Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1987 Page 7 of about 77 results (0.076 seconds)

Oct 27 1987 (SC)

Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Ram Chan ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-27-1987

Reported in : AIR1988SC113; 1988(15)ECC452; 1987(32)ELT231(SC); JT1987(4)SC313; 1988LabIC336; (1988)IILLJ141SC; 1987(2)SCALE941; 1980Supp(1)SCC90; [1988]1SCR835; 1988(1)LC381(SC); 1988(1

sabyasachimukharji, j.1. special leave granted.2. this appeal arises out of the judgment and order of the division bench of the rajasthan high court dated 2nd september, 1986. the judgment under appeal was rendered in an appeal under section 82(2) of the employees' state insurance act, 1948 (hereinafter called 'the act'). the respondent, ram chander, was the proprietor of m/s. commercial tailors, sojati gate, jodhpur. at all material times, he used to run a tailoring shop, where clothes were stitched. the shop employed at the relevant time about 10 or 12 persons as tailors. the number of employees, however, never exceeded 20. the clothes were supplied by the customers and these were stitched according to the different sizes of the customers. such stitchingwere done at the shop of the respondent herein manually by electric iron which was also used in the process of stitching. there were ironing of finished clothes also. the employees state insurance court, rajasthan came to the conclusion as follows:the applicant is a tailoring shop which has employed more than 20 persons on one occasion and less on other days and makes use of power in the shape of electric press which is used for ironing of stitched clothes for customers. the electric iron is also used during the process of stitching in addition to the ironing of finished clothes.3. the question before the rajasthan high court was whether such establishment was covered by the notification dated 20th september, 1975 and came .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1987 (SC)

State of West Bengal Vs. Sree Sree Ma Engineering and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-08-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC2229; 1987(2)ARBLR194(SC); JT1987(3)SC553; 1987(3)KarLJ97; 1987(2)SCALE507; (1987)4SCC452; [1988]1SCR69

sabyasachi mukharji, j. 1. special leave granted.2. this is an appeal challenging the decision of the high court of calcutta upholding the decision of the learned single judge of that court whereby the award of the arbitrator was set aside and new arbitrator was appointed. in order to appreciate the position it is necessary to state that in the year 1964 the executive engineer had invited competitive sealed tenders in respect of 'silt clearance of river peali from utterbhag canning road bridge upto hobon sluice'. shri d.p. chatterjee entered upon the reference soon thereafter and the award was made in november, 1966. it appears that thereafter the respondent asked for the award amount in full and final settlement which the executive engineer turned down. the respondent herein was paid by the appellant a sum of rs. 32,525.62 in terms of the award and which sum was received and acknowledged by the respondent no. 1. then the true copy of the award was forwarded to the court by the chief executive engineer and the application was filed by the respondent no. 1 in 1981 in the high court of calcutta under sections 14, 15, 16 & 30 of the arbitration act, 1940 for setting aside the award dated the 19th november, 1966. the high court after hearing the parties dismissed that application on 10th may, 1982. the high court was thereafter pleased to pass judgment in terms of the award. the respondent herein preferred an appeal against the judgment dated 10.5.82. the division bench allowed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1987 (SC)

Gulab Mehra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-15-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC2332; 1988CriLJ168; 1987(3)Crimes405(SC); JT1987(3)SC559; 1987(2)SCALE561; (1987)4SCC302; [1988]1SCR126

b.c. ray, j. 1. special leave granted. arguments heard.2. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the high court of allahabad dated 26th march, 1987 in habeas corpus petition no. 17849 of 1986 dismissing the writ petition and confirming the order of detention passed against the appellant by the district magistrate, allahabad.3. the respondent no. 2, district magistrate, allahabad clamped upon the appellant an order of detention under section 3(2) of the national security act, 1980 and the appellant was detained at central jail, naini on october 10, 1986. on the same day the grounds of detention were served on the appellant. two grounds of detention mentioned in the grounds of detention are stated hereinbelow:(1) that the appellant on 2.10.1986 threatened the shopkeepers of khalasi line locality in order to extort money and was saying that appellant could not come for the last auction because the police were present on that occasion and that the shopkeepers had not given the appellant the money received in the above auction. further that the shopkeepers should collect money and give it to the appellant or else the appellant would shoot all of them. as a result of this the place was terror-stricken and the shops and houses closed down. a report of this incident was made by the picket employed at police station kydganj, i.e. report no. 38 time 20.10 dated 2.10.86. this was investigated by dev shankar, s.i. of police station kydganj and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1987 (SC)

