Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1987 Page 4 of about 77 results (0.080 seconds)

Nov 11 1987 (SC)

Vinod Kumar Singh Vs. Banaras Hindu University and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-11-1987

Reported in : AIR1988SC371; JT1987(4)SC304; 1987(2)SCALE1046; (1988)1SCC80; [1988]1SCR941; 1988(1)LC57(SC)

order1. special leave granted.2. appellant passed bachelor's examination in law from the banaras hindu university securing 54.4% marks and was placed in the second division. he applied for admission in the master's course in law in the academic session 1979/80. the university had prescribed a minimum of 55% marks on the average of three years of the degree course as the qualifying requirement. appellant claimed weightage on the basis that members of his family had donated lands and houses to the university and cited the case of shri anant narain singh as a precedent. as he failed to secure admission, he again applied for taking admission in the academic session 1983-84 but was not granted admission. ultimately he filed a writ petition before the allahabad high court. on 28.7.1986 the said writ petition was taken up for hearing by a division bench and when hearing was concluded, judgment was dictated in open court allowing the writ petition and direction to the university to admit the petitioner was ordered. the appellant applied for certified copy of the judgment but was told that the matter was again in the hearing list and would be heard afresh. the matter continued to appear in the hearing list from september 1986 till 5.2.1987 when the particular division bench which had heard the matter released the case to be taken up by another bench. on 23rd of march, 1987, the writ petition was dismissed by the new division bench.3. two contentions have been raised before us. it is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 1987 (SC)

Catering Cleaners of Southern Railway Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-04-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC777; [1987(54)FLR476]; JT1987(1)SC376; 1987LabIC619; (1987)ILLJ345SC; 1987(1)SCALE240; (1987)1SCC700; [1987]2SCR164; 1987(2)SLJ23(SC); 1987(1)LC560(SC)

o. chinnappa reddy, j.1. the petitioners describe themselves as 'catering cleaners of southern railways represented by v. china thambi and m.mohan of the vegetarian refreshment room, central station, madras'. the petition is claimed to be filed in a representative capacity on behalf of about three hundred and odd catering cleaners working in the catering establishments in various railway junctions of the southern railway and in the pantry cars of long distance trains running under the control of the southern railway. since a long time they have been agitating for the abolition of the contract system under which they are employed to do cleaning work in the catering establishments and the pantry cars and for their absorption as regular employees of the principal employer, namely, the southern railway. they complain that they are rot even paid minimum wages. they are paid a pittance averaging from rs. 2 00/- to rs. 2.50/- per day. although the contract system has been abolished in almost all the other railways, the southern railway persists in employing contract labour for cleaning its catering establishments and pantry cars. as the several representations made by them to the authorities concerned proved fruitless they have been forced to seek the intervention of this court under article 32 of the constitution to direct the respondents to exercise their powers under section 10(1) of the contract labour (regulation and abolition) act 1970 and to abolish the contract system in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1987 (SC)

State Bank of India and Another Vs. State Bank of India Employees Unio ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-15-1987

Reported in : [1988]169ITR675(SC)

the certificate on the basis of which this appeal is filed is issued by a learned single judge of the high court of bombay under article 134a of the constitution in respect of an order passed by him in a writ petition in which the employees of the state bank of india had questioned the right of the management to fix the hours of work and hours of recess and its right to stagger the period of recess and had prayed for other consequential reliefs. the learned single judge allowed the petition following certain earlier decisions of the high court rendered by the division benches. he, however, proceeded to grant a certificate of fitness to file an appeal against his decision before this court following an earlier order of a division bench granting such a certificate in respect of one of those earlier decisions. he issued the certificate under article 134a of the constitution without referring to the article under which this appeal could be filed. article 134a of the constitution read thus :'134a. every high court, passing or making a judgment, decree, final order, or sentence, referred to in clause (1) of article 132 or clause (1) of article 133, or clause (1) of article 134, -(a) may, if it deems fit so to do, on its own motion; and(b) shall, if an oral application is made, by or on behalf of the party aggrieved, immediately after the passing or making of such judgment decree, final order or sentence,determine, as soon as may be, after such passing or making, the question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1987 (SC)

Arati Dutta Vs. Eastern Tea Estate (P) Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-13-1987

