{"id":267539,"date":"2022-05-28T10:00:52","date_gmt":"2022-05-28T04:30:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=267539"},"modified":"2022-06-03T10:50:36","modified_gmt":"2022-06-03T05:20:36","slug":"land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn&#8217;t be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Supreme Court<\/strong>: The bench of <strong>MR Shah*<\/strong> and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that in a case where on the date of commencement of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, no award has been declared under Section 11 of the Act, 1894, due to the pendency of any proceedings and\/or the interim stay granted by the Court, such landowners shall not be entitled to the compensation under Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013 and they shall be entitled to the compensation only under the Act, 1894.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It was argued before the Court that there is no express provision in Section 24, that excludes the period during which any interim order was operative, preventing the State from making an award. The Court, however, rejected the contention and held that preventing the State from taking the possession of acquired land or from giving effect to the award, in a particular case or cases, cannot result in the inclusion of such period or periods for the purpose of reckoning the period of five years.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It cannot be disputed that there shall be a very huge difference between the quantum of compensation payable under the Act, 1894 and the compensation payable under the Act, 2013. It cannot be said that there was any inaction on the part of the Authority in not declaring the award because of the interim order passed by the Court.<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cTherefore, should the State and the Public Exchequer be made to suffer when there is no inaction on the part of the Authority in declaring the Award? The intention of the Parliament while enacting Section 24(1) of the Act, 2013 cannot be to give benefit to a litigant, who has obtained a stay order and because of that the award could not be declared and thereafter the litigant may be awarded the compensation as per Act, 2013. It may even result in discrimination between the landowners, whose lands have been acquired under the same notification.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Stating that no party could take advantage of a litigation, the Court held that the principle of restitution is a statutory recognition of the rule of justice, equity and fair play. The court has inherent jurisdiction to order restitution so as to do complete justice. This is also on the principle that an unsuccessful litigant who had the benefit of an interim order in his favour cannot encash or take advantage of the same on the enforcement of the Act, 2013 by initially stalling the acquisition process and later seeking a higher compensation under the provisions of Act, 2013.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court, hence, observed that<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\u201cIf at the instance of a landowner, who has challenged the acquisition, an interim order has been passed by a Court is successful then the proceeding of acquisition or the acquisition notification would be quashed. Then there would be no occasion to determine any compensation. But on the other hand, if a landowner, who has the benefit of an interim order in his favour whilst a challenge is made to the acquisition, is unsuccessful, he cannot then contend that he must be paid compensation under the provision of the Act, 2013 on its enforcement, whereas a landowner, who did not have the benefit of any interim order is paid compensation determined under the provisions of the Act, 1894, which is lesser than what would be computed under the Act, 2013.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">[Faizabad-Ayodhya Development Authority v. Dr. Rajesh Kumar Pandey, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/IZPx2x6z\"><b>2022 SCC OnLine SC 679<\/b><\/a>, decided on 20.05.2022]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>*Judgment by: Justice MR Shah<\/strong><\/h4>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that in a case where on the date of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":267544,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[2773,2728,26444,2723,14531,43578,36058],"class_list":["post-267539","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-Award","tag-compensation","tag-interim-order","tag-Land_Acquisition","tag-land-acquisition-act","tag-landowner","tag-right-to-fair-compensation-and-transparency-in-land-acquisition"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn&#039;t be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn&#039;t be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that in a case where on the date of\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-05-28T04:30:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-06-03T05:20:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1333\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"890\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/\",\"name\":\"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn't be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-05-28T04:30:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-06-03T05:20:36+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg\",\"width\":1333,\"height\":890},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn&#8217;t be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn't be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn't be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court","og_description":"Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that in a case where on the date of","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-05-28T04:30:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-06-03T05:20:36+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1333,"height":890,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/","name":"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn't be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg","datePublished":"2022-05-28T04:30:52+00:00","dateModified":"2022-06-03T05:20:36+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg","width":1333,"height":890},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/28\/land-acquisition-compensation-interim-order-pendency-of-proceedings-supreme-court-judgments-legal-research-updates-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Land Acquisition| Compensation under 2013 Act cannot be claimed if award under 1894 Act couldn&#8217;t be passed due to pendency of proceedings or interim stay: Supreme Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Prachi-Image2-150x150.png","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/MicrosoftTeams-image-191.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":226629,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/03\/06\/no-lapse-of-acquisition-proceedings-if-government-has-paid-compensation\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":0},"title":"No lapse of acquisition proceedings if government has &#8216;paid&#8217; compensation","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 6, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a landmark ruling the 5-judge bench of Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee, Vineet Saran, MR Shah, and Ravindra Bhat, JJ has unanimously held that the land owners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246284,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/31\/the-undoing-of-section-24-of-the-right-to-fair-compensation-and-transparency-in-land-acquisition-rehabilitation-and-resettlement-act-2013\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":1},"title":"The undoing of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 31, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Siddharth Batra\u2020 Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 20","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":187134,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/187134\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":2},"title":"Non-deposit of compensation under Section 31 of LA Act, 1894 does not result in lapse of acquisition under 2013 Act","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"February 9, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the case where the Court was deciding the issue relating to interpretation of section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, AK\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":201052,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/31\/acquisition-proceedings-deemed-to-have-lapsed-under-right-to-fair-compensation-act-2013-on-non-payment-of-compensation\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":3},"title":"Acquisition proceedings deemed to have lapsed under Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013 on non-payment of compensation","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 31, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S. Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ. allowed a writ petition filed for seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings under which the land of the petitioner was acquired have lapsed. A notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":174144,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/07\/will-non-acceptance-compensation-landowner-amount-lapse-acquisition-proceedings-larger-bench-decide\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":4},"title":"Will non- acceptance of compensation by landowner amount to lapse of acquisition proceedings? Larger bench to decide","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 7, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Bench of Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy, JJ asked CJI to form a larger bench to decide the question as to whether by virtue of the provisions contained in Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265647,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/20\/land-owners-acquisition-compensation-supreme-court-legal-news-updates-research-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":267539,"position":5},"title":"Land owners cannot claim acquisition proceeding is lapsed u\/s. 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation Act where stay was obtained by them vide interim orders: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"April 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising of M. R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., reversed the impugned judgment of Karnataka High Court holding that land owners who approach the acquisition proceedings and obtain interim orders in their favour cannot take benefit under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267539","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=267539"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267539\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/267544"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=267539"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=267539"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=267539"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}