Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: chhattisgarh Year: 2003 Page 1 of about 9 results (0.009 seconds)

Jan 21 2003 (HC)

Prem Singh Chauhan and anr. Vs. L.M. Pandey

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Jan-21-2003

Reported in : 2003(2)MPHT38(CG)

..... effort has to be made to bring about an amicable settlement between the parties but if conciliation or mediation or judicial settlement is not possible, despite efforts being made, the case will ultimately go to trial. 3. having heard counsel for the ..... conciliation act, 1996 will apply and that case will go outside the stream of the court but resorting to conciliation or judicial settlement or mediation with a view to settle the dispute would not ipso facto take the case outside the judicial system. all that this means is that ..... as may be prescribed. section 89(2)(d), therefore, contemplates appropriate rules being framed with regard to mediation. 10. in certain countries of the world where adr has been successful to the extent that over 90 per cent of the cases are settled ..... date. the alternative dispute resolution (adr) mechanism as contemplated by section 89 is arbitration or conciliation or judicial settlement including settlement through lok adalat or mediation. sub-section (2) of section 89 refers to different acts in relation to arbitration, conciliation or settlement that the parties shall follow the procedure ..... 1987 (39 of 1987) shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a lok adalat under the provisions of that act. (d) for mediation, the court shall effect a compromise between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed.' 2. counsel for the parties relied on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2003 (HC)

Smt. Chandra Kiran Choudhary and ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Apr-29-2003

Reported in : 2003(3)MPHT66(CG)

..... vide annexure p-3. in this statement she has categorically admitted that even during the pendency of criminal case the parties were in talking terms and either directly or through mediators and negotiation for finding a solution acceptable to both the parties was going on. she further admits that in the course of proceedings under section 9 of the hindu marriage .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 2003 (HC)

Madan Singh and ors. Vs. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Dec-19-2003

Reported in : 2004(4)MPHT28(CG)

fakhruddin, j.1. the appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30-7-2003 passed in civil appeal no. 12-a/2003 by third additional district judge, bilaspur arising out of the judgment and decree dated 30-6-2003 passed by the third civil judge, class-11, bilaspur in civil suit no. 242-a/2002.2. briefly stated the facts of the case that the respondent had filed a suit for eviction before the trial court on the ground that the respondent/ plaintiff is the owner/landlord and the appellants are tenants of the said premises/non- residential accommodation. it was stated that the let out accommodation was non-residential. the area has been shown in the plaint. the respondent contended that he purchased the property through registered sale deed on 17-5-2001 and the appellant no. 1 was tenant. the eviction of the accommodation was sought on the ground of bona fide requirement, which was in possession of the tenant. it was submitted that the respondent and his wife both are advocates an they do not have any other non-residential accommodation of their own in the city. the tenant denied the claim and contended that the requirement shown by the plaintiff is not bona fide as alternative accommodation is available to him.3. the learned trial court framed 6 issues. so far as sub-tenancy is concerned, the trial court held that it was not proved. the tenant is using the premises for immoral and un- lawful activities. the bona fide issue is found to be proved. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2003 (HC)

Bhagirathi Nirmalkar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Jul-31-2003

Reported in : AIR2005Chh8

orderfakhruddin, j.1. by this petition under article 226/227 of the constitution of india, the petitioner has challenged the validity of section 21 of the chhattisgarh panchayat raj avam gram swaraj adhiniyam, 1993. originally this act was made by madhya pradesh and after reorganisation of the state of chhattisgarh it has been adopted by this state.2. the ground for challenge as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said provision is violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. in this connection, learned counsel referred to para 5.18 of the petition, whereby it is hypothetically contended that the sarpanch is elected directly whereas panchas are elected from the wards and these panchas, who have been elected, do not have right to remove the sarpanch, who has been elected from his own constituency.3. section 21 of the aforesaid act is pertinent, which reads as under :'21. no confidence motion against sarpanch and up sarpanch -- (1) on a motion of no confidence being passed by the gram panchayat by a resolution passed by majority of not less than three fourth of the panchas present and voting and such majority is more than two third of the total number of panchas constituting the gram panchayat for the time being, the sarpanch or up-sarpanch against whom such motion is passed, shall cease to hold office forthwith.(2) notwithstanding contained in this act or the rules made thereunder, a sarpanch or an up-sarpanch shall not preside over a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 10 2003 (HC)

Raymond Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Sep-10-2003

Reported in : AIR2004Chh12; 2004(1)MPHT33(CG)

order1. the petitioners have preferred this writ petition under article 226/227 read with articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the constitution of india by which they have challenged the order dated 25th july, 2003 passed by the board of revenue, chhattisgarh at bilaspur. the board of revenue has held that the board of revenue being the chief controlling revenue authority has every jurisdiction to entertain a revision application under section 56(4) of the indian stamp act, 1899 (for short 'stamp act') as amended by the state of madhya pradesh, against the order dated 16-1-2001 passed by the collector of the stamp, district janjgir champa under section 32 of the act after following the procedure as envisaged under section 31 of the indian stamp act, 1899.2. the petitioner's petition is that the petitioner no. 1 established a cement division at gopalnagar, district janjgir champa in the erstwhile state of madhya pradesh in the year 1982. the govt. of madhya pradesh welcomed the setting up of the said cement division and granted several concessions to the petitioner no. 1. the petitioner no. 1 also generated large revenue for the state of madhya pradesh and central government from the date it commenced operations by payment of sales tax, stamp duty, excise, royalty and cess on limestone, electricity charges etc.3. the petitioners further mentioned that they also actively contributed for development of the area where they established the cement division and it's around area. in the year .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 28 2003 (HC)

