of the land nor compensation had been tendered or paid.

Supreme Court took note of the fact that the High Court had recorded that physical possession of the land could not be taken. It was further noted that the word "or" in Section 24(2) of the Act should be read as "nor" or "and," and that the deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the Act, possession of land has not been taken, and compensation has not been paid.

The Court also held that the word "paid" in the main part of Section 24(2) of the Act does not include a deposit of compensation in court. If compensation has not been deposited with respect to the majority of landholdings for five years or more, all beneficiaries (landowners) as on the date of notification for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894 Act shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Non-deposit of compensation in court does not result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings. In case of non-deposit with respect to the majority of holdings for five years or more, compensation under the Act has to be paid to the "landowners" as on the date of notification for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894 Act.

The Court also held that if a person has been tendered the compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment or non-deposit of compensation in court. The obligation to pay is complete by tendering the amount under Section 31(1). The landowners cannot claim that acquisition has lapsed on the grounds that the compensation has not been paid or deposited in court.

In light of the above, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgments and order passed by the High Court and held that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question had not lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act. The appeal was allowed.

Land Acquisition Collector & Anr. Vs. Ashok Kumar & Ors.