Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1952 Page 1 of about 23 results (0.106 seconds)

Dec 17 1952 (SC)

Strawboard Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Gutta Mill Workers' Union

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-17-1952

Reported in : AIR1953SC95; (1953)ILLJ186SC; (1953)IMLJ427(SC); [1953]4SCR439

das, j. 1. this appeal has been filed with the special leave granted by this court on may 10, 1951. by the order granting such leave the appeal has been restricted to one point only, namely, 'whether the government of uttar pradesh had the power to extend the time for making the award ex post facto, i.e., after the time limit originally fixed therefore had expired.' 2. there is no dispute as to the facts. an industrial dispute having arisen between the appellant company and its employees, by labour department notification no. 637(st)/xviii-53(st)/50 dated february 18, 1950, the governor of uttar pradesh was pleased, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 read with section 4 of the u.p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (u.p. act no. xxviii of 1947), to refer the said dispute to the labour commissioner, u.p., or a conciliation officer of the state government nominated by him for adjudication on seven several issues specified therein and to direct the adjudicator to conclude the adjudication proceedings and submit his award to the government not later than april 5, 1950. the labour commissioner by his letter no. i.m.r. 14-a nominated shri m. p. vidyarthi, regional conciliation officer, u.p., as the adjudicator in the above dispute with a direction that he should submit his award by march 25, 1950, and that if the proceedings were not likely to be completed within that time he should move the government for extension of time at least a week before the specified date. by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1952 (SC)

State of Madras Vs. C.P. Sarathy and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-05-1952

Reported in : AIR1953SC53; (1953)ILLJ174SC; (1953)IMLJ212(SC); [1953]4SCR334

..... incompetent under clause (c) no doubt, the tribunal adjudicates, whereas the board only mediates. but the adjudication by the tribunal is only an alternative form of settlement of the disputes on a fair and just basis having regard to the prevailing conditions in the ..... of the conciliation machinery provided by the act, and it cannot be said that it is necessary to specify the dispute in referring it to such a body which only mediates between the parties who must, of course, know what they are disputing about. if a reference without particularising the disputes is beyond cavil under clause (a), why should it be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1952 (SC)

Musammat Phool Kuer Vs. Musammat Pem Kuer and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-24-1952

Reported in : AIR1952SC207; (1952)IMLJ823(SC); [1953]1SCR793

mahajan, j.1. the dispute in this appeal concerns the zamindari and house properties owned by shah chiranji lal who died at a young age on the 11th may, 1913, leaving him surviving a widow, mst. khem kuer, and his mother mst. mohan kuer, besides a number of collaterals, indicated in the pedigree table below :- shah pirthi raj______________________________|_____________________________| | || hira lal shah jai| __________|__________________ kisen| | || shah jwala prasad shah sri kishen| (1) khem kuer || (2) phool kuer shah madho lal| | _________|____________| dwarka prasad | || sudarshan lal madsudan lal|||mst. tulsa kuer = shah lal chand = mst. mohan kuer| |mst. ram kuer = kherpal |_________|___________________ || | | |ram lachman kishen lal |chand prasad = mst. umri |||___________________________________________|_________| | | |ganga jamna mst. prem kuer shah chiranjiprasad prasad = lekh raj lal = mst._______|_______ khem kuer| |manohar lal lachmi narain2. mst. khem kuer, the young widow of shah chiranji lal, was murdered on the 28th august, 1919, and mst. mohan kuer, the mother, died on the 5th december, 1932. mst. prem kuer, the respondent in the appeal, claiming herself to be the heir to shah chiranji lal as his sister, brought the suit giving rise to this appeal in the court of the civil judge, agra, against, amongst others, mst. phool kuer, the present appellant, for recovery of possession of the properties of shah chiranji lal and mesne profits. 3. mst. prem kuer joined .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1952 (SC)