Standard Fireworks Industries, Sivakasi and anr. Vs. Collector of Cent ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-17-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC829; 1987(11)ECC361; 1987(28)ELT56(SC); JT1987(1)SC460; 1987(1)SCALE351; (1987)1SCC600; 1987(1)LC384(SC)

ranganath misra, j.1. these appeals under section 35-l of the central excise and salt act of 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the act) are directed against the decision of the customs, excise and god (control) appellate tribunal, affirming the appellate order passed by the collector (appeals), central excise, madras.2. the appellants are manufacturers of fireworks each of them claimed refund of duty on the footing that they were exempted them claimed refund of duty on the footing that they were exempted from payment therefore under notification no. 17/77 dated 18.6.1977 as the goods manufactured by them were covered by tariff item no. 68 and in relation to such manufactures no process was ordinarily carried on with the aid of power the claims for refund related to the period covering parts of 1978, were rejected by the assistant collector and such rejection was upheld in appeal. revisions directed against the appellant's decision were filed before the central government which stood transferred to tribunal for disposal in accordance with the amended law. the exemption notification read thus: in exercise of the power conferred by sub-rule (1) of rule 8 of the central excise rules, 1944, the central government herby exempts all goods falling under item no. 68 of the first schedule to the central excise and salt act, 1988 (1 of 1944) in or in relation to the manufacture of which no process is ordinarily carried on with the aid of powers, from whole of the duty of excise lea .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 25 1987 (SC)

Arun Madan Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-25-1987

Reported in : 1987Supp(1)SCC535

1. the order of termination of the service of the appellant was passed before the respondent bank was nationalised. the high court was therefore right in holding that a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution was not maintainable against an order made when the bank was a public limited company. therefore, the appeal is dismissed. no costs.

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1987 (SC)

Madan Mohan Singh Vs. Harbans Lal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-26-1987

Reported in : 1987Supp(1)SCC601

a.p. sen and; v. balakrishnan eradi, jj.1. after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to the view that the high court was not right in its interpretation of section 13(2)(1) of the haryana urban (control of rent and eviction act), 1973. the default spoken of in clause (1) of section 13(2) of the act is only of arrears of rent and it does not provide that the tenant must in addition, also tender the electricity charges due. while the electricity charges would always be in addition to the rent and payable by the tenant it may or may not form part of the rent. it appears that the electricity charges were not fixed between the parties and therefore the tender made by the tenant on the first date of the hearing could not be held to be invalid on that account. in view of this, the judgment of the high court as well as the order of the rent controller are set aside and the application for eviction will stand rejected. we, however, direct that in view of the spiral rise in the prevailing rents the appellant shall pay rs 350 per month as rent for the demised premises w.e.f. april 1, 1987. the learned counsel for the appellant agrees to this increase. the appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1987 (SC)

Madan Lal Vs. Badri NaraIn and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-17-1987

Reported in : (1987)3SCC460

a.p. sen and; v. balakrishnan eradi, jj.1. the short question involved in this appeal is whether the high court was justified in upholding the order of the additional district judge no. vi, jaipur disallowing an application filed by the appellant under order 39 rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908. disagreeing with the additional civil judge, jaipur city, the learned additional district judge held that the appellant who as plaintiff claims to be mortgagee's tenant had no prima facie case for the grant of temporary injunction after redemption of the mortgage and therefore cannot claim the protection of the rajasthan premises (control of rent and eviction) act, 1950. as there was a divergence of opinion between different benches of the high court, a learned single judge referred the question to a full bench. we have gone through the decision1 of the full bench and also heard learned counsel for the appellant at quite some length.2. in our opinion, the proper course to adopt is to leave the question open to be determined in the suit. the full bench has held that a tenant inducted by the mortgagee with possession ceases to be a tenant on the termination of the mortgagee's interest on redemption to the mortgage and therefore was not entitled to claim the status of a tenant and thus not entitled to the protection of the act. it has referred to several decisions including those of this court in asa ram v. ram kali2 and sachalmal parasram v. ratanbai3. our attention has been .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 1987 (SC)

