Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1978 Page 3 of about 76 results (0.133 seconds)

Jan 19 1978 (SC)

Vishvas Aba Kurane Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-19-1978

Reported in : AIR1978SC414; 1978CriLJ484; (1978)1SCC474; 1978(10)LC84(SC)

..... . on may 18, 1968, another fracas between maruti arid dinkar, the brother of sharkar (p.w. 2) took place which did not, howver, assume a grave funi because of the mediation of a few persons including the brothers of dinkar. on the fateful evening of may 19, 1968, jaywant left his house for his field to keep a vigil, on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 18 1978 (SC)

Ram Adhar Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-18-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC702; 1980CriLJ817; (1979)3SCC774; 1979(11)LC139(SC)

v.d. tulzapurkar, j.1. the appellant-accused was sentenced to death by the second temporary civil and sessions judge, kanpur under section 302 ipc for committing the murder of his uncle phool ghand in sessions case no. 279 of 1972 on november 25, 1972, which conviction and sentence were confirmed by the allahabad high court in criminal appeal no. 3336 of 1972 and reference case no. 128 of 1972. he has challenged his said conviction and sentence in this appeal by special leave granted on december 2, 1975. 2. the incident during the course of which phool chand was assaulted by the appellant-accused with a 'karauli' inflicting numerous injuries is said to have taken place on march 16, 1972, at about 6.00 p.m. in the 8 biswa field of phool chand in village bhagwantpur and the motive for the assault was property dispute. briefly stated the prosecution case was that deceased phool chand, whose only daughter had died some 16/17 years ago, had brought his son-in-law salig ram and three grand sons babu, chote lal and raghuraj (pw 1) to his village bhagwantpur and they were living with him. about 10 months prior to the occurrence phool ghand had executed a gift deed (ex. ka-27) in respect of his l/3rd separated share in the ancestral lands (admeasuring 111/2 bighas) in favour of smt. rajeshwar widow of babu (who had in the mean time died), chote lal and raghuraj (pw 1), this was not relished by the appellant-accused and his brother mahadev (nephews of phool chand. after the execution .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 18 1978 (SC)

R.G. Anand Vs. Delux Films and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-18-1978

Reported in : AIR1978SC1613; (1978)4SCC118; [1979]1SCR218

fazal ali, j.1. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the delhi high court dated 23rd may, 1967 affirming the decree of the district judge, delhi and dismissing the plaintiffs suit for damages against the defendants on the ground that they had violated the copyrighted work of the plaintiff which was a drama called 'hum hindustani'.2. the facts have been succinctly stated by the district judge in his judgment and summarised by the high court, and, therefore, it is not necessary for us to repeat the same all over again. we would, however, like to give a brief resume of some of the striking facts in the case which may be germane for the purpose of deciding the important issues involved in this appeal. we might mention here that the high court as also the district judge negatived the plaintiff's claim and prima facie the appeal appears to be concluded by finding of fact, but it was rightly argued by mr. andley appearing for the appellant that the principles of violation of copy-right in the instant appeal have to be applied on the facts found and the inferences from proved facts drawn by the high court which is doubtless a question of law and more particularly as there is no clear authority of this court on the subject, we should be persuaded to go into this question without entering into findings of facts. having heard counsel for the parties, we felt that as the case is one of first impression and needs to be decided by this court, we should enter .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1978 (SC)

H.P. Gupta Vs. Manohar Lal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-03-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC443; 1979CriLJ199; (1979)2SCC486; [1979]2SCR208; 1979(11)LC100(SC)

v.d. tulzapurkar, j.1. the short question raised in this appeal by special leave is whether the court of appeal, after having disposed of the appeal, has the power to order restoration of possession of immovable property under section 456(2) of the crpc, 1973 2. the facts giving rise to the aforesaid question are briefly these : respondents 1 to 4 were convicted by a metropolitan magistrate under section 447 i.p.c. for trespassing and taking forcible possession of the immovable property which was in the possession of the appellant shri h.p. gupta. the magistrate, however, did not pass any order for restoration of possession under sub-section (1) of section 456 cr.p.c. the respondents filed an appeal to the court of sessions against their conviction which was dismissed by the additional sessions judge, new delhi on january 6, 1975. two weeks later the appellant made an application to the appellate court for restoration of possession of the property under section 456(2) of cr.p.c. and the learned additional sessions judge ordered its restoration to him on february 1, 1975. the respondents moved the delhi high court under article 227 of the constitution read with section 482 cr.p.c. being criminal miscellaneous petition no. 118 of 1975, challenging the said order of the additional sessions judge on the ground that the appellate court had no jurisdiction or power to pass the order after disposing of the appeal. the high court set aside the impugned order holding that 'the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1978 (SC)

