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

TEK CHAND versus SAT NARAYAN

Decided
14 September 1989
Judges listed
E.S. VENKATARAMIAH, K.N. SINGH, S. NATARAJAN (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[1989] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 121 · 1989 INSC 277

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.

We have heard this case arising out of Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act 1973. We feel thai this case is fully covered by the decision of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sabyasachi Mukharji & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranganathan in Atma Ram Mittal v. Ishwar Singh Punia, [1988] 4 S.C.C. 284. We respectfully agree with the principle enunciated in that decision. The special leave petition is dismissed.

pp. 121–122, margin G

Learned counsel for the respondent Mr. S.C. Maheshwari states that the decree will not be executed till 30th April, 1990 subject to an undertaking on usual terms being filed in this Court within four weeks from today. If the undertaking is not filed, the decree shall become executable forthwith. G.N. Petition dismissed.

p. 122, margin A