Dhartipakar Madan Lal Agarwal Vs. Rajiv Gandhi

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-11-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC1577; JT1987(2)SC402; 1987(1)SCALE1086; 1987Supp(1)SCC93; [1987]3SCR369; 1987(2)LC671(SC)

1. this appeal under section 116-a of the representation of the people act 1951 is directed against the order of the high court of allahabad (lucknow bench) dated 12.10.1981 rejecting the election petition filed by the appellant questioning the election of the respondent as member of the lok sabha.2. a bye election was held on june 14, 1981 to fill up the vacancy to the lok sabha caused by the death of sanjay gandhi in the 25th amethi constituency in district sultanpur in the state of uttar pradesh. the appellant, the respondent and 13 other candidates contested the election. on 15th june 1981 rajiv gandhi was declared elected having polled 258884 votes while the appellant polled 2728 votes only. the appellant filed an election petition under section 80 of the representation of the people act 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the act) questioning the validity of the election of the respondent on a number of grounds, including the allegations of corrupt practice of undue influence, hiring and procuring of vehicles for carrying voters and obtaining the assistance of government servants and incurring expenses at the election in excess of the permissible limit. the high court issued notice to the respondent who appeared before it and made an application under order vi rule 16 of the cpc for striking out the pleadings contained therein as the same were vague, general, unnecessary, frivolous and vexatious which did not disclose any cause of action. respondent further prayed that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1987 (SC)

Amar Singh and ors Vs. State of Rajasthan

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-12-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC2023; 1988CriLJ198; JT1987(1)SC687; 1987Supp(1)SCC144; [1987]Supp1SCR144

ordera.p. sen, j.1. these appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment and sentence passed by the rajasthan high court dated may 8, 1978 setting aside the judgment and sentence passed by the sessions judge, jhunjhunu dated january 17, 1975 and convicting the co-accused banwari lal under section 302 of the indian penal code, 1860 for having committed the murder of rattan singh, and the appellants for having committed alleged offences punishable under section 307 read with section 149 of the indian penal code for having attempted to commit the murders of shiv prasad and maan singh. the learned sessions judge had convicted them for offences punishable under section 325 read with section 149 holding that the ingredients of an offence punishable under section 307 were not made out. the high court also enhanced the sentence passed on the appellants from rigorous imprisonment for two years to rigorous imprisonment for four years. the appellant amar singh has since died and his appeal has abated.2. the only contention advanced by learned counsel for the appellants in these appeals is that no appeal having been preferred by the state government against the acquittal of the appellants for having committed offences punishable under section 307 read with section 149 of the indian penal code, the high court could not have altered their conviction under section 325 to one under section 307. the appellants' contention, in our view, must succeed. it has been brought out in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1987 (SC)

Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. Jai Hind Oil Mills Co. and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-09-1987

Reported in : AIR1987SC622; 1987(12)ECC209; 1987(30)ELT633(SC); JT1987(1)SC110; 1987(1)SCALE22; (1987)1SCC648; [1987]1SCR932; 1987(2)LC154(SC)

e.s. venkataramiah, j.1. these appeals by special leave are filed against the order dated 26.6.1986 passed in appeal no. 512 of 1986 in writ petition no. 1007 of 1986 and the order dated 26.6.1986 in appeal no. 535 of 1986 in writ petition no. 1424 of 1986 of the high court of bombay. since these two are connected matters, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. the facts of these two cases are these. the appellant in both these appeals is the board of trustees of the port of bombay (hereinafter referred to as 'the port trust') and the ist respondent in both these appeals is a partnership firm by name m/s. jai hind oil mills company. the ist respondent imported 5 consignments of propylene of 10 metric tons each in january, 1986 by s.s. maribor. the general landing date of the said consignments was 20th january, 1986 and the last free date in respect of them was 23rd january, 1986. thereafter the said consignments were incurring demurrage. the bills of entry were submitted by the ist respondent to the customs authorities in the same month. disputes arose between the ist respondent and the customs authorities with regard to the basic customs duty payable in excess of 32.50% (as goods were imported from the republic of korea which was a developing country), with regard to loading the assessable value with customs duty for calculation of the additional duty and with regard to loading the cif value with the landing charges. not being satisfied with the contentions of the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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