Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1985 Page 1 of about 74 results (0.095 seconds)

May 08 1985 (SC)

K.C. Vasanth Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-08-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1495; 1985(1)SCALE832; 1985Supp(1)SCC714; [1985]Supp1SCR352

..... . it is this that has made the judiciary the fulcrum of such continuous tension for it is the judiciary and above all the supreme court which has the duty of mediating these conflicting demands back to society through the prism of constitutional interpretation'. the courts, however, deal with the problems that society presents. 'levels of awareness and corresponding senses of grievance .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 11 1985 (SC)

Union of India and anr. Vs. Tulsiram Patel and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-11-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1416; (1985)87BOMLR563; (1985)3CompLJ45(SC); [1985(51)FLR362]; (1985)IILLJ206SC; 1985(2)SCALE133; (1985)3SCC398; [1985]Supp2SCR131; 1985(2)SLJ145(SC)

..... , and at all times ; no human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this ; and such of them as are valid derive ail their force and ail their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.79. in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries there was a reaction against natural law as the basis of law. the french revolution had enthroned reason .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1985 (SC)

Malkhan Singh Vs. Sohan Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-02-1985

Reported in : AIR1987SC500; (1985)4SCC469; [1985]Supp2SCR747; 1986(1)LC51(SC)

acts/rules/orders: civil procedure code (cpc), - section 11; uttar prade6h consolidation of holdings act, 1953 - sections 12 and 52; uttar pradesh consolidation of holdings (amendment) act, 1963 - section 49 prior history: from the judgment and order dated october 28, 1971 of the allahabad high court in second appeal no. 94 of 1965--citing reference: raj lakshmi dasi and ors. v. banamali sen and ors mentionedsmt. natho and anr. v. board of revenue, u.p. allahabad and ors. discussedsuba singh v. mahendra singh and ors discussed1. the present appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the high court of allahabad dated 28th october, 1971.2. one ganga singh had three sons, kishan singh, natha singh and guman singh. kishan singh had no issue while natha singh had three sons, chajju, rambir and malkhan singh. guman singh had two sons, sohan singh and rohan singh. kishan singh was possessed of some agricultural land and also a house. it appears that the village where the agricultural plots of kishan singh were situate was brought under consolidation operations and the rights and title of kishan singh were determined in those proceedings and eventually chak no. 14 was allotted to him. the consolidation proceedings start with a notification under section 4 of the u.p. consolidation of holdings act and comes to an end with a denotification under section 52 of the act. although the notification under section 52 had not been issued but the statement of proposals ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 1985 (SC)

A. Sreenivasa Pai and anr. Vs. Saraswathi Ammal Alias G. Kamala Bai

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-12-1985

Reported in : AIR1985SC1359; 1985(2)SCALE78; (1985)4SCC85; [1985]Supp2SCR122; 1985(17)LC1075(SC)

e.s. venkataramiah, j.1. there was one k. vasudeva pai who was carrying on business at quilon, which is now in the state of kerala. padmavathi ammal was his wife. they had a son by name v. sreenivasa pai and a daughter by name s. lakshmi ammal (defendant no. 2). saraswathi ammal alias g. kamala bai (plaintiff) was the wife of v. sreenivasa pai. s. lakshmi ammal had been given in marriage to a. sreenivasa pai (defendant no. 1). k. vasudeva pai was adjudged insolvent in the year 1923 by the district court at quilon and consequently the properties belonging to him vested in the official receiver. the official receiver conveyed some of the said properties under a sale deed in favour of one s.a.s. ayyavu iyer in or about the year 1926. these properties were two plots of land with some buildings and out-houses at quilon. later on, in the year 1930 ayyavu iyer conveyed the properties purchased by him in favour of a. sreenivasa pai, the son-in-law of k. vasudeva pai, under whom a. sreenivasa pai was working all along. subsequently, on december 12, 1932 a. sreenivasa pai executed a settlement deed transferring the said properties in favour of his mother-in-law padmavathi ammal. this deed is in malayalam language. an english translation of this deed is produced before us. the relevant portion of the settlement deed translated into english reads as follows:.on seeing that you are now in distress after selling in auction of all the properties belonging to your family by the receiver in i .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 1985 (FN)

Estate of Thornton Vs. Caldor, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-26-1985

..... to intervene as of right to defend the constitutionality of the state law. 465 u.s. 1098 (1984). [ footnote 8 ] the state board of mediation and arbitration construed the statute as providing thornton with the absolute right not to work on his sabbath. caldor, inc. v. thornton, conn.bd. med. ..... who believes that his discharge was in violation of subsection (a) or (b) of this section may appeal such discharge to the state board of mediation and arbitration. if said board finds that the employee was discharged in violation of said subsection (a) or (b), it may order whatever remedy will ..... may not be penalized for so doing." id. at 350, 464 a.2d at 794. the court noted that the statute required the state mediation board to decide which religious activities may be characterized as an "observance of sabbath" in order to assess employees' sincerity, and concluded that this ..... position in the torrington store; thornton resigned two days later page 472 u. s. 707 and filed a grievance with the state board of mediation and arbitration alleging that he was discharged from his manager's position in violation of conn.gen.stat. 53-303e(b) (1985). respondent defended ..... respondent transferred thornton to a clerical position in the connecticut store; thornton resigned two days later and filed a grievance with the state board of mediation and arbitration, alleging that he was discharged from his manager's position in violation of the connecticut statute. the board sustained the grievance, ordering .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 01 1985 (FN)

