Land acquisition lapse under Section 24(2) follows where possession is untaken and compensation is not lawfully paid.

Land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were treated as having lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act because the award had been made more than five years before commencement of the new Act and neither physical possession was taken nor compensation paid in accordance with law. The record showed that compensation was not paid to the landowners or deposited in court as required by Section 31 of the 1894 Act, and deposit in the Government Treasury or Revenue Department was held insufficient. On that interpretation, the acquisition was deemed to have lapsed and relief followed for the landowners.

---

---

Issues: Whether the land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 because the award was made more than five years before commencement of the 2013 Act and neither physical possession was taken nor compensation was paid in accordance with law.

Analysis: The proceedings were initiated under the 1894 Act and the awards had been made long before the 2013 Act came into force. The record showed that physical possession had not been taken from the landowners and the compensation had not been paid to them or deposited in court as required by Section 31 of the 1894 Act. Mere deposit of compensation in the Government Treasury or Revenue Department was held to be insufficient and not equivalent to payment to the persons interested. On the settled interpretation of Section 24(2), where either of the statutory contingencies exists, the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed.

Conclusion: The acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and the appellants were entitled to relief.

---