DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs ANITA SINGH

The Supreme Court examined whether the land acquisition process had lapsed due to non-payment of compensation and non-possession transfer, as claimed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The High Court had allowed the writ petition, declaring the acquisition as lapsed. The Supreme Court analyzed the facts, including the timeline of notifications and possession, and upheld the validity of the acquisition, emphasizing the importance of compliance with statutory procedures. The Court clarified that mere non-payment of compensation or non-possession does not automatically result in lapse if statutory requirements are met.