Thomas Vs. Union Carbide

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jul-01-1985

..... and terms of compensation nor on a procedure for reaching an agreement on the amount and terms of compensation, either person may initiate binding arbitration proceedings by requesting the federal mediation and conciliation service to appoint an arbitrator from the roster of arbitrators maintained by such service. the procedures and rules of the service shall be applicable to the selection of ..... the representative of the craft or class for purposes of this act.' that 'right' is protected by [a provision] which gives the mediation board the power to resolve controversies concerning it. . . . a review by the federal district courts of the board's determination is not necessary to preserve or protect that 'right.' ..... act that established a "right" of a majority of a craft or class to choose its bargaining representative and vested the resolution of disputes concerning representation solely in the national mediation board, without judicial review. the court concluded: "the act . . . writes into law the 'right' of the 'majority of any craft or class of employees' to 'determine who shall be ..... 232 (1983) ("public rights doctrine exalts form over substance"); note, the supreme court, 1981 term, 96 harv.l.rev. 62, 262, n. 39 (1982). for example, in switchmen v. national mediation board, 320 u. s. 297 (1943), cited with approval in south carolina v. katzenbach, 383 u. s. 301 , 383 u. s. 333 (1966), the court upheld as constitutional a provision .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1985 (FN)

School Committee Vs. Dept. of Educ.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-29-1985

..... respondent massachusetts department of education's bureau of special education appeals (bsea). a hearing was initially scheduled for august 8, but was apparently postponed in favor of a mediation session on august 17. the mediation efforts proved unsuccessful. meanwhile, the panicos received the results of the latest expert evaluation of michael by specialists at massachusetts general hospital, who opined that michael's .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 1985 (FN)

Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co. Vs. Russell

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-27-1985

..... railroad passengers, 414 u. s. 453 , 414 u. s. 458 (1974); nashville milk co. v. carnation co., 355 u. s. 373 , 355 u. s. 375 -376 (1958); switchmen v. national mediation board, 320 u. s. 297 , 320 u. s. 301 (1943); botany worsted mills v. united states, 278 u. s. 282 , 278 u. s. 289 (1929). [ footnote 16 ] see, e.g .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 13 1985 (FN)

Liparota Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-13-1985

liparota v. united states - 471 u.s. 419 (1985) u.s. supreme court liparota v. united states, 471 u.s. 419 (1985) liparota v. united states no. 84-5108 argued march 19, 1985 decided may 13, 1985 471 u.s. 419 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit syllabus the federal statute governing food stamp fraud provides in 7 u.s.c. 2024(b)(1) that "whoever knowingly uses, transfers, acquires, alters, or possesses coupons or authorization cards in any manner not authorized by [the statute] or the regulations" shall be guilty of a criminal offense. petitioner was indicted for violation of 2024(b)(1). at a jury trial in federal district court, the government proved that petitioner on three occasions had purchased food stamps from an undercover department of agriculture agent for substantially less then their face value. the court refused petitioner's proposed jury instruction that the government must prove that petitioner knowingly did an act that the law forbids, purposely intending to violate the law. rather, over petitioner's objection, the court instructed the jury that the government had to prove that petitioner acquired and possessed the food stamps in a manner not authorized by statute or regulations, and that he knowingly and willfully acquired the stamps. petitioner was convicted. the court of appeals affirmed. held: absent any indication of a contrary purpose in the statute's language or legislative history, the government in a prosecution for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1985 (SC)

Osmania University Vs. Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance C ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-08-1985

Reported in : AIR1986SC466; [1985(51)FLR614]; (1986)ILLJ136SC; 1985(2)SCALE696; (1985)4SCC514; [1985]Supp3SCR589; 1986(1)LC9(SC)

v. balakrishna eradi, j.1. the short question that arises for our determination in this appeal, which has been filed on the basis of a certificate granted by the high court of andhra pradesh is whether the provisions of the employees' state insurance act, 1948 are applicable in respect of the employees working in the department of publications and press of the osmania university. a division bench of the high court has answered the said question in the affirmative differing from the contrary view expressed by a learned single judge, who had allowed a writ petition filed by the university. in the light of the said conclusion, the division bench set aside the judgment of the learned single judge and dismissed the writ petition. under clause (4) of section 1 of the employees' state insurance act, 1948 (for short 'the act') the act will apply to all 'factories' including factories belonging to the government other than seasonal factories. the expression 'factory' has been defined in section 2(12) of the act in the following terms:2(12) 'factory' means any premises including the precincts thereof whereon twenty or more persons are employed or were employed for wages on any day of the preceding twelve months, and in any part of which a manufacturing process is being carried on with the aid of power or is ordinarily so carried on but does not include a mine subject to the operation of the mines act, 1952(35 of 1952) or a railway running shed; 'seasonal factory' means a factory which .....

Tag this Judgment!


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