Accheram Navarang Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Apr-28-2003

Reported in : 2004(1)MPHT17(CG)

orderfakhruddin, j.1. this batch of petitions has been filed by the petitioners pursuant to the creation of states under the m.p. reorganisation act, 2000. the disputes relate to the allocation of the employees of the state government. it is contended that under the provisions of the act and policy framed by and or at the behest of the central government, options were invited. it is submitted that final allocation has been made and aggrieved by the same these petitions have been filed before this court claiming reliefs mentioned therein.2. learned counsel for all the petitioners stated at the bar that in the present batch of petitions, none of the petitioners is in judicial service or in the service of vidhan sabha. they all are employees of the departments other than the above said departments. it is also stated that some cases are listed at motion hearing and they are being heard analogously with consent of the parties finally, as copies have been supplied and the acknowledgments have been obtained.3. shri murthy submitted that central government has filed the return in w.p. no. 2353/2002 and prayed that the same be adopted in all connected cases, which was not opposed and allowed.4. shri sanjay k. agrawal, dy. advocate general, submitted that state has filed detailed return in writ petitions no. 2215/2002 (dr. r.k. tiwari v. state), no. 2547/2002 (bhim rao v. union of india) and no. 2427/2002 (shiva sharan sharma v. union of india). he further submitted that the same be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 06 2003 (HC)

Hemendra Bhai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Jan-06-2003

Reported in : [2003(97)FLR402]; (2003)IILLJ645CG; 2003(2)MPHT1(CG)

orderk.h.n. kuranga, c.j. 1. in this petition filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, one of the partners of the firm, namely, m/s. dayalal meghji & co. prays for quashing of the proceedings in criminal case no. 872 of 1999 (state of m.p. v. hemendra bhai s/o late daya bhai manik) pending on the file of judicial magistrate first class, raipur. 2. few facts necessary for the disposal of the petition are these:-- the applicant is the partner of the firm m/s. dayalal meghji & co. (hereinafter referred to as 'the firm'), a firm registered under the partnership act, 1932 having its principal place of business at malviya road, raipur. the firm carries on business of manufacturing and selling of badshahi farmaish bidi, popularly known as 345 bidi since last several decades. 3. the supreme court while deciding writ petition no. 465 of 1986 (m.c. mehta v. state of tamil nadu and others), reported in (1996) 7 scc 756, has given certain directions. as per the said directions of the supreme court in the said case, on 4-7-1997 a survey had been got conducted by the labour department of the state. a surveyor named s.s. shukla conducted the inspection of the house of one santosh sahu, resident of village datrangi, bhatapara, district raipur and found that ku. kevra, aged about 11 years was making bidis. on being asked, she told him that the bidis were made for the firm. thereafter he filled up the prescribed form no. 1 and submitted a report to the assistant labour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 2003 (HC)

Yashwant Kumar Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and ors.

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Sep-12-2003

Reported in : 2004(2)MPHT79(CG)

orderl.c. bhadoo, j.1. in this batch of writ petitions the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the provision of clause (m) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of chhattisgarh panchayat raj avam gram swaraj adhiniyam, 1993 (for short 'the adhiniyam'). the relevant provisions are extracted hereunder :'section 36.- disqualification for being office bearer of panchayat :--36 (1) no person shall be eligible to be an office bearer of panchayat who *** *** *** :(m) : has more than two living children one of whom is born on or after the 26th day of january 2001.(2) if any person having been elected (*** ***) as an office bearer of panchayat--(a) subsequently becomes subject to any of the disqualification mentioned in sub-section (1) and such disqualification is not removable or being removable is not removed (or becomes office bearer concealing his disqualification for it which has not been questioned and decided by any election petition under section 122).*** *** *** ***he shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), cease to be such office bearer and his office shall become vacant.(3) in every case the authority competent to decide whether a vacancy has occurred under sub-section (2) shall be collector in respect of gram panchayat and janpad panchayat and commissioner in respect of jila parishad who may give his decision either on an application made to him by any person or on his own motion. until, the collector or the commissioner, as the case may be, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 2003 (HC)

Munna Khan Vs. State of M.P. (Now Chhattisgarh)

Court : Chhattisgarh

Decided on : Mar-27-2003

Reported in : 2004CriLJ525; 2003(2)MPHT29(CG)

orderl.c. bhadoo, j.1. this criminal revision has been preferred by accused/applicant munna khan being aggrieved by the judgment dated 8th march, 1994, passed by the seventh additional sessions judge, raipur, in criminal appeal no. 139/91 affirming the judgment dated 28th november, 1991, in criminal case no. 1023/89, passed by the judicial magistrate, first class, raipur, by which he convicted the accused/applicant under section 304a of the indian penal code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay a fine of rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.2. the undisputed relevant facts for the disposal of this criminal revision are that on 29th october, 1984, deceased-roshanlal gupta along with complainant-jamuna prasad and other passengers boarded the truck bearing registration no. cpt/2598 at village bhesmudi to travel by truck up to village kharora. the driver of the said truck was the present accused/applicant. after the truck reached village kharora, the truck stopped and the passengers started getting down from the truck. while deceased roshanlal gupta was alighting from the truck, his full pant was entangled with the side iron hook of the truck and before he could alight from the truck, the truck moved forward and in the process, the deceased came beneath the rear wheel of the truck and he was crushed by the rear wheel of the truck and died at the spot. a report to that effect, ex. p-1 was .....

Tag this Judgment!


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