Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1974 Page 1 of about 64 results (0.075 seconds)

Mar 04 1974 (SC)

Prem Raj Vs. Ram Charan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-04-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC968; (1974)2SCC1; [1974]3SCR494

s.n. dwivedi, j.1. kariya and his wife sava purchased the house in dispute by a registered deed on april 2, 1905. kariya died in 1936 leaving behind him sava and ram charan, his son. on august 16, 1951 ram charan mortgaged the house to prem raj (the appellant). prem raj obtained a preliminary decree for foreclosure on august 16, 1952 and also the final decree on july 16, 1955. in the meanwhile on march 7,1952 sava gifted the entire house to prakash chandra, son of ram charan, the respondent. fortified by this gift, prakash chandra frustrated several attempts of the appellant to get possession of the house in execution of his decree. he made three unsuccessful attempts to execute the decree till the end of 1954. he made the fourth attempt on april 25, 1956. shortly thereafter, on december 7, 1956, prakash chandra instituted a suit against the appellant and his father rani charan for a declaration that the preliminary and final decree for foreclosure in favour of the former were not binding on him and for a perpetual injunction restraining the appellant from taking possession of the house in execution of the aforesaid decree. the suit was dismissed on november 25, 1955. he filed an appeal and obtained an order staying execution of the decree on december 31. 1958. the appeal court partly allowed his appeal on october 21, 1959. it was held that he was the owner of a half share in the house by virtue of the gift deed from sava in his favour. so the appeal court issued an .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 17 1974 (SC)

Mysore State Road Transport Corporation Vs. the Mysore Revenue Appella ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-17-1974

Reported in : (1975)4SCC192; [1975]1SCR493

..... undertaking should operate services on the remaining routes appearing in the statement appended between the two specified terminals only, to the complete exclusion of all other operators, excluding the inter- mediate routes;' the relevant clauses 3 to 7 are given here as follows: the route or routes (with their startingpoints, termini, intermediate stations and route length) in which the state road .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1974 (SC)

Gurdit Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-10-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC1791; (1974)2SCC260; [1974]3SCR896; 1974(6)LC304(SC)

k.k. mathew, j.1. the first appellant is the father of appellants 2 and 3. the property in question belonged to the father of first appellant. by a will executed by him, he bequeathed the property to appellants 2 and 3. after the death of the tastator, mutations in favour of appellants 2 and 3 were effected in the revenue records in the year 1996 b.k. (1939). the first appellant managed to get the mutation of the land in his name in 1944 for the reason that he wanted to get licence for a gun. in 1955, when the pepsu tanancy and agricultural lands act (hereinafter referred to as the act) came into force, the first appellant was shown to be the owner of the land in the revenue records. chapter iv-a of the act was inserted by pepsu act no. 15 of 1956 on october 30, 1956 and by section 32a of this chapter, ceiling was placed on the holding of land.2. a suit was filed by appellants 2 and 3 for a declaration that the land belonged to them, that, the mutation of the land in the name of the first appellant in the revenue records was for the purpose of enabling him to obtain a gun licence and that there was no transfer of the land to first appellant. the first appellant was the only defendant in the suit. he did not contest the suit and it was decreed on february 14, 1961. a few weeks later, the question of declaration of the surplus area of the land in the hands of the first appellant came up for consideration before the collector of bhatinda. on the basis of the judgment and decree .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 10 1974 (SC)

Anil Kumar Bose Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-10-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC1560; 1974CriLJ1026; (1974)4SCC616; [1974]3SCR902; 1974(6)LC405(SC)

p.k. goswami, j.1. these appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the patna high court convicting the two appellants and anr. under section 420/34, indian penal code. they have each been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine of rs. 200/-, in default rigorous imprisonment for six months. dr. rama shankar (pw 14) and dr. ram bala singh (pw 4) were state, of the legal consequences attending a proved or admitted state of facts. its declaratory, determinative and adjudicators function is its distinctive characteristics. its recordings gives an official certification to a pre-existing relation or establishes a new one on pre-existing ground see borchard, 'declaratory judgments', 2nd ed., pp. 8-10.2. the judgment of the civil court with which we are concerned, adjudicated on the rights of the parties as they existed before the suit and when it declared that the mutation was effected not with the idea of transferring the property to the first appellant but for some other reason, the effect of the declaration was that there was no real transfer of the property in favour of the first appellant and that the property remained always in the ownership of appellants 2 and 3, notwithstanding the purported transfer evidenced by the mutation in the revenue records. it is impermissible to give the wide language employed in clause (b) of section 32-dd an unconfined operation. when a transfer or mutation is made on account of fraud or mutation was made on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 19 1974 (FN)

Sampson Vs. Murray

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-19-1974

..... holding it invalid for failure to comply with rule 52(a). this was the precise course taken by the court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit in national mediation board, supra, on which the majority relies. see also sims v. greene, supra. in addition, the government had other courses it could have taken in this case. in view of ..... applies to preliminary injunctions, and as no findings of fact and conclusions of law have yet been filed in this case, no valid preliminary injunction was ever issued. see national mediation board v. air line pilots assn., 116 u.s.app.d.c. 300, 323 f.2d 305 (1963); sims v. greene, 160 f.2d 512 (ca3 1947). nor would it ..... n 8, supra. [ footnote 58 ] the court of appeals for the second circuit, in an opinion cited by the court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit in national mediation board v. airline pilots assn., 116 u.s.app.d.c. 300, 323 f.2d 305 (1963), described these principles as follows: "it is because the remedy is so drastic ..... a temporary restraining order continued beyond the time permissible under rule 65 must be treated as a preliminary injunction, and must conform to the standards applicable to preliminary injunctions. national mediation board v. airline pilots assn., 116 u.s.app.d.c. 300, 323 f.2d 305 (1963). we believe that this analysis is correct, at least in the type of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1974 (FN)

