Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1970 Page 1 of about 70 results (0.091 seconds)

Oct 16 1970 (SC)

B.R. Rao Vs. N.G. Ranga

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-16-1970

Reported in : AIR1971SC267; (1970)3SCC576

..... and bus no. aps-1315 to vote for the respondent, that the sub-inspector prepared the statement of the bus conductor, the lorry driver and other persons and that a mediation report' was also recorded in that connection. the respondent denied the allegations. in his additional written statement he also pleaded that there was absence of essential particulars relating to the ..... had seen the incident and had given a report promptly to the sub-inspector of police, and that sub-inspector had detained the motor lorry and bus and got a mediators' report prepared. but the sub-inspector of police to whom the report is alleged to have been made was (though cited as a witness) not examined in the case and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1970 (SC)

Mohd. Ilyas Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-06-1970

Reported in : (1970)3SCC61

k.s. hegde, j.1. the only question that arises for decision in this appeal by special leave is whether the union of india failed to conform to the principles of natural justice while disposing the representation of the appellant made under section 9(2) of the citixenship act, 1955 read with rule 30 of the citizenship rules, 1050.2. according to the appellant, he was born at hapur in meerut district. he was domiciled in that city. in 1949, while he was 15 years' of age, he came to live with his sister at delhi. he continued to live at delhi till march, 1950. in that month there was an outbreak of serious communal disturbances all over northern india. his sister's family being panic stricken left for pakistan. they took the appellant who was a minor at that time to pakistan. but his parents continued to live in india. after sometime the appellant was desirous of coming back to india but he was unable to get the necessary permit. under these circumstances he applied for and obtained a pakistani passport on august 20, 1953, and after obtaining the necessary visa from the indian high commission at karachi, came to india. after the expiry of the period for which visa had been issued to him, the government took steps to deport him to pakistan. at that stage, he made a representation to the government under section 9(2) of the citizenship act contending that he was an indian citizen and as such he could not be deported. in that representation he asked for an opportunity to personally .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 1970 (SC)

The Second Gift Tax Officer, Mangalore Etc. Vs. D.H. Nazareth Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-02-1970

Reported in : [1970]76ITR713a(SC); (1970)1SCC749; [1971]1SCR195

m. hidayatullah, c.j.1. these six appeals by certificate under article 132(1) of the constitution are filed against the decision of the high court of mysore, declaring that parliament had no power to legislate with respect to taxes on gift of lands and buildings. the high court passed a detailed judgment on two of the petitions by which the competence of parliament was challenged and followed its own decision in the other four cases. it is not necessary to give the facts of the six petitions in the high court. as illustrative of the facts involved we may mention on w.p. no. 1077 of 1959. in that case a certain d. h. nazareth, owner of a coffee plantation, made a gift by registered deed, january 22, 1958, of a coffee plantation and other properties in favour of his four sons. the market value of the property was rs. 3,74,080 and the coffee plantation accounted for rs. 3,24,700. gift tax of rs. 35,612/- was demanded. if the coffee plantation was left out of consideration the tax was liable to be reduced by rs. 34,036. the authority to charge gift tax on the gift of the coffee plantation was challenged and the right of parliament to impose a gift tax on lands and buildings questioned. in some of the other cases agricultural or paddy lands or buildings were the subjects of gifts and they were similarly taxed and the tax questioned.2. the high court held that entry 49 of the state list read with entry 18 of the same list reserved the power to tax lands and buildings to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1970 (SC)

Gottipulla Venkatasiva Subbrayanam and ors. Vs. the State of Andhra Pr ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-19-1970

Reported in : AIR1970SC1079; 1970CriLJ1004; (1970)1SCC235; [1970]3SCR423

..... negatived by the learned judge. it was observed that this right had not been pleaded by accused no. 10 and on the prosecution evidence the accused had first attacked the mediators on their intervention to prevent the occupiers being beaten up and it was thereafter that p.ws. 5 and 7 and others beat the accused persons in retaliation. the high ..... to 9 thereupon rushed at them to beat them. at that stage p.w. 5, jasti ramarao, p.w. 7, garimella subba rao and some others who had come to mediate intervened but they were beaten by the accused. the prosecution witnesses in turn snatched the sticks from some of the accused persons and retaliated causing injuries to some of them .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1970 (SC)