Reported in : AIR1988SC325; (1988)1CompLJ34(SC); JT1987(4)SC564; 1987(2)SCALE1479; (1988)1SCC523; [1988]1SCR1070

sabyasachi mukharji, j.1. these appeals by special leave relate to the affairs of m's. eastern tea estate (p) ltd. it was of two branches namely, the dutta's and the choudhury's. due to death and lack of cordiality between the erstwhile partners the two branches first drifted and then parted company as it unfortunately is the fate of so many indian concerns and there were disputes and litigations in court.2. the civil appeal no. 1510 of 1987 arises from a judgment and decision of the division bench of the high court of gauhati dated 4th june, 1987. it appears that that a petition was filed originally by the appellant under sections 397 and 398 read with section 403 of the companies act, 1956 (hereinafter called 'the act'). the company petition came to be disposed of on 4th february, 1977 in accordance with the compromise arrived at between the parties. the said compromise comprised of inter alia, two relevant paragraphs, for the present purpose, which read as follows:1. mrs. arati dutta will take over chandana t.e. and choudhury group will take over martycherra t.e. on 25th january, 1976.2. the bank liability of the company in respect to martycherra t.e. amounting to rs. 2,20,000 (approx.) shall be shared equally of which rs. 1,10,000 shall be paid by mrs. arati dutta on 25th january, 1976 at silchar in presence of shri b.k. das, advocate and shri s.k. sen, advocate.3. the entire liability of the company would be equally shared and for that purpose an independent auditor .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 18 1987 (SC)

Sheela Barse Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-18-1987

Reported in : 1987(3)Crimes433(SC); JT1987(3)SC612; 1987(3)KarLJ125; 1987(2)SCALE593; (1987)4SCC373; [1988]1SCR210

ranganath misra, j. 1. petitioner is a bombay-based free lance journalist who had sought permission to interview women prisoners in the maharashtra jails and on 6.5.1982, the inspector-general of prisons of the state permitted her to do so in respect of female prisoners lodged in the bombay central jail, the yerawada central jail at pune and the kolhapur district jail. when the petitioner started tape-recording her interviews with the prisoners at the bombay central jail, she was advised instead to keep notes only of interviews. when the petitioner raised objection on this score, the inspector-general of prisons orally indicated that he had changed his mind. later, the petitioner was informed that grant of permission to have interview was a matter of discretion of the inspector-general and such interviews are ordinarily allowed to research scholars only. petitioner has made grievance over the withdrawal of the permission and has pleaded that it is the citizen's right to know if government is administering the jails in accordance with law. petitioner's letter was treated as a writ petition under article 32 of the constitution.2. return has been made to the rule nisi and the inspector-general of prisons in his affidavit has pleaded that the petitioner is a free lance journalist and is not employed by any responsible newspaper. the permission issued in favour of the petitioner was under administrative misunderstanding and mistaken belief and was in contravention of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 02 1987 (SC)

Sarup Chand Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-02-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC1441; 1987CriLJ1180; 1987(1)Crimes818(SC); JT1987(1)SC592; 1987(1)SCALE477; (1987)2SCC486; 1987(1)LC687(SC)

murari mohan dutt, j.1. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the punjab & haryana high court affirming the order of conviction of the appellant under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act, 1947 and under section 161 ipc, and also upholding the sentence of fine as passed by the learned special judge, sangrur, but reducing the sentence of imprisonment from two years to one year under section 5(1)(d) read with section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act; the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment under section 161 ipc has been sutained. needless to say, the sentences of imprisonment have been directed to run concurrently.2. the prosecution case is that p.w. 4 gurcharan singh had entered into an agreement to mortgage his land to one baldev singh for rs. 55,000/-, and for the purpose of effecting the mortgage, he required a copy of the jamabandi the appellant, who is the revenue patwarl of the village, was approached by p.w. 4 on march 3, 1981 when he demanded a sum of rs. 300/- for supplying a copy of the jamabandi the amount was settled at rs. 200/-. it was arranged that p.w. 4 would meet the appellant at the canal bridge at 3.00 p.m. on that day. p.w. 4 was advised to go to the vigilance inspector, sangrur. accordingly, he went there and made a statement to the vigilance inspector, gurdial singh (p.w. 7). p.w. 4 also handed over to p.w. 5 two currency notes of rs. i00/- each. p.w. 5 applied .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1987 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, U.P., Lucknow Vs. British India Corporatio ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-03-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC798; (1987)60CTR(SC)54; [1987]165ITR51(SC); JT1987(1)SC328; 1987(1)SCALE221; (1987)2SCC96; [1987]2SCR133; 1987(1)LC480(SC)

sabyasachi mukharji, j.1. this is an appeal from the judgment and order of the high court of allahabad dated 25th november, 1971.2. the income-tax appellate tribunal had referred to the high court the following question for its opinion:whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of rs. 50,000 was a capital expenditure which could not be allowed as a deduction under section 10(2)(xv) of the income-tax act, 1922?3. the assessee carried on the business of manufacture and sale of woolen goods, cotton textiles and hides and leather products. the activity of tanning hides and manufacturing leather products was carried on under the name and style of cooper allen and north west tannery branches. for the assessment year 1959-60, under the income-tax act, the relevant accounting of which being the calender year ending on 31st december, 1958, the assessee had claimed a deduction of rs. 50,000 paid to messrs textile & general supplies private ltd. bombay (hereinafter referred to as 'textile & general supplies'). the assessee's claim was made on the basis that the assessee was bound under an agreement with messrs charles walker & co., london to pay that amount to textile general supplies for meeting the initial expenditure for establishing it as distributor of the assessee's products. the income-tax officer rejected the claim, and the appellate assistant commissioner upheld that decision. the assessee went up in appeal before the income-tax appellate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1987 (SC)

