Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: chennai Year: 2001 Page 1 of about 76 results (0.036 seconds)

Apr 02 2001 (HC)

K. Sadasivam and Another Vs. B. Harikrishnan

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-02-2001

Reported in : (2001)2MLJ300

..... injunction.4. mr. a. venkatesan, learned counsel for the respondent would submitted that it was only after the dispute that the appellants came into possession that too because of the mediation by the police and he would vehemently argue that the appellants having projected a case of sublease right through the trial court and the appellate court cannot now abandon it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 2001 (HC)

Sujatha Christiana Vs. C. Thomas

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-16-2001

Reported in : AIR2002Mad6

..... the reply notice that the petitioner is ill-treating the respondent and that the respondent was treated as a slave and that even after repeated request of the respondent and mediators, the petitioner has not turned up to see the child and that in spite of these things, the respondent is ready and willing to live with the petitioner. r.w ..... the husband's house and that she was taken by the petitioner in a taxi and left near the house of her parents. regarding the mediation, it is alleged by the respondent that the petitioner insisted the mediators that the respondent would be taken back if her father pays rs.50,000/- as dowry. regarding the stand taken in ex. a-10 ..... information. but the petitioner never sent any reply. now the temporary post was made permanent and the respondent is working at csi higher secondary school, james town. the respondent sent mediators for re-union. but the petitioner informed the mediators that the respondent would be taken back if her father pays rs. 50,000/- as dowry. while the process of ..... mediations were going, the petitioner issued notice for restitution of conjugal rights. on receipt of the notice, the respondent replied consenting to go back with the petitioner. but unfortunately the respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 2001 (HC)

Augustine and anr. Vs. Kunjamma Kuriakose and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Aug-06-2001

Reported in : AIR2001Mad480

..... the conspiracy also; that when the first plaintiff asked about the same, there was no reaction on the part of the defendants; that even the attempts for reconciliation, compromise or mediation or counselling through the lawyer also did not fructify; that the second plaintiff had no other alternative than to issue a notice stating all the circumstances, as found under ex .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2001 (HC)

Jeyaraj C. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-19-2001

Reported in : (2002)IILLJ926Mad

..... application was dismissed. thereafter, he raised an industrial dispute before the government vide his letter dated november 28, 1994. the conciliation officer found it not possible to bring about any mediation. therefore a claim was filed on march 6, 1995 and the same was taken on file as i.d. no. 49 of 1995.4. the labour court framed two issues .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 25 2001 (HC)

K. Jagannathan Vs. A.M. Vasudevan Chettiar and 12 Others

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-25-2001

Reported in : AIR2001Mad184; (2001)1MLJ614

..... arrangement effected by their brothers-in-law by a document dated 7.5.1977 and written and duly signed by all the 3 brothers and attested by 2 of 3 mediators. after deliberation and after thorough discussion, each of the three brothers effected a division of immovable and other properties allotted as per family arrangement again among the members of the ..... a division of partnership firm assets andliabilities, cash etc., and this was accepted by all the three brothers by giving their consent in writing on 2.2.1977 to the mediators. the site and building of sri murugan flour, paddy rice mill were joint family properties. but machineries belong to a.r.m. sons firm. in effecting a division among the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2001 (HC)

K.S. Mothilal Vs. K.S. Kasimaris Ceramique (P.) Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-19-2001

Reported in : [2004]50SCL116(Mad)

..... names of other persons. but those suits were dismissed. the business organisation of the company cannot be said to have been destroyed, merely because the brokers who were acting as mediators in carrying out the business between the members had been discharged and their accounts settled. the services of the brokers could again be secured. the company could always restart the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 2001 (HC)

B.V. Srinivasan Vs. B.V. Tulasiraman

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-13-2001

Reported in : (2001)1MLJ702

..... to render an account for profits. the plaintiff is entitled to a sum of rs. 2,000. the plaintiff and the first defendant could not settle the matter amicably. the mediators intervened to settle the dispute, but it could not be settled. hence, the plaintiff has come forward with the suit for partition and separate possession of his 2/3rd share .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2001 (HC)