Hans Raj Bagrecha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-18-1970

Reported in : 1972(0)BLJR56; (1971)1SCC59; [1971]2SCR412; [1971]27STC4(SC)

..... that would fall within the purview of article 301. the argument that all taxes should be governed by article 301 whether or not their impact on trade is immediate or mediate, direct or remote, adopts, in our, opinion, an extreme approach which cannot be upheld.12. in a recent judgment of this court in the andhra sugars ltd. and anr. v .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1970 (SC)

Mst. Mahli Vs. Ranbir Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-26-1970

Reported in : (1971)3SCC958

s.m. sikri, j.1.this appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the high court of punjab dismissing in limine the second appeal filed by mst mahli, plaintiff, now appellant before us, against the decree of the senior subordinate judge (with enhanced appellate powers), dismissing the first appeal from the order and decree of the subordinate judge, iii class, rohtak, filed by the plaintiff and accepting the appeal filed by the respondents. the trial court had decreed the suit of the plaintiff for possession of 1/9th share of the land in dispute.2. in order to appreciate the points debated before us it is necessary to set out the pedigree table and a few facts.nota shiv lal chandgi bhagwani widowdefendant 3 ram sarup mst mahliplaintiff daughter phoolmatidefendant 5 daughter chhotudefendant 4 daughter hoshiar singhdefendant 3 ranbir singhdefendant 13. chandgi owned fair amount of land in village asan, tehsil and district rohtak. he was jat by caste and governed by punjab customary law. on november 21, 1954, he made an oral gift of 2/3rds of the land in favour of ranbir singh and hoshiar singh, his grandsons, his son ram sarup having died. mutation was entered by the patwari and submitted for sanction. the mutation was reviewed because this mutation had been decided (after) the date of possession of land given vide mutation 1290 respecting repartition. this apparently has reference to repartition proceedings in consolidation proceedings. at any rate, the mutation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 1970 (SC)

Jayvant Rao and ors. Vs. Chandra Kant Rao and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-26-1970

Reported in : AIR1971SC910; (1970)1SCC702; [1970]3SCR837; 1970(3)WLN11

v. bhargava, j. 1. this appeal arises out of a suit for partition of properties in the family of one lalaji ramchandra who was the common ancestor of the parties to the suit. he had two sons, govindraoji and motilal alias krishnaraoji. the plaintiffs/appellants and the non contesting proforma respondents are the descendants of motilal, while the contesting respondents are the descendants of govindraoji, the principal one being chandrakant rao who was defendant no. 1 in the suit. the appellants sought partition of all the family properties, including eight villages known as 'the sarola jagir' which were situated in the erstwhile state of kota. the trial court dismissed the suit in its entirety, holding that none of the properties in suit was ancestral property. on appeal by the present appellants, the high court of rajasthan upheld the dismissal of the suit insofar as the appellants had claimed a share in the eight villages forming the sarola jagir, while the suit in respect of the other properties was decreed and a preliminary decree passed in respect of those properties. the appellants have come up to this court in this appeal, by certificate granted by the high court, against the order of the high court refusing to grant partition of the eight villages of the sarola jagir.2. in order to appreciate the point raised in this appeal the history of this jagir in this family may be recited briefly. lalaji ramchandra and his eldest son govindraoji were awarded this jagir by means .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 10 1970 (SC)