Passenger Corp. Vs. Passengers Assn.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-09-1974

..... passengers who are the prime casualties when passenger service is discontinued. each case involving the availability of judicial review stands on its own feet. in switchmen's union v. national mediation board, 320 u. s. 297 , we denied judicial review since the collective bargaining right was being protected by a neutral agency, the national ..... mediation board. there is no such body standing between the passengers and amtrak. amtrak is a private for-profit corporation which is only construing its own enabling act. if passengers are .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1974 (SC)

State of Punjab (Now Haryana) and ors. Vs. Amar Singh and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-21-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC994; (1974)2SCC70; [1974]3SCR152

civil appellate jurisdiction : civil appeals 1756 of 1967. nos. 1755 and from the judgment and order dated the 4th october, 1966 of the punjab and haryana high court in civil writ petition no. 854 and 855 of 1963. v. c. mahajan and r. n. sachthey, for the appellants. s. k. dhingra for the respondents. the judgment of d. g. palekar and v. r. krishna iyer, jj. was delivered by krishna lyer, j. r. s. sarkaria, j. gave a dissenting, opinion. krishna iyer, j. these two appeals by the state of haryana challenge the high court's approach to an interpretation of two, crucial provisions of a land reforms law, namely, ss. 10-a and 18 of the punjab security of land tenures act (x of 1953) 1953 (for short called "the act"). counsel for the appellants complains; that if the view upheld by the high court of subordinating s. 10-a to s. 18 were not upset by this court, large land' holders may extricate their surplus land in excess of the ceiling set, through legal loopholes, such as have been practised in the present case. if make- believe deals and collusive, proceeding, he argues, may maneouvre through the legal net cast by s. 10-a of the act interdicting alienations and orders which diminish the surplus pool intended for re-settlement by the state of ejected tenants, the agrarian reform measure would be reduced to a paper tiger or socioeconomic eyewash. certainly, land reforms are so basic to the national reconstruction of the new order envisaged by the constitution that the issue raised .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 1974 (SC)

Maruti Bala Raut Vs. Dashrath Babu Wathare and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-27-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC2051; 1974MhLJ972(SC); (1974)2SCC615; [1975]1SCR899

a. alagiriswami, j.1. in the year 1932 one shantappa wathare, father of respondents 1 and 2 in c.a. 1942, executed a document (we are using the word 'document' because the character of the document was the subject matter of subsequent litigation) in respect of the western l/3rd share of survey no. 99 measuring 7 acres and 30 gunthas in the village of bamani in the state of miraj in favour of nabisha pirajde of miraj. in 1936 he executed a similar document in respect of middle l/3rd and in 1941 dashrath and bhima, belonging to another branch of the family, executed a similar document in respect of the eastern l/3rd portion of the land in favour of the said nabisha pirjade. on 11-8-1948 miraj state merged in the then bombay province and from that date the bombay tenancy act 1939 became applicable to the lands in question. on 15-9-1948 the bombay agricultural debtors relief act, 1947 became applicable to the areas of the former miraj state and on 28-12-1948 the bombay tenancy and agricultural lands act, 1948 came into force in the same area. in 1949 the two branches of wathares started two separate sets of proceedings under the bombay agricultural debtors relief act contending that the documents of 1932, 1936 and 1941 were mortgages and they were entitled to redeem them. they succeeded in their contention. to these proceedings the appellant maruti bala raut was not a party. the appellant obstructed their attempt to take possession on. the ground that he was a tenant of these .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1974 (SC)

State of Mysore and anr. Vs. M.M. Thammaiah and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-02-1974

Reported in : AIR1974SC1375; (1974)2SCC281; [1975]1SCR422; 1974(6)LC424(SC)

y.v. chandrachud, j.1. these are two cross-appeals by certificate granted by the high court of mysore under article 133(1)(b) of the constitution and they arise out of its judgment dated march 18, 1971 in writ petition 6394 of 1969. civil appeal 1000 of 1972 is filed by two persons called m. m. thammaiah and b.m. kariappa (herein called the appellants), against the state of mysore and the divisional forest officer, south coorg division, hunsur, mysore (herein called the respondents). civil appeal 1721 of 1971 is filed by the state of mysore and the divisional forest officer.2. appellant no. 1, m. m. thammaiah, is the holder of immovable properties consisting partly of 'bane lands', situate at nemmale in the district of coorg. on october 17, 1968 he sold certain soft-wood trees standing on his lands to appellant 2 for a sum of rs. 20,000. on september 23, 1969 he made an application to respondent 2, the divisional forest officer, for the issue of a permit in the name of appellant no. 2 allowing him to cut and remove the timber. respondent 2 informed appellant no. 1 that the bane lands held by him were not redeemed and that no permission could be granted for cutting and removing the timber unless the timber value was paid under rule 137 of the mysore forest rules of 1969.3. aggrieved by this order the appellant filed a petition in the high court of mysore under article 226 of the constitution challenging the constitutionality of rule 137 of the mysore forest rules. they .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 1974 (FN)

Granny Goose Foods, Inc. Vs. Teamsters

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-04-1974

..... limits permitted under rule 65(b), and where the required findings of fact and conclusions of law have not been set forth, the order is invalid. see, e.g., national mediation bd. v. air line pilots assn., 116 u.s.app.d.c. 300, 323 f.2d 305 (1963); sims v. greene, 160 f.2d 512 (ca3 1947). [ footnote 18 ] rule .....

Tag this Judgment!


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