S. Muthurajan and 3 Others Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Its Sec ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-04-2001

Reported in : (2001)3MLJ357

order1. in all the writ petitions, the issue involved is one and the same. hence, all the writ petitions are dealt with by this common order.2. the petitioners have challenged the land acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents issued under section 4(1) of the land acquisition act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') in no. 879, housing and urban development department dated 28.5.91 and published in tamil nadu government gazette dated 19.6.91. according to the petitioners, they have purchased the lands by registered sale deeds on 8.2.89 and the mutation was effected on 30.3.89 and pattas also were granted. however, in the said notification, the names of the petitioners have not been shown and they were not given opportunity to participate in the enquiry conducted under section 5-a of 'the act' by issuing notice of section 5-a enquiry. they came to know of the land acquisition proceedings only when they were served with the notice dated 21.7.94 under section 12(2) of 'the act'. hence, they pray for quashing of the land acquisition proceedings.3. mr. m. kandasamy, learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that in the absence of the names of the petitioners shown in the notification issued under section 4(1) of 'the act' and the failure of the respondents to give opportunity to the petitioners to participate in the 5-a enquiry, the entire land acquisition proceedings are vitiated.4. on the other hand, the learned additional government pleader on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 2001 (HC)

A. Sarabanu Vs. A.M.A. Asmathullah (Died) by His L.Rs. and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-24-2001

Reported in : (2001)3MLJ408

f.m. ibrahim kalifulla, j.1. the second plaintiff is the appellant. the appellant and the 12th respondent failed o.s. no. 100 of 1978 on the file of the subordinate judge. tirunelveli on 25.3.1978 for partition and separate possession of the plaintiffs 13/24th share in the suit schedule properties and for directing the first respondent herein to pay the plaintiffs 13/24th share on the future mesne profits from the date of plaint till the date of partition of their share.2. as per the plant averments, the suit properties comprising of two houses, originally belonged to one hameeda who was the first wife of the first defendant and who left two daughters namely the appellant herein and one other daughter by name firoz banu. the first plaintiff/12th respondent herein is one of the sisters of late hameeda. smt.hameeda had one other sister by name lateefa who died in 1972. the respondents 5 to 9 are the heirs of lateefa. on the death of late smt. hameeda, the suit properties devolved upon the first respondent herein to an extent of 1/24th share, the sister lateefa to an extent of 1/24th share, the first plaintiff/12th respondent herein to an extent of 1/24th share, the appellant, the second plaintiff to an extent of 1/3rd share and her sister firoz banu for another 1/3rd share. according to the appellant, her sister firoz banu executed a registered release deed on 19.2.1968 relinquishing her share in the suit schedule property in favour of the appellant and the first respondent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 22 2001 (HC)

Subramaniyan and Others Vs. Vijayarani and Others

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jan-22-2001

Reported in : (2001)2MLJ444

order1. the unsuccessful defendants 2 to 4 in of 1988, the unsuccessful d-2 and d-3 in of 1988 and the unsuccessful plaintiffs in of 1996 on the file of the additional district munsif no. thiruvannamalai, preferred of 1998, of 1998 and of 1998 respectively and all the three appeals were dismissed on 25.3.1999 confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court and aggrieved against this, they have come forward with the present second appeals.2. the case in brief for disposal of all the appeals is as follows:the plaintiffs in 118 of 1998 filed a suit for declaration of title and for consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants and their men from interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property. the schedule mentioned property originally belonged to d-l. the adjoined house on the eastern side bearing door no. 13-a originally constituted one single house bearing door no. 13. d-l had 2 sons namely kuppusamy and subramani (d-2). the 1st plaintiff is the legally wedded wife of kuppusamy and the plaintiffs 2 to 5 were born to them out of the wedlock. even during the lifetime of kuppusamy and subramani, there was family arrangement since kuppusamy married the first plaintiff belonging to a different community. the house property was divided into 2 equal shares and the eastern half to the 2nd defendant and they were also put in possession of their respective shares .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //