Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1969 Page 5 of about 74 results (0.072 seconds)

Apr 16 1969 (SC)

Shankar Ramchandra Abhyankar Vs. Krishnaji Dattatreya Bapat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-16-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC1; (1970)72BOMLR179; 1970MPLJ127(SC); (1969)2SCC74; [1970]1SCR322

a.n. grover, j.1. this is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the division bench of the bombay high court. the only question for decision is whether the high court could interfere under articles 226 & 227 of the constitution with the order of the appellate court in proceedings under the bombay rents, hotel and lodging house rates control act, 1947, hereinafter called the 'act', when a petition for revision under section 115, civil procedure code, against the same order had been previously dismissed by a single judge of that court.2. the appellant is the owner of a house in poona. the respondent, who was a teacher, was the tenant of a block of four rooms on the first floor of the house. in 1958 he was transferred to another town wai where he was allotted suitable residential accommodation. his son, however, stayed on in poona as he was studying there. the appellant filed a suit in the court of judge, small causes, under the provisions of the act for possession of the suit premises, inter alia, on the ground that the respondent had acquired suitable accommodation elsewhere. the position taken up by the respondent was that his son was required to stay on in poona and for that reason it could not said that the had acquired suitable residence at wai. moreover he had gone away from poona only temporarily and on his return the premises would be required for his own use. the trial court held that only a part of the premises which were required by the son should be vacated. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 1969 (SC)

V.O. Tractoroexport, Moscow Vs. Tarapore and Company and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-28-1969

Reported in : AIR1971SC1; (1971)IIMLJ44(SC); (1969)3SCC562; [1970]3SCR53

a.n. grover, j.1. these connected appeals which involve points of importance and interest in international commercial arbitration arise out of a suit instituted on the original side of the high court of judicature at madras by m/s. tarapore & co. against m/s. v. o. tractoroexport, moscow.2. initially the claim was for a permanent injunction restraining the russian firm from realizing the proceeds of a letter of credit opened on june 9, 1965 with the bank of india ltd., madras, which had also been impleaded as a defendant. subsequently by an amendment of the plaint the plaintiff has confined relief to recovery of damages.3. the facts chronologically are as follows: a contract was entered into on february 2, 1965, between the indian and the russian firms for the supply of earth-moving machinery for a value of rs. 66,09,372.00. the machinery was required by the indian firm for executing the work of excavation of a feeder canal as part of the farakka barrage project. on june 9, 1965. the indian firm opened a letter of credit with the bank of india ltd., for the entire value of the machinery in favour of the russian firm. the consignments started arriving at calcutta in october 1965. on february 22, 1966, the indian firm wrote to the russian firm saying that there was something wrong with the design and working of motorised scrapers which had been supplied and which formed one of the items of machinery covered by the contract. one june 6, 1966 came the devaluation of the indian .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1969 (SC)

Dhian Singh Vs. Municipal Board, Saharanpur

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-31-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC318; 1970CriLJ492; (1969)2SCC371; [1970]1SCR736

k.s. hegde j.1. two contentions advanced in this appeal by special leave are (1) that the appeal filed by the municipal board, saharanpur before the high court of allahabad under section 417(3) of the criminal procedure code was not maintainable in law and (2) the accused could not have been convicted on the strength of the certificate of the public analyst annexed to the complaint. the high court rejected both these contentions.2. the material facts relating to this appeal are these : the accused in this case is proprietor of khalsa tea stall situated in court road, saharanpur. among other things, he was selling coloured sweets. on suspicion that the sweets sold by him were adulterated, the food inspector, municipal board, saharanpur purchased from the accused for examination some coloured sweets under a yaddasht on may 31, 1963 and sent a portion of the same to the public analyst of the government of u.p. for examination.the public analyst submitted his report on june 24, reads :see rule 7(3)report by the public analystreport no. 11652.i hereby certify that i, dr. r.s. srivastava, publicanalyst for uttar pradesh, duly appointed under theprovisions of the prevention of food adulteration act,1954, received on the 4th day of june 1963 from thefood inspector c/o medical officer of health, municipalboard, saharanpur, a sample of coloured sweet(patisa) prepared in vanaspati no. 264 for analysis,properly sealed and fastened and that i found the sealintact and unbroken.i .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 1969 (SC)

Satwara Chhagan Karsan and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-13-1969

Reported in : (1969)3SCC203

s.m. sikri, j.1. eight persons, namely: (1) satwara chhagan karsan, hereinafter referred to as accused 1, (2) satwara makan karamshi, hereinafter referred to as accused 2, (3) satwara prema khangar, hereinafter referred to as accused 3, (4) satwara rava karshan, hereinafter referred to as accused 4, (5) satwara ramji chhagan, hereinafter referred to as accused 5, (6) satwara popat khangar, hereinafter referred to as accused 6, (7) satwara naran karamshi, hereinafter referred to as accused 7, and (8) satwara rai rambha laxman, hereinafter referred to as accused 8, were committed to sessions on various charges under sections 447, 147, 148, 302, 307, 326, 324, 325 and 34 and 149 ipc. in brief the prosecution case was that these eight persons alongwith three others assaulted a number of persons on january 10, 1965 at about 7 a.m. at village naya amrapur, taluka halvad, district surendranagar, as a result of which harji amba died having received six injuries including incised and penetrating wounds. bhikha manji received three injuries, two transverse incised wounds and one oblique penetrating wound; premji shiva received three injuries, two transverse incised wounds and one transverse wheal mark; talshi baval received three injuries, one incised wound on the head, an injury on left auricle of left ear, and diffused swelling and deformity of left forearm; thakershi bhikha received as many as nine injuries including incised wounds and penetrating wounds; and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1969 (SC)

R. Kempraj Vs. Barton Son and Co.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-29-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC1872; (1969)2SCC594; [1970]2SCR140

1. this is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the mysore high court in which the question involved is whether an option given to a lessee to get the lease, which is initially for a period of 10 years, renewed after every 10 years is hit by the rule of perpetuity and is void.2. the respondent entered into a deed of lease on october 26, 1951 with the appellant in respect of premises nos. 8 & 9, mahatma gandhi road, (south parade), civil station, bangalore. it was stipulated that the lease would be for a period of 10 years in the first instance with effect from november 1, 1961 'with an option to the lessee to renew the same as long as desired as provided'. clauses 9 and 10 which are material may be reproduced:9. the lessee shall have the right to renew the lease of the scheduled premises at the end of the present period of ten years herein secured on the same rental of rs. 450/per month, for a similar period and for further similar periods thereafter on the same terms and conditions as are set forth herein; and the lessee shall be permitted and shall have the right to remain in occupation of the premises on the same terms and conditions for any further periods of ten years as long as they desire to do so.10. the lessor shall not raise any objection whatsoever to the lessee exercising his option to renew the lease for any further periods of ten years on the same terms and conditions as long as they desire to be in occupation, provided that the lessee shall not have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1969 (SC)

Nathulal Vs. Phoolchand

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-16-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC546; 1970(0)BLJR790; 1970MhLJ674(SC); (1969)3SCC120; [1970]2SCR854

j.c. shah, j. 1. nathulal-appellant in this appeal-was, the owner of a ginning factory constructed on a plot of agricultural land bearing khasra no. 259/1. the land stood entered in the revenue records in the name of chittarmal-brother of nathulal. on february 26, 1951, nathulal agreed to sell to phoolchand the land and the ginning factory for rs. 43,011/-. he received in part payment rs. 22,011/-, and put phoolchand in possession of the property. phoolchand agreed to pay the balance on or before may 7, 1951. the terms of the agreement were reduced to writing in counter-part and were duly signed by the parties.2. on the plea that phoolchand had failed to pay on the due date the balance of price, nathulal rescinded the contract on october 8, 1951 and commenced an action in may, 1954 in the court of the district judge, nimar, for a decree for possession of the land and the factory and for mesne profits from the date of delivery till possession was restored to him, alleging that phoolchand was a trespasser because he had contrary to the express terms of the agreement made default in payment of the balance of the purchase price on or before may 7, 1951. phoolchand contended that nathulal had failed to get the name of chittarmal 'deleted' from the revenue record according to the terms of the agreement, that he, phoolchand, was ready and willing to pay the balance of rs. 21,000/-, that he had sent a telegram on may 7, 1951, offering to pay the balance against execution of the sale .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1969 (SC)

The Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. the Chief Commissioner, ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-11-1969

Reported in : AIR1971SC344; [1970(20)FLR33]; (1969)3SCC925; [1970]2SCR348

1. this is an appeal from a judgment of the punjab high court (circuit bench, delhi) involving the question of the validity of 7 read with rule 5 and its schedule of the delhi factories rules 1950 made under section 112 of the factories act 1948, hereinafter called the act. the impugned rules relate to the grant of a licence for a factory and renewal thereof, the fees being prescribed by the schedule to rule 5.2. the delhi cloth and general mills co. ltd. operates within the delhi area a number of industrial establishments which are factories within the meaning of section 2(m) of the act. the company has to pay a total sum of rs. 12,775.00 as annual licence fee for all its factories in delhi, the fees being calculated according to the horse power and the maximum number of workers to be employed on any day during the year as given in the schedule. the maximum fee that is payable is rs. 2,000/- for a factory. the factories can be run only after registration and under a licence granted under the act and the rules on payment of the prescribed fee. the licence is renewed every year under rule 7 on payment of the same fee which is paid at the time of the granting of the licence. every licence granted or renewed remains in force up to december 31, of the year for which it is granted or renewed. in january 963 the company filed a petition under article 226 and 227 of the constitution in the high court challenging the validity of the rules under which the licence fee for renewal of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 1969 (SC)

Sheikh Abdul Sattar Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-10-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC479; (1970)3SCC845

i.d. dua, j.1. the appellant in this appeal with certificate from the judgment and decree of the allahabad high court, had in february 1944 submitted a tender for the supply of meat to the army authorities at allahabad and banaras. this tender was accepted in march 1944 for the supply of meat for one year from april 1, 1944 to march 31, 1945. the formal acceptance was conveyed on may 18, 1944. the controversy centers round the condition contained in para 51 of the special conditions for the meat supply. this condition reads as under:51. (a) no enhancement of rates will be considered in the case of contracts concluded for periods of 3 or 6 months. (b) in the case of annual contracts, revision of rates i.e. increases or decreases will be provided for, but no revision will be considered or allowed within six months of the commencement of the contract.(c) rates for annual contracts will be subject to review, according to the rise or fall of market rates by referees appointed by government, the reviewingtribunal for contracts to consist of the deputy commissioner or his representative, the c. r. i. a. s. c. or his representative and the local purchase officer(military). the three members will constitute a quorum.the contractor will attend to present his case, but will not be a member of the tribunal.the final recommendation in all cases reviewed, shall rest with the officer sanctioning the contract.2. on september 4, 1944 the appellant wrote a letter to c. r. i. a. s. c. ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1969 (SC)

JaIn Bros. and ors. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-18-1969

Reported in : AIR1970SC778; [1970]77ITR107(SC); (1969)3SCC311; [1970]3SCR253

a.n. grover, j. 1. this is an appeal by certificate from a judgment of the delhi high court dismissing a petition under articles 226 and 227 of the constitution.2. appellant no. 1 which carries on business in delhi was registered as a firm under section 26a of the indian income tax act, 1922. appellants 2 to 5 are its partners. on may 26, 1960, a notice under section 22(2) of that act was served on the firm calling upon it to submit a return of its income for the assessment year 1960-61 (accounting year ending october 31, 1959). the return had to be filed within 35 days of the service of the notice. it was not filed. further notices were served on two occasions. it filed a return on november 18, 1961, showing income of rs. 3,55,566. the income tax officer completed the assessment on november 23, 1964, computing the total income of the firm at rs. 4,75,368. in view of the amendment made by the finance act of 1956 in section 23(5) of the act of 1922 the tax payable by the firm as also the amount to be included in the income of each partner was determined. on the same date i.e. november 23, 1964, the income tax officer issued a notice under section 271 read with section 274 of the income tax act 1961 calling upon the firm to show cause why an order imposing a penalty should not be passed on account of its failure to furnish the return within time. after considering the explanation submitted by the assessee the income tax officer made an order on november 19, 1966 under clause (a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1969 (SC)

Workmen of Delhi Cloth and General Mills Ltd. Vs. the Management of De ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-17-1969

Reported in : [1970(20)FLR308]; (1972)ILLJ99bSC; (1969)3SCC302; [1970]2SCR886a

i.d. dua, j.1. the workmen of m/s. delhi cloth and general mills, bara hindu rao, delhi, have appealed to this court by special leave from the award of the additional industrial tribunal, delhi dated february 17, 1966 holding that shibban lal was bound by the settlement dated june 9, 1965 and, therefore, there was no industrial dispute on the date of reference which could be referred for adjudication.2. the facts necessary for the purpose of this appeal may now be briefly stated. the chief commissioner, delhi by means of an order dated september 9, 1965 referred the dispute in controversy to the additional industrial tribunal, the order of reference being in the following terms :whereas from a report submitted by the conciliation officer, delhi under section 12(4) of the industrial dispute act, 1947, it appears that an industrial dispute exists between the management of m/s. delhi cloth & general mills, ltd., bara hindu rao, delhi and its workmen and shri shibban lal and the said dispute has been taken up by the d.c.m. (city shop) karamchari union, 1121, chatta madan gopal, maliwara, chandni chowk, delhi.3. before the additional industrial tribunal the management had raised various preliminary objections including the objection that kapra karamchari sangh (hereafter called the sangh) was not competent to take up the case of shri shibban lal, and that the d.c.m. (city shop) karamchari union (hereafter called the union), which had originally taken up the cause of workmen, .....

Tag this Judgment!

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