Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1971 Page 1 of about 64 results (0.093 seconds)

Apr 27 1971 (SC)

The State of Mysore and anr. Vs. Pendakur Virupanna Setty and Sons and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-27-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC1325; (1971)2SCC255; [1971]SuppSCR526

grover, j.1. these appeals by certificate arise from a judgment of the mysore high court delivered in certain petitions filed under article 226 of the constitution challenging the demand of a cess levied in exercise of the powers conferred by section 11(1) of the madras commercial crops market act 1933-hereinafter called the 'act'-the provisions of which were applicable to the bellary district of the state of mysore.2. the respondents were served a notice by the secretary of the bellary market committee established under the act to pay the cess on groundnut seeds bought or sold in the notified area of the committee. as the respondents failed to comply with the demand complaints were filed against them for contravention of section 11(1) of the act and of certain rules and bye-laws framed thereunder. the respondents filed petitions under article 226 of the constitution challenging the validity of the levy of cess. the high court quashed the demand on the ground that what was being really demanded was the payment of sales tax and since the maximum rate of sales tax authorised by section 15 of the central sales tax act 1956 read with section 5(4) of the mysore sales tax act 1957 had already been imposed the market committee could not make any further or additional levy. a direction was also made for refund of the cess collected during a period of three years preceding the date of the presentation of the writ petition.3. for the purpose of determination of the points which have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 06 1971 (SC)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab, Haryana, Jammu and Kasmir and Hima ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-06-1971

Reported in : AIR1972SC386; [1971]82ITR804(SC); (1972)4SCC517; [1972]1SCR991

k.s. hegde, j.1. this is an appeal by certificate from the decision of the high court of punjab and haryana in a reference under section 66(1) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 (to be hereinafter referred to as the act). the question referred to the high court for its opinion was:whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the receipt of rs. 70,000/-by the assessee on 11-6-1954 was revenue or capital in nature.2. the high court held that the said receipt was capital receipt. aggrieved by that decision the commissioner of income-tax came up in appeal to this court.3. we shall now refer to the material facts found by the income-tax appellate tribunal as can be gathered from the case stated. the assessee was assessed as an individual. the relevant assessment year is 1955-56, the accounting period for the same ended on asad sudi 1, s.y. 2011.4. the assessee was instrumental in discovering the existence of kankar deposits in jind state. he also brought about an agreement between one shanti parsad jain and the erstwhile state of jind, now a part of punjab state for the acquisition of sole and exclusive monopoly rights of manufacturing cement in the said jind state. that agreement was entered into on april 2, 1938. the same was to remain operative for a period of 25 years, which term was liable to be extended to 100 years at the option of the said shanti parsad jain or his nominee. shanti parsad jain transferred his rights under that agreement to a public limited .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1971 (SC)

Veeramachineni Gangadhara Rao Vs. the Andhra Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-25-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC1613; (1971)1SCC874; [1971]SuppSCR209

..... to meet urgent demands in my business of scientific apparatus etc. in this connection i confirm the discussion i had with your managing director at my residence, requesting me to mediate for the amicable settlement of the affair of my brother, sri v. butchiyya chowdary with your bank regarding the key loan account granted to godavary sugars and refiners ltd. i ..... no. 1 to amicably settle the suit loans. that is also the evidence of the appellant the allegation in this letter that the managing director was requesting the appellant to mediate for the amicable settlement of the affairs of defendant 1 with the bank regarding suit loans does not appear to have been repudiated in any of the letters written by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 08 1971 (SC)

Dayaram and ors. Vs. Dawalatshah and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-08-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC681; 1972MHLJ24(SC); (1971)1SCC358a; [1971]3SCR324

j.c. shah, c.j.1. dawalatshah and ranwirshah-sons of pratapshah-instituted an action in the court of the additional district judge, chanda, for a decree for possession of property immovable (including the zamindari of dhanora) and movable specified in the schedules annexed to the plaint, and for an order for payment of mesne profits and also for recovery of the amount of compensation in respect of certain lands received by the defendants from the government of madhya pradesh and for an order declaring their right to receive the balance of compensation remaining to be paid. the plaintiffs relied upon the following genealogy : gangashah ___________________________________________|________________________________________ | | | | | hira bhakta sakru kajur raju thakur thakur thakur thakur thakur | | | | sitaram tanoa thakur | chatturshah | thakur | | (dead) | | nillanshah | | | | | | | pratapshah | | | | |_______________ | | ____________|________ | | | | | | gulabshah lalashah | | dawalatshah ranwirshah (dead) (dead) | | (pltff. no. 1) (pltff. no. 2) | ____|_______________ ______________________________________________| | | | | | hanmantrao amarshah bapu chandarshah karanshah niranshah | (died dec. 9, 1950) (dead) (dead) | diwakarrao | (died sept. | 8, 1932) _________________________| | | ballarshah karanshah ____________|_____________ | | | | dayaram indershah | (deft. no. 1) (deft. no. 2) | _________________________________|_______________ | | | govinda budha rama laxman (dead) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 01 1971 (FN)

Chicago and N.W. R. Co. Vs. Transportation Union

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-01-1971

..... pressures. moreover, the court provides absolutely no guidance as to where in the bargaining scheme the parties are to be remanded. does the court send them back to the mediation board which has already terminated jurisdiction finding the parties to have reached impasse? should the court remand to some other phase of the proceedings? if so, where? more important ..... parties themselves, which congress enacted in 1926 as-the railway labor act, 44 stat. 577, was a unique blend of moral and legal duties looking toward settlement through conciliation, mediation, voluntary arbitration, presidential intervention, and finally, in case of ultimate failure of the statutory machinery, resort to traditional self-help measures. the cooperation involved was unparalleled in this ..... ). in light of these considerations, we think the conclusion inescapable that congress intended the enforcement of 2 first to be overseen by appropriate judicial means, rather than by the mediation board's retaining jurisdiction over the dispute or prematurely releasing the parties for resort to self-help if it feels such action called for. [ footnote 14 ] iv we ..... connection with the duty to "exert every reasonable effort" under the railway labor act. in that case, the railroad refused to recognize a union certified by the national mediation board as the duly authorized representative of its shop workers, and instead sought to coerce these employees to join a company union. the employees sought and obtained an injunction .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 08 1971 (FN)

Chemical Workers Vs. Pittsburgh Glass

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-08-1971

..... other party, (2) an offer to meet and confer "for the purpose of negotiating a new contract or a contract containing the proposed modifications," (3) timely notice to the federal mediation and conciliation service and comparable state or territorial agencies of the existence of a "dispute," and (4) continuation "in full force and effect [of] . . . all the terms and conditions ..... of economic warfare. thus, the party desiring to make a modification or termination is required to serve a written notice on the other party, offer to meet and confer, notify mediation and conciliation agencies if necessary, and meanwhile maintain contract relations. accordingly, we think we accurately described the relevant aim of 8(d) when we said in mastro plastics corp. v ..... the proposed modifications." but such an offer is meaningless if a party is statutorily free to refuse to negotiate on the proposed change to the permissive term. the notification to mediation and conciliation services referred to in paragraph (3) would be equally meaningless, if required at all. [ footnote 23 ] we think it would be no less beside the point to ..... ;" "(2) offers to meet and confer with the other party for the purpose of negotiating a new contract or a contract containing the proposed modifications;" "(3) notifies the federal mediation and conciliation service within thirty days after such notice of the existence of a dispute, and simultaneously therewith notifies any state or territorial agency established to .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 1971 (SC)

Patel Laljibhai Somabhai Vs. the State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-07-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC1935; 1971CriLJ1437; (1971)2SCC376; [1971]SuppSCR834

dua, j.1. this appeal with certificate under article 134(1)(c) of the constitution directed against the judgment and order of the gujarat high court in criminal reference made by the sessions judge, ahmedabad, raises an important question of law on which there appears to be conflict of judicial opinion. even in the gujarat high court the correctness of the majority view in the full bench decision in the state of gujarat v. ali bin rajak 9 g l r 1 has been doubted by the learned judge hearing the criminal reference in the present case, who followed the majority view merely because he felt bound by it. the learned single judge did not consider the case to be fit for reference to a larger bench for reconsidering the majority view in the case of ali bin rajak (1). certificate of fitness for appeal to this court was, however, granted by the learned judge.2. the question raised relates to the scope and effect of section 195(1)(c), cr.p.c. and its applicability to cases where a forged document has been produced as evidence in a judicial proceeding by a party thereto and prosecution of that party is sought for offences under sections 467 and 471, i.p.c. in respect of that document.3. the relevant facts of the case may now be briefly stated, the appellant patel laljibhai somabhai instituted a civil suit (no. 11 of 1964) in the court of joint civil judge at dholka against vora safakat huseian yusufali (hereafter called the complainant) and his brother vora ahmed huseian yusufali for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 06 1971 (SC)

Raghunath Laxman Wani and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-06-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC2137; 1971MhLJ877(SC); (1971)3SCC391; [1972]1SCR48; 1971(III)LC737(SC)

j.m. shelat, j.1. this appeal by special leave, is against the judgment and order passed by the maharashtra revenue tribunal, dated september 2, 1966, in proceedings held by the deputy collector under section 14 of the maharashtra agricultural lands (ceiling on holdings) act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act) in respect of lands held by the appellants.2. the following pedigree explains the relationship between the appellants: tukaram (dead) | | ______________________________________ | | | | narayan, d. about 1920=laxmibai laxman, d. 5-6-alka (minor): 1954=warubai raghunath=rukhminiba | | ___________________________________________ ramesh suresh shaila mukano (minor) (minor) (minor) (minor) 3. it is not in dispute that, until at any rate 1956, appellant raghunath and the other members of the family formed a joint and undivided hindu family of which raghunath, on the death of his father laxman in june 1954, became the karta and the manager. the family then held 523.03 acres of lands situate at ranjangaon, sangwi, karajgaon, shindi and odhre villages. in 1956, appellant raghunath gave a vardhi (intimation) to the talathi stating that he and the other members of his family had entered into a partial partition where-under laxmibai, the widow of narayan, received 41.13 acres of land of karajgaon, kashinath, named madhav narayan after his adoption, 74.20 acres of land in shindi village and warubai, his mother, 64.03 acres of land of shindi and odhre villages. the balance of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1971 (FN)

Gillette Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-08-1971

..... 3/6 ] that duty has not changed. pope paul vi has expressed it as follows: "on his part, man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. in all his activity, a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to god, the end and purpose of life. [ footnote 3 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1971 (SC)

Smt. Sahodara Devi and ors. Vs. Government of India and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-26-1971

Reported in : AIR1971SC1599; (1972)3SCC156; [1971]SuppSCR230; 1971(III)LC568(SC)

bhargava, j.1. the appellants are admittedly the joint owners of bungalow no. 45, situated along tagore road, in the cantonment of kanpur. these premises are recorded in the general land register of the cantonment as occupancy land on old grant terms. it appears that the words 'old grant terms' referred to grants made by the government under the general order of the governor-general in council dated 12th september, 1836. subsequently, the first act to be passed in respect of these lands was the cantonments act no. 13 of 1889. this was followed by cantonments act no. 15 of 1910 and cantonments code, 1912. these were amended by cantonments act no. 2 of 1924 which still continues to be in force. on the 26th june, 1925, rules were framed for the first time under section 280 of the cantonments act of 1924, regulating administration of cantonment lands. these rules were, however, superseded by fresh rules by government notification dated 23rd november, 1937. the new rules are described as 'cantonment land administration rules, 1937'. under these rules, a provision was made in rule 27 for regularisation of old grants by issue of fresh leases. the appellants did not have any documents to show how the original title of their predecessors was acquired in respect of these lands. the earliest document, which the appellants could produce, was a sale-deed executed by ram nath and others, sons of roop kishore, in favour of dost mohammad estate, on the 8th september, 1943. this document .....

Tag this Judgment!

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