CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 1996 › Karnal Improvement Trust, Karnal v. Smt. Parkash Wanti(dead)

Karnal Improvement Trust, Karnal v. Smt. Parkash Wanti(dead)

Supreme Court of India · 21 March 1996 · [1996] 3 S.C.R. 767

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
21 March 1996
Case no.
C.A. No. 4237 of 1995
Reported as
[1996] 3 S.C.R. 767
Result
Disposed of
Bench
Ramaswamy, K.
Length
1 pages
Have a question about this judgment?

Ask our Legal AI about it on WhatsApp: free, no signup, in English or Hindi.

Write it first.

PETITIONER:
KARNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
RAM PARKASH & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21/03/1996
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
NANAVATI G.T. (J)
CITATION:
JT 1996 (4) 89 1996 SCALE (3)336

ACT

HEADNOTE

JUDGMENT

ORDER

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.

Ask CaseMinister about Karnal Improvement Trust, Karnal v. Smt. Parkash Wanti(dead)

Your 24×7 legal assistant on WhatsApp answers with the judgments that apply, in English or Hindi. No signup needed.

Questions about this judgment, or a case like it?Ask on WhatsApp