Sadhu Singh (Deceased) and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-02-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC1609; 1980Supp(1)SCC787; [1979]3SCR1279

1. the litigation culminating in the present appeal (by certificate under article 133(1)(b) of the constitution) which is directed against the judgment and order dated september 25, 1967, of the punjab and haryana high court in c.w.n. 1630 of 1962 setting aside the allotment dated may 23, 1960 made by naib tehsil-dar-cum-managing officer, fatehabad, district hissar in favour of madan mohan and others, and orders dated april 18, 1962 and july 21, 1962 of the assistant settlement commissioner and chief settlement commissioner respectively on the finding that 'no part of the holding which formed part of the land allotted to respondent no. 14, mehta lal chand, (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') could, during the subsistence of such allotment and without its cancellation, be allotted to any one else' has had a very chequered career extending over well nigh two decades. it appears that the respondent who is a displaced person from pakistan was found entitled to an allotment of 113 standard acres and 3 units of land in lieu of 120 acres of land held by him as owner in bhawalpur (pakistan). against the aforesaid entitlement, the respondent was allotted 90 standard acres and 6 units of evacuee land between 1953 and 1958 in different villages of tehsil fatehabad, district hissar including two areas measuring (1) 13 standard acres and 31/2 units and (2) 13 standard acres and 131/2 units in village bahmniwala allotment of which was made on march 1, 1957 and october 10, 1958 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 16 1978 (SC)

P.N. Kaushal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-16-1978

Reported in : AIR1978SC1457; (1978)3SCC558; [1979]1SCR122

krishna iyer, j.1. what are we about a raging rain of writ-petitions by hundreds of merchants of intoxicants hit by a recently amended rule declaring a break of two 'dry' days in every 'wet' week for licensed liquor shops and other institutions of inebriation in the private sector, puts in issue the constitutionality of section 59(f)(v) and rule 37 of the punjab excise act and liquor licence (second amendment) rules, (hereinafter, for short, the act and the rules). the tragic irony of the legal plea is that article 14 and 19 of the very constitution, which, in article 47, makes it a fundamental obligation of the state to bring about prohibition of intoxicating drinks, is pressed into service to thwart the state's half-hearted prohibitionist gesture. of course, it is on the cards that the end may be good but the means may be bad, constitutionally speaking. and there is a mystique about legalese beyond the layman's ken !2. to set the record straight, we must state, right here, that no frontal attack is made on the power of the state to regulate any trade (even a trade where the turn-over turns on tempting the customer to take reeling rolling trips into the realm of the jocose, belliocose, lachrymore and comatose). resort was made to a flanking strategy of anathematising the statutoryregulatory power in section 59(f)(v) and its offspring, the amended rule interdicting sales of tipay ecstasy on tuesdays and fridays, as too naked, unguided and arcane and, resultantly, too .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1978 (SC)

Mehtab Singh Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-09-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC1263; 1979CriLJ1077; (1979)4SCC597; 1979(11)LC146(SC)

orderv.r. krishna iyer, j.1. the question of law raised in the special leave petition being one which is likely to arise in more than one case, we have granted leave and heard arguments and proceed to judgment right away,2. the short point is whether a fine imposed by a criminal court upon a convict can be realised more than six years after the date of the sentence if the appellate court or the revisional court has stayed or suspended the collection of the fine.3. the appellant had been sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 20s000/- as early as 1964. more than six years there after the state tried to levy the fine and so the aggrieved appellant moved the high court under section 482, cr. p. c. to quash the order of the sessions judge directing levy of the fine. the high court, however, declined to demolish the levy proceedings because the appellant had got the levy of the fine suspended all through when he had gone up in appeal against the conviction and the sentence including the sentence of fine.4. section 70 of the indian penal code reads :the fine, or any part thereof which remains unpaid, may be levied at any time within six years after the passing of the sentence, and if, under the sentence, the offender be liable to imprisonment for a longer period than six years, then at any time pre7vious to the expiration of that period; and the death of the offender does not discharge from the liability any property which would, after his death, be legally .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 1978 (SC)

