Land Acquisition Compensation and Lapse Under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act
Landowners challenge the adequacy of compensation awarded for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and seek a declaration that the acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The core legal question is whether the acquisition proceedings stand vitiated because the State failed to pay the determined compensation or take physical possession of the land. The advocate must establish either that the market value fixed by the Collector is unjustifiably low, or that the twin conditions for lapse—non-payment and non-taking of possession—are met.
Courts approach these matters by weighing the evidence on record regarding the date and mode of payment of compensation and the factum of taking possession. The listed cases do not directly address the land acquisition framework, and therefore no specific holdings on market value, solatium, interest, or the interpretation of Section 24(2) can be drawn from them. The advocate must rely on the statutory text and the factual matrix of the acquisition, as the present compilation does not contain precedents that guide the determination of these issues.
The leading cases
12 judgments · 12 Supreme Court · most-cited first
What LexPilot's research engine returns for this question, ranked by court and how often each judgment has been cited since. Read the full judgment before you rely on a holding.
- 1
B.S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr.
2003 INSC 179Supreme Court · 2003cited 11,973 times
The High Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can quash criminal proceedings, FIR, or complaint in matrimonial disputes even for non-compoundable offences under Section 498A and 406 IPC.…
- 2
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another
2012 INSC 419Supreme Court · 2012cited 7,921 times
The inherent power of the High Court under s. 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings is distinct from the power of compounding under s. 320; s. 320 does not limit or restrict s. 482. The High Court may quash…
- 3
Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr
2008 INSC 948Supreme Court · 2008cited 6,710 times
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and quashed the criminal proceedings against the appellant. The Court held that, on an overall view of the facts and keeping in mind the compromise decree and the principle in B.S.…
- 4
Secretary, State of Karnataka and Ors. v. Umadevi and Ors.
2006 INSC 216Supreme Court · 2006cited 6,553 times
The appeal was disposed of in favour of the State. The Supreme Court held that there is no fundamental right to regularization or permanent absorption for employees engaged on daily wages, temporarily, or…
- 5
Sakiri Vasu v. State of U.P. and Ors.
2007 INSC 1243Supreme Court · 2007cited 3,669 times
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It held that an aggrieved person has no right to insist on investigation by a particular agency like the CBI; he can only claim a proper investigation. The Court elaborated on…
- 6
State of Haryana and Ors. etc. etc. v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Another etc. etc.
1992 INSC 357Supreme Court · 1992cited 2,700 times
The Court dismissed the contempt petition and interlocutory applications. The statement of fact in a newspaper report is hearsay and inadmissible without proof by evidence aliunde. The applicant failed to discharge the…
- 7
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & Ors.
2018 INSC 828Supreme Court · 2018cited 2,575 times
The High Court's finding on the deceased's income (Rs.6,000 p.m.) and treating the father and sister as dependents with a 1/3rd deduction for personal expenses is upheld. However, future prospects are reduced from 50%…
- 8
United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon and Others
2010 INSC 428Supreme Court · 2010cited 2,516 times
1. A secured creditor is not required to exhaust remedies against the principal borrower before proceeding against the guarantor under the SARFAESI Act; the notices and application filed by the bank cannot be faulted…
- 9
Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran v. M/S Pure Industrial Cock & Chem. Lid. and Ors.
2007 INSC 588Supreme Court · 2007cited 2,513 times
A development plan does not include a draft development plan; the literal meaning of words prevails. A declaration of intention under s. 50 to prepare a town development scheme can only be made after a final…
- 10
Tata Cellular v. Union of India
1994INSC283Supreme Court · 1994cited 2,240 times
The Supreme Court held that judicial review is concerned with the legality of the decision-making process, not the merits. While the government has freedom of contract, decisions must be free from arbitrariness, bias…
- 11
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and Others
2021 INSC 253Supreme Court · 2021cited 2,233 times
Police has a statutory right and duty to investigate cognizable offences; courts must not thwart investigation save in exceptional cases. Blanket "no coercive steps" orders without reasons are impermissible and hamper…
- 12
Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh and Ors.
2002 INSC 148Supreme Court · 2002cited 2,152 times
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's bail order, and cancelled the bail. The High Court committed a manifest error by granting bail without cogent reasons, ignoring the subsequent FIR and…
Frequently asked questions
When does a land acquisition lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act?
Section 24(2) provides that an acquisition under the 1894 Act lapses if the award was made five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force and either compensation has not been paid or physical possession has not been taken. The listed cases do not interpret this provision, so the advocate must demonstrate through factual evidence that the statutory conditions are satisfied.
How is market value of acquired land determined?
Market value is typically determined by reference to comparable sale transactions, the potential use of the land, and other statutory factors. None of the listed judgments address the principles for determining market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, so the advocate must rely on the evidence led before the reference court.
What are the entitlements to solatium and interest on the compensation amount?
The 1894 Act provides for solatium on the market value and interest on the compensation amount from the date of taking possession. The listed cases do not contain any holdings on the rate or calculation of solatium and interest, leaving the advocate to argue based on the statutory provisions and the facts of the case.
Free trial · Research assistance, not legal advice — always read the judgment before you rely on it.
More on civil procedure & property
- Interim Injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 CPC
- Specific Performance of an Agreement to Sell Immovable Property
- Rejection of Plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC
- Amendment of Pleadings After Commencement of Trial (Order 6 Rule 17 CPC)
- Condonation of Delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act
- Adverse Possession: Ingredients, Hostile Plea and Use as a Sword
- Eviction of Tenant on Ground of Bona Fide Requirement
- Scope of Review Petition Under Order 47 Rule 1 CPC