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 PUNJAB & ORS. versus G.S. RANDHAWA

Decided
3 June 2010
Judges listed
B.S. CHAUHAN (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[2010] 7 S.C.R. 342 · 2010 INSC 339

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. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

1

We have heard Ms. Rachna Joshi lssar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. In spite of notice, respondent did not enter appearance. We requested Sti. Vijay Hansaria, learned senior counsel for the respondent, A to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae.

pp. 342–343, margin G

2

For the reasons recorded in Civil Appeal No. 5292 of 2004 (Smt. Fuljit Kaur Vs. State of Punjab & Ors.) decided on this date, the appeal stands allowed. Judgment and Order of the High Court dated 06.12.2006 is set aside and the Demand Notice is upheld. The appellant is entitled to make recovery in accordance with law. RP. Appeal allowed.

p. 343