Babu Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-31-1978

Reported in : AIR1978SC527; 1978CriLJ651; (1978)1SCC579; [1978]2SCR777

orderv.r. krishna iyer1. the petitioners have moved for bail setting out special grounds in (support of the prayer. the state opposes on various grounds which we will presently set out. one of us sitting as a chamber judge in gudikanti narasihmalu and ors. v. public prosecutor, govt. of ap : 1978crilj502 had considered this question at some length and since the principles set out herein commend themselves to us, we are proceeding on the same lines and are inclined to reach the same conclusion.2. briefly we will state the facts pertinent to the present petition and prayer and proceed thereafter to ratiocinate on the relevant criteria in considering the interlocutory relief of bail. right at the beginning, we must mention that, at an earlier stage,, their application for bail was rejected by this court on september 7, 1977. but an order refusing an application for bail does not necessarily preclude another, on (a later occasion, giving more materials, further developments and different considerations. while we surely must set store by this circumstance, we cannot accede to the faint plea that we are barred from second consideration at a later stage. an interim direction is not a conclusive adjudication, and updated reconsideration is not over-turning an earlier negation. in this view, we entertain the application and evaluate the merits pro and con.3. shri r.k. jain has brought to our notice certain significant factors which frown upon continuance of incarceration and favour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1978 (SC)

Haji C.H. Mohammad Koya Vs. T.K.S.M.A. Muthukoya

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-12-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC154; (1979)2SCC8; [1979]1SCR664

fazal ali, j.1. this election appeal is directed against the order of the high court of kerala dated 19th december, 1977 by which the election of the appellant haji c.h. mohammad koya has been set aside and he has been disqualified from taking part in the elections for a period of six years under the provisions of the representation of the people act, 1951 (hereinafter called the act).2. for the purpose of brevity we shall refer to the respondent-petitioner as the petitioner and haji c.h. mohammad koya as the appellant.3. in the general election held to the legislative assembly of kerala on 20th march, 1977 the petitioner and the appellant were the contesting candidates from no. 34 malappuram constituency. the counting of votes took place on the 20th march, 1977 and the appellant was declared elected on the same date. the total votes polled were 56.276. the appellant secured 39,362 votes and thus defeated the petitioner by a margin of 20,000 votes. aggrieved by the election results, the petitioner filed an election petition in the high court alleging that the appellant had committed various corrupt practices falling within the ambit of sections 123(3), (3a) and (4) of the act. it was mainly alleged that before the elections, the appellant was the chief editor of a malayalam daily paper called chandrika which was the official organ of the muslim league. it is further alleged by the petitioner that the appellant held shares worth rs. 3 lakhs in the printing and publishing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 15 1978 (SC)

Avadh Kishore Das Vs. Ram Gopal and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-15-1978

Reported in : AIR1979SC861; (1979)4SCC790; 1979(11)LC251(SC)

r.s. sarkaria, j.1. the plaintiffs-respondents 1 to 3 instituted a suit in the court of district judge, jhansi, under section 92 of the cpc, against avadh kishore dass, defendant-appellant herein, inter alia, on the ground that there was a public religious endowment of considerable area of land in village baha-walpura, district jalaun (u.p.) in favour of the temple of shri thakur ram jankiji maharaj also known as shri thakurji maharaj.2. the founder of the endowment or trust was one swami sewa das, who was a hermit of a very high order be longing to rihang vaishnava sampraday. he had a large number of followers. his hermitage was in village bahawalpura, pargana konch. district jalaun. sometime in the 14th century king mohamad shah was passing by that way. he was impressed by the learning of swami sewa das as well as his austerity and personality. the king made a gift of 836 bighas of land as padaragh in the aforesaid village in favour of swami sewa das, in trust for the specific purpose of constructing and maintaining the temple of shri thakurji maharaj and for due celebrations or raj bhog, puja, arti, utsav etc. of the said thakurji maharaj. swami sewa das accordingly installed an idol of shri thakurji maharaj after constructing a temple there. he spent the income of the endowed property for religious purposes such as sewapuja of the idol and for maintenance of sadhus of nihang vaishanaua vairagi of rama nandi sampradaya. he. was the first mahant of the math thus established .....

Tag this Judgment!

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