Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1992 Page 8 of about 113 results (0.074 seconds)

May 15 1992 (SC)

Workmen of Meenakshi Mills Ltd. and ors. Vs. Meenakshi Mills Ltd. and ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-15-1992

Reported in : AIR1994SC2696; [1992(65)FLR1]; JT1992(3)SC446; (1992)IILLJ294SC; 1992(1)SCALE1248; (1992)3SCC336

s.c. agarwal, j. 1. these appeals and writ petitions have been placed before us on a reference by a division bench of this court for the reason that they raise the question involving the constitutional validity of section 25-n of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the validity of the said provision is assailed on the ground that it is violative of thf.j.r. e right guaranteed under article 19(1)(g) of the constitution and is not saved by clause (6) of article 19. 2. since the only question required to be considered by us is with regard to the validity of section 25-n of the act and it can be decided on the basis of the relevant provisions of the act without going into the facts of each case, we do not consider it necessary to set out the facts. 3. section 25-n forms part of chapter v-b which bears the heading 'special provisions relating to lay-off, retrenchment and closure in certain establishments'. the said chapter consists of sections 25-k to 25-s and was inserted by the industrial disputes (amendment) act, 1976 (act no. 32 of 1976), hereinafter referred to as 'the 1976 act', with effect from march 5,1976. section 25-k, as originally enacted, confined the applicability of the provisions of chapter v-b to industrial establishments in which not less than 300 workmen were employed on an average per working day for the preceding twelve months. section 25-m makes provision for prohibition of lay-off. section 25-n prescribes the conditions .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1992 (SC)

Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Limited and anr. Vs. Reser ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-30-1992

Reported in : AIR1992SC1033; [1992]75CompCas12(SC); 1991CriLJ1391; JT1992(1)SC405; 1992(1)SCALE216; (1992)2SCC343; [1992]1SCR406

n.m. kasliwal, j.1. special leave granted in all the petitions.2. this litigation is an upshot of the earlier case reserve bank of india v. peerless general finance and investment company ltd. and ors. : [1987]2scr1 decided on january 22, 1987. in 1978 the prize chits and money circulation scheme (banning) act, 1978 (in short 'the banning act, was enacted 'to ban the promotion or conduct of prize chits or money circulation schemes and for matters connected therewith or incidental 'hereto.' the question which arose in the above case was whether the endowment scheme piloted by the peerless general finance and investment company ltd, (hereinafter in short 'the peerless') fell within the definition of 'prize chits' within' the meaning of section 2(e) of the above banning act. by a letter dated july 23, 1979, the reserve bank of india pointed out to the peerless that the schemes conducted by it were covered by the provisions of the banning act which had come into force w.e.f. december 12, 1978. on september 3, 1979 the peerless filed a writ petition in the calcutta high court for a declaration that the prize chits banning act did not apply to the business carried on by the peerless. a similar writ petition was filed questioning a notice issued by the madhya pradesh government on the same lines as that issued by the west bengal government. a learned single judge of the high court dismissed both the writ petitions but appeals preferred by the peerless under the letters patent were .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 1992 (SC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. P.L. Karuppan Chettiar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-11-1992

Reported in : (1992)109CTR(SC)317; [1992]197ITR646(SC); 1993Supp(1)SCC580

orders. ranganathan, j.1. at the instance of the commissioner of income-tax, madurai, by this application under section 256(1) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), presented on august 11, 1982, we proceed to draw up a statement of the case and refer the question arising out of the tribunal's order in i.t.a. no. 1100/(mds) of 1981, relating to the income-tax assessment for the year 1977-78.2. there was one palaniappa chettiar who, along with his wife, anandavalli achi, their son, karuppan chettiar, and their daughter-in-law, constituted a hindu undivided family. there was a partition in this family on march 22, 1954, under which palaniappa chettiar was allotted certain properties as and for his share and he got separated. this partition was recognised by the income-tax department under section 25a of the indian income-tax act, 1922. thereafter, karuppan chettiar, son of palaniappa chettiar, and his wife and their subsequently born sons and daughter constituted a hindu undivided family which is the assessee in the present reference and has been assessed in that status. palaniappa chettiar, the father, died on september 9, 19g3, leaving behind his window, anandavalli achi, and karuppan chettiar, his son, who is also the karta of the assessee-hindu undivided 'family as his legal heirs. these two persons succeeded to the properties left by palaniappa chettiar under section 8 of the hindu succession act and divided the same between themselves.3. in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 1992 (SC)