Raj Bajrang Bahadur Singh Vs. ThakuraIn Bakhtraj Kuer

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-07-1952

Reported in : AIR1953SC7; (1953)IMLJ108(SC); [1953]4SCR232

mukherjea, j.1. this appeal is on behalf of the plaintiff and is directed against a judgment and decree of the chief court of avadh dated september 4, 1946, affirming, on appeal, those of the civil judge, bahraich, passed in regular suit no. 1 of 1941. 2. to appreciate the controversy between the parties to this appeal it would be necessary to state a few facts. one raja bisheshwar bux singh, the father of the plaintiff and of the defendant's husband, was a taluqdar of oudh, and the estate known as gangwal estate, to which he succeeded in 1925 on the death of the widow of the last holder, is one to which the oudh estates act (i of 1869) applies. raja bisheshwar died on 16th october, 1930, leaving behind him two sons, the elder of whom, bajrang bahadur, is the plaintiff in the present litigation, while the younger, whose name was dhuj singh, has died since then, being survived by his widow bakhtraj kuer, who is the defendant in the suit. shortly before his death raja bisheshwar executed a will dated 11th september, 1929, by which five properties, described in lists a and b attached to the plaint, were bequeathed to dhuj singh, the younger son, by way of making provisions for the maintenance of the said son and his heirs. on the death of raja bisheshwar, the estate went to the plaintiff as his eldest son under the provisions of the oudh estates act and dhuj singh got only the five properties mentioned above under the terms of his father's will. dhuj singh had no issue of his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 1952 (FN)

Railroad Trainmen Vs. Howard

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-09-1952

..... , respectively, by the carrier or carriers and by the employees thereof interested in the dispute." "as we have already pointed out, 2, ninth, after providing for a certification by the mediation board of the particular craft or class representative, states that 'the carrier shall treat with the representative so certified as the representative of the craft or class for the purpose ..... to a judicial remedy to prevent the sacrifice or obliteration of their rights under the act. for no adequate administrative remedy can be afforded by the national railroad adjustment or mediation board. the claims here cannot be resolved by interpretation of a bargaining agreement so as to give jurisdiction to the adjustment board under our holding in slocum v. delaware, l ..... 343 u. s. 772 the district court held that the complaint raised questions which congress by the railway labor act had made subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the national mediation board and the national railroad adjustment board. 72 f.supp. 695. the court of appeals reversed this holding. [ footnote 4 ] it held that the agreement, as construed and acted upon ..... a trainmen's union on the ground that it discriminated against negro "train porters," the district court denied most of the relief prayed for on the ground that the national mediation board and the national railroad adjustment board had exclusive jurisdiction of the dispute under the railway labor act. 72 f.supp. 695. the court of appeals reversed this holding. 191 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 02 1952 (FN)

Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. Vs. Sawyer

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-02-1952

..... property returned on agreement agreement of parties on na- inglewood, calif. 6 fed.reg. 2777 pany with government and ownership of parties to wage increase and tional defense mediation by government of machinery, mate- maintenance of membership. board recommendation. rials and work in progress in plant.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- federal shipbuilding & drydock 8/23/41 1/6/42 ..... 8868. none. (order cites contracts of com- 8/6/41 8/23/41 maintenance off membership national defense mediation co., kearny, n.j. 6 fed.reg. 4349. pany with government and ownership during period of seizure. board recommendation. by government of vessels under con- struction, ..... 27/41 strikers reinstated over replace- agreement of parties on na- 6 fed.reg. 5559. pany with government and ownership ments hired by company prior tional defense mediation by government of facilities in plant.) 9/30/41 10/24/41 to seizure. board recommendation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [343 u.s. 621] 2. between pearl harbor and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1952 (SC)

Dhiyan Singh and anr. Vs. Jugal Kishore and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-22-1952

Reported in : AIR1952SC145; [1952]1SCR478

bose, j.1. this is a litigation between two branches a family whose common ancestor was one megh raj singh the family tree is a follows : megh raj singh--------------|-------------| |jawahar singh madan singh| |shanker lal (d. 1884) brijlal (d. 1890)| _____|___________daughter : mst. mohan dei | |(d. oct. 1929) kishan lal mahabir prasadhusband narain das (d. 21-5-1940) (d. 1921)_______|______ ___|_____________ || | | | |shri kishan das mst. deoki jugal kishore amar nath |(d. march 1929) (d. 1894) plff 1. plff 2. |__|_______________ || | ___________________|dhiyan singh jai bhagwan singh | |deft. 1 deft. 2 ghas ram onkar prasad2. the dispute is about property which, according to the plaintiffs, formed part of shanker lal's estate. the plaintiffs state that the two branches of family were separate at all material times; that on shanker lal's death in 1884 his daughter mst. mohan dei (the defendants' grandmother) succeeded to a limited estate. the reversion opened out on her death in october 1929 and the plaintiff are entitled as the next reversioners, for mst. mohan dei's son shri kishan das predeceased her. 3. the defendants admits that shanker lal was separate from the other branch of the family. they divide the property which their grandmother mst. mohan dei possessed into two categories. first, there was property which they say belonged to her. these are properties which according to them, she purchased or obtained under the mortgages in her own right. next, there were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 1952 (SC)

Mohammad YasIn Vs. the Town Area Committee, Jalalabad and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-27-1952

Reported in : AIR1952SC115; [1952]1SCR572

das j.1. this is an application under article 32 of the constitution made by mohammad yasin for the protection of his fundamental right of carrying on his business which, according to him, is being infringed by the respondent. 2. the case sought to be made out in the petition may be shortly stated as follows :- the petitioner is a wholesale dealer in fresh vegetables and fruits at jalabad in the district of muzaffarnagar in the state of uttar pradesh and claims to have been carrying on such business for the last 7 years or so at his shop situated in the town of jalalabad. the vegetable and fruit growers used to bring their goods to the town and get them auctioned through any of the vegetable dealers of their choice who used to charge one anna in the rupee as and by way of commission. the respondent committee which is a town area committee has framed certain bye-laws under which all right and power to levy or collect commission on sale or purchase of vegetables and fruits within the limits of the town vest in the respondent committee or any other agency appointed by the committee and no one except the respondent committee is authorised to deal in wholesale vegetables and fruits and collect the commission thereof in any place and in any event. the respondent committee has by auction given the contract for sale of vegetables and fruits and for collecting the commission for the current year to the respondent bishamber who, it is alleged, has never dealt in vegetables and fruits. .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1952 (SC)

The State of Bihar Vs. Maharajadhiraja Sir Kameshwar Singh of Darbhang ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-02-1952

Reported in : [1952]1SCR889

patanjali sastri, c.j.1. these appeals and petitions which fall into three groups raise the issue of the constitutional validity of three state enactments called the bihar land reforms act, 1950 (bihar act xxx of 1950), the madhya pradesh abolition of proprietary rights (estates, mahals, alienated lands) act, 1950 (no. i of 1951), and the uttar pradesh zamindari abolition and land reforms act, 1950 (u. p. act no. i of 1951) (hereinafter referred to as the bihar act, the madhya pradesh act and the uttar pradesh act, respectively). 2. the common aim of these statutes, generally speaking, is to abolish zamindaries and other proprietary estates and tenures in the three states aforesaid, so as to eliminate the intermediaries by means of compulsory acquisition of their rights and interests, and to bring the raiyats and other occupants of lands in those areas into direct relation with the government. the constitutionality of these acts having been challenged in the respective state high courts on various grounds, the bihar act was declared unconstitutional and void on the ground that it contravened article 14 of the constitution, the other grounds of attacks being rejected, while the other two acts were adjudged constitutional and valid. the appeals are directed against these decisions. petitions have also been filed in this court under article 32 by certain other zamindars seeking determination of the same issues. the common question which arises for consideration in all these .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1952 (SC)

Visweshwar Rao Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-02-1952

Reported in : AIR1952SC252; [1952]1SCR1020

mahajan, j. petition no. 166 of 1951. 1. this is a petition under article 32 of the constitution of india by shri visheswar rao, zamindar and proprietor of ahiri zamindari, an estate as defined in section 2 (3) of the central provinces land revenue act, ii of 1917, and situated in tehsil sironcha, district chanda (madhya pradesh), for the enforcement of his fundamental right to property under article 31(1) of the constitution by the issue of an appropriate writ or a direction to the respondent state restraining it from disturbing his possession of the estate, and eighty malguzari villages situate in the garchiroli tehsil of the same district. 2. the petitioner and his ancestors have been owing and enjoying these properties in full proprietary right for several generations past. on the 5th april, 1950, the madhya pradesh legislative assembly enacted an act called the madhya pradesh abolition of proprietary right act. the act received the assent of the president of india on the 22nd january, 1951, and was published in the madhya pradesh gazette on the 26th january, 1951, as act i of 1951. by a notification in a gazette extraordinary issued on the 27th january, 1951, the madhya pradesh government fixed 31st march 1951, as the date of vesting of the estates under section 3 of the act. the petitioner thus was to lose his estate and lands on the 31st march 1951. on the 9th march, 1951, i.e. before the vesting date, he presented the present application to this court for the issue of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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