Karnal Improvement Trust vs Ram Parkash & Ors
- SCC(1996) 8 SCC 269
- Neutral1996 INSC 422
- SCR[1996] 3 SCR 767
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an award by a Tribunal has been set aside by this Court as illegal and non est due to lack of participation by required members, no decree founded on that award can be executed until a fresh award is made in accordance with law. Any amount deposited pending the proceedings is subject to the result of the fresh award that may subsequently be made by the Tribunal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
O R D E R 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.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free