Kundan Lal Srikishan, Mathura (U.P.) Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-03-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC793; JT1987(1)SC321; 1987(1)SCALE234; (1987)1SCC684; [1987]2SCR140; [1987]65STC62(SC); 1987(1)LC600(SC)

order under section 21 the original tax assessment order in respect of you was passed on 7.2.79. the audit, however, had objected that the businessman's arhat (commission) and mandi cess amount was left out from taxation. on this basis the businessman was called by issuing him notice under the said section. on the appointed day, his advocate appeared and submitted the accounts books. on examination it was found that the businessman had already included the arhat and mandi cess amount in the taxable income and he had already been assessed. therefore, no tax is to be levied now and the businessman is declared as free from paying any more tax under section 21. sd/- b. lal sales tax officer sector 2, mathura dated: 18.1.80 3. in the year 1982, the appellant realised that it was not liable to pay sales tax on purchases made on behalf of ex-u.p. principals as such purchases had occasioned inter-state movement of the commodities in question and were as such exempt from the purview of the act. the appellant, therefore, filed four applications under section 22 of the act for rectification of the mistakes in the assessment orders for assessment years 1975-76, 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 on the ground that the turnover in respect of purchases made on behalf of ex-u.p. principles had been wrongly assessed to sales tax in the aforementioned four years. the applications for rectification made in respect of assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79 were all within three years of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1987 (SC)

A.N. Pathak and ors. Vs. Secretary to the Government, Ministry of Defe ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-12-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC716; [1987(54)FLR556]; JT1987(1)SC414; 1987LabIC638; (1987)IILLJ140SC; 1987(1)SCALE307; 1987Supp(1)SCC763; [1987]2SCR281; 1987(3)SLJ39(SC); 1987(1)LC653(SC)

v. khalid, j.1. the petitioners, six in number, are working in the ministry of defence, department of production. they joined their service on different dates ranging from 1963 to 1969. the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th petitioners joined service as senior technical assistant while 4th and 6th petitioners joined as technical assistant. the 1st and 2nd petitioners are now working as senior technical officer (officiating), 3rd and 4th petitioners are working as technical officer (officiating) and 5th & 6th are working as junior technical officer. none of the petitioner have been confirmed in their respective posts to which they have been promoted.2. the first respondent is the secretary to the government, ministry of defence and the second respondent, director, directorate of production and inspection, naval.3. the appointment and promotion of persons like the petitioners were governed by the department of defence production (directorate of production and inspection, naval) group a and group b technical post recruitment rules, 1976, for short 'the rules'. prior to these rules, they were governed by the rules framed in 1965 and revised in 1972.4. the grievance of the petitioner is that the rules discriminate between them and the direct recruits, that their seniority is not taken into consideration while the seniority list is prepared and that the direct recruits are given seniority over them undeservedly by virtue of the operation of the method of recruitment contained in the rules. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1987 (SC)

Binod Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Suresh Chandra Mahaveer Prasad Mantri

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-06-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC1739; JT1987(2)SC504; 1987MPLJ437(SC); 1987(1)SCALE1051; (1987)3SCC99; [1987]3SCR247

1. special leave granted.2. this is an appeal by special leave against the judgment & order dated 5-1-1987, of the high court of madhya pradesh, bench at indore, in civil revision no. 382 of 1986, by which the high court affirmed the order dated 28-11-1986 of the district judge, ujjain in civil execution case no. 1249 of 1986, filed by the respondent against the appellant.3. the appellant is a textile undertaking at agra road, ujjain. the madhya pradesh government enacted the madhya pradesh sahayata upkram (vishesh upbandh) adhiniyam, 1978 (no. 32 of 1978), for short the act, with the object of giving relief to sick undertakings. relief was given to the appellant-company first by notification no. f-17-87-79-xi-b-1, dated 15-11-1980, extended from time to time by subsequent orders, the relief so given to continue till 15-11-1987.4. the respondent filed a summary suit against the appellant in the bombay high court on its original side, as summary suit no. 124 of 1986 claiming a decree for rs. 12,12,327.50, with interest and costs. the appellant did not contest the suit. the suit was accordingly decreed. the respondent got the decree transferred for execution to the district judge, ujjain on 26-9-1986 and then applied for execution of the decree. the appellant resisted execution by filing objection pleading that it was a relief undertaking under the act, the benefits under which act were available till 15-11-1986 at the time the objection was filed (now upto 15-11-1987) and that .....

Tag this Judgment!


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