Fateh Bibi Etc. Vs. Charan Dass

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-10-1970

Reported in : AIR1970SC789; (1970)1SCC658; [1970]3SCR953

vaidialingam, j.1. the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal, filed by the legal representatives of the deceased defendant, on certificate, is whether on a true construction of the hindu law of inheritance (amendment) act, 1929 (act ii of 1929) (hereinafter referred to as the act), it applies only to the case of a hindu male dying intestate on or after february 21, 1929 (when the act came into force) or whether it applies in the case of a hindu male dying intestate before the act came into operation and succeeded by a female heir who died after that date.2. the following pedigree will be useful in appreciating the relationship of the parties as well as the basis of the claim made regarding the title to the properties by the parties. dayala | -------------------------------------------------------------- | | mohri tota | | dasondhi thakur dass | | kirpa ram-bishan devi bishna & bishan singh | (defendant) ------------------------------------------- | | charanji lal maya devi-nand lal | charan dass (plaintiff) 3. the respondent-plaintiff instituted suit no. 41 of 1955 in the subordinate judge's court, jagraon, against the original defendant for recovery of possession of the suit properties. according to the plaintiff kirpa ram was the last owner of the properties. even during his life-time his only son charanji lal had died. on the death of kirpa ram, his widow bishan devi became the owner of the properties and was in possession of the properties for her .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 1970 (SC)

Shiv Lal and ors. Vs. Chet Ram and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-09-1970

Reported in : AIR1971SC2342; (1970)2SCC773; [1971]2SCR104

hegde, j.1. the appellants in these appeals are the representatives of the mortgagees of the suit properties. the respondents in both these appeals claim to represent the interest of the mortgagors. civil appeal no. 1250 of 1966 arises from suit no. 280 of 1961 in the court of senior sub judge, rohtak and civil appeal no. 1251 of 1966 arises from suit no. 334 of 1961 on the file of the same judge. both the suits were suits for redemption. the trial court dismissed both the suits on two grounds viz. (1) that kura, the person from whom the plaintiffs claim to have purchased the rights of the mortgagors was incapable of entering into a contract as he was insane. hence the sale deeds executed by him are void and (2) the claim for redemption in respect of the various mortgages sought to be redeemed excepting the one executed on april 26, 1912 is barred by limitation. the learned district judge allowed the appeals and decreed both the suits excepting as regards the mortgage dated january 20, 1878. in second appeal capoor j. of the punjab high court confirmed the decision of the learned district judge. the letters patent appeals filed by the appellants were summarily dismissed. thereafter these appeals were brought after obtaining special leave from this court.2. both the learned district judge as well as the learned judge of the high court have concurrently come to the conclusion that there is no satisfactory evidence to show that kura was insane at the time he sold the suit .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1970 (SC)

Mir MuzafaruddIn Khan and Three ors. Vs. Syed ArifuddIn Khan and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-25-1970

Reported in : (1971)3SCC810

a.n. grover, j.1. this is an appeal by certificate from a judgment and decree of the andhra pradesh high court. the suit out of which the appeal arises relates to the properties which originally belonged to nawab zainulabud din khan, a retired revenue officer, who died at hyderabad on december 18, 1953. the following pedigree table will be helpful in understanding the relationship between the parties:hazarath maroof ali shah qadri mir dawur ali khan syed hydayat mohiuddin khan nawab zainulabudin khan daughter daughter syed pusha mohiuddin khan syed muzaffuruddin khan (adopted son of nawab zainulabudin khan (defendant 3) syed gulam das tagir khan (defendant 5) syed qadar ali khan (defendant 6) mir dawar ali khan (in whose favour somajiguda house was gifted (defendant 4) asmutunisa begam mehrunissa begum khaderunissa begum (daughter of mehrunnissa begam (defendant no. 1) syed arifuddin plaintiff (son of mehrunnissa begam) born 19492. in 1954 syed arifuddin who claimed to be the son of syed zainulabudin khan from his wife mehrunnissa begam instituted a suit in forma pauperis impleading khaderunnissa begam defendant 1 who was the daughter and asmutunnisa begam defendant 2 who was the widow of the deceased as parties. it was stated that his deceased father had left movable and immovable properties set out in lists a, b, and c valued approximately at rs 1,61,516-10-8. out of these defendant 1 was entitled to 1/3 share, defendant 2 to 1/8 share and to the balance of the property the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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