Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

IMPROVEMENT TRUST, SANGRUR versus GURJJT SINGH SANDHU AND ORS.

Decided
15 January 1996
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[1996] 1 S.C.R. 487 · 1996 INSC 69

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Unnumbered paragraph

Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

p. 487, margin D

Unnumbered paragraph

Mr. K.R.R. Pillai, learned counsel, is appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 14 to 18. Notice had been sent on 29.3.1994 to respondent Nos. I, 3, 4 and 7 to 13, but till date they have not appeared either in person or through their counsel. Acknowledgements have not been received. Therefore, they must be deemed to have been served. 2nd respondent was served on 31.3.1994. He is not appearing either in person or through his counsel.

p. 487, margin E

Unnumbered paragraph

The controversy is whether the respondents are entitled to the additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Act 68 of 1984. The Collector's award is dated September 10, 1979 while the notification under Section 4(1) was published on January 28, 1978. Under these circumstances, the respondents are not entitled to the additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Act.

p. 487, margin F

Unnumbered paragraph

The appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. No costs G.N. Appeal allowed,

p. 487, margin G