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

STATE OF KARNATAKA versus MALLINATH AND ORS.

Decided
30 October 1995
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[1995] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 556 · 1995 INSC 645

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.

It is stated in the affidavit filled by Matru Lal Kashyap, clerk of Shri Veerappa, the learned counsel for the petitioner, that on instructions from the Assistant Commissioner, Bijapur, Somawa Patil, the second respondent herein had left behind her son Mallinath who is respondent No. 1 in SLP (C) No. 14220/86 as her legal representative and that since Mallinath is already on record, there is no need to bring him on record separately as legal representative. He is transposed as legal representative. Since he is already representing the estate of his deceased mother Somavva Patil, it is accordingly recorded.

p. 556, margin F

i.-eave granted.

p. 557, margin A

The controversy hinges upon the applicability of section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, 'the Act') as amended by Act 68 of 1984. Since the award of the Collector wa> made much prior to the Amendment Act, the claimants are not entitled to the payment of additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Act.

p. 557, margin A

The appeals are allowed to the above extent and the orders of the High Court and the appellate Court are set aside to that extent. In other respects, the award stands confirmed. No costs. R.P . Appeal allowed.

p. 557, margin B