Mobile View
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer
Cites 1 docs
Karnal Improvement Trust, Karnal vs Parkash Wanti (Smt) (Dead) And ... on 9 May, 1995
Citedby 10 docs - [View All]
Guru Jambheshwar Maha. Cha.Trust ... vs Birbal Ram & Anr on 14 August, 2008
Guru Jambheshwar Maha. Cha.Trust ... vs Khemaram & Anr on 14 August, 2008
Karnal Improvement Trust vs Ram Parshad (Dead) Through Lrs. on 24 July, 2003
H.P. Housing And Urban ... vs Shri Mast Ram on 11 October, 2007
Bhiwani Improvement Trust vs Shankar And Ors. on 19 December, 2007

User Queries
Supreme Court of India
Karnal Improvement Trust vs Ram Parkash & Ors on 21 March, 1996
Equivalent citations: JT 1996 (4) 89, 1996 SCALE (3)336
Bench: Ramaswamy, K.

PETITIONER:

KARNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

RAM PARKASH & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21/03/1996

BENCH:

RAMASWAMY, K.

BENCH:

RAMASWAMY, K.

NANAVATI G.T. (J)

CITATION:

JT 1996 (4) 89 1996 SCALE (3)336

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:

O R D E R

Though the respondents have been served, no one is appearing on behalf of the respondents. Leave granted.

This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana made in C.R. No.1307 of 1993 on December 14, 1993. It is not necessary to dilate upon all the material facts Suffice it to state that this Court on an earlier occasion had remanded the self-same matter for determination of the compensation of the Phar land. Pending the determination, the respondents filed Execution Application for realization of certain amount said to be due. The appellant-Trust filed objection stating that the appellant had deposited more than what was due to the respondents, Therefore, the execution application deserves to be dismissed. The objection was over-ruled and on revision, the High Court confirmed the same. Thus this appeal by special leave.

In an analogous situation when the very award of the Tribunal was questioned by the appellant, this Court in Karnal Improvement Trust, Karnal v. Smt. Parkash Wanti [Dead] & Anr.[JT 1995 (5) SC 151] had there being participation by the other members, is illegal and non est. Accordingly, it was set aside. Consequently, in law as on date, there is no award in existence. Resultantly, the respondents cannot execute the decree until an award is made afresh in accordance with law. The appellant admittedly had deposited the amount pending revision in the High Court. In view of the fact that the award-was set aside, any amount paid would be subject to the result in the award that could be made by the Tribunal under the Act. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.