From the record we find that respondents had clearly brought out a case that petitioners had refused to accept the compensation and therefore the amount of compensation of Rs. 8,87,866/- was deposited with the civil court of ACJM, Jaipur. A cheque for the same amount was drawn and deposited in the year 2009. Documents in support of these averments are produced along with the reply. The petitioners have not seriously disputed this vital factual aspect. The fact therefore remains that the compensation was deposited with the civil court by the government. Whether the petitioners received the same or not is not important. Even before the decision of Supreme Court in case of Indore Development Authority (supra) the law was clear that if a person whose land is acquired refuses to receive compensation, the condition of payment of compensation as referred to in Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 would stand satisfied if the same is deposited with the reference court. As noted, as per the decision of Supreme Court in case of Indore Development Authority (supra) for lapsing of the acquisition to occur in terms of Section 24 (2) of the Act of 2013, both the conditions of possession not having been taken over and compensation not paid are to be satisfied cumulatively. In that view of the matter it is not necessary to go into the grievances of the petitioners with respect to the manner in which the possession is stated to have been taken over. Even there by