Union of India and Others Vs. Rajendra Singh<br>and<br>union of India ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-12-1992

Reported in : AIR1993SC205a; [1992]Supp1SCR937

orderyogeshwar dayal, j.1. heard. special have granted in both the matters. with the consent of learned counsel for the parties the appeals are being disposed of.2. this order will dispose of the two appeals arising out of s.l.p. (civil) no. 450 of 1990 and s.l.p. (civil) no. 7584 of 1991,3. in the appeal arising oat of s.l.p. (civil) no. 450 of 1990 the matter has arisen out of a second appeal (second appeal no. 621 of 1988) decided by a single judge of the lucknow bench of the allahabad high court dated 19th december, 1988. as per the facts found by the learned single judge the respondent was dismissed from service by the assistant security officer, railway protection force after the departmental inquiry. after exhausting the departmental remedies he filed a suit for declaration stating that the order of dismissal was void as it was passed by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority.4. it was alleged by him that he was appointed in the year 1965 as rakshak by the assistant security officer and the appointment was made after the approval of the chief security officer. the order of removal dated 20th august, 1980 was passed by the assistant security officer. the suit was contested by the union of india (appellant no. 1 herein) and it was pleaded that die respondent herein was removed by the competent authority. the learned single judge noted the provisions of the railway protection force act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') as well the railway .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 1992 (SC)

Tvl. Ramco Cement Distribution Co. Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu Vs. State of ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-20-1992

Reported in : AIR1993SC123; 1994(38)KarLJ79; 1992(2)SCALE850; (1993)1SCC192; [1992]Supp2SCR78

orders. ranganathan, j.1. by its judgment dated 23.12.1981, reported as ramco cement distribution co. (p) ltd. v. the state of tamil nadu (1982) 51 s.t.c. 171, the madras high court disposed of a batch of 48 sales tax revision cases arising out of the assessments, to local sales tax (t.n.s.t.) as well as central sales tax (c.s.t.), of ramco cement distribution co. (p) ltd. (16 cases), madras cements ltd. (8 cases), dalmia cement bharat ltd. (21 cases) and india cements ltd. (3 cases). the questions at issue were answered partly in favour of revenue and partly in favour of the assessees. c.a. nos. 5306-5336/1985 preferred by the state of tamil nadu arise out of 31 of these cases : 9 relating to ramco cements, 16 relating to dalmia cements and 6 relating to madras cements. c.a. no. 2684 to 2690/82 are appeals by ramco cements and c.a. no. 4043-4044/1982 are by madras cements from the same judgment. c.a. nos. 315-319/1983 315-319/1983 arise out of the other 5 cases relating to dalmia cements. c.a. nos. 280-281/1989 arise out of a judgment of the high court dated 17.1.1985 which dismissed two revision tax cases pertaining to dalmia cements. one of the questions involved in these cases was decided in favour of the assessee by following the decision in 51 s.t.c. 171. as the questions involved are common, all these appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment. in doing so, we shall refer to the facts in the appeals pertaining to ramco cements. it is common ground that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1992 (SC)

Thakore Dolji Vanvirji and Others Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-15-1992

Reported in : AIR1993SC209; 1992CriLJ3953; JT1992(6)SC66; 1992(2)SCALE774; 1993Supp(2)SCC534

orderk. jayachandra reddy, j.1. this is an appeal under section 379 cr.p.c. read with section 2 of the supreme court (enlargement of criminal appellate jurisdiction) act. there are four appellants. they are original accused nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5. they alongwith tha. chandji badarji (a-3) were tried for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 302/34 and 323 i.p.c. the learned trial judge acquitted all of them. the state preferred an appeal and a division bench of the gujarat high court reversed the order of acquittal and convicted a-1 under section 302 i.p.c. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. he was also convicted under section 148 i.p.c. and sentenced to undergo one year's r.i. a-2 to a-5 were convicted under section 302/149 i.p.c. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. a-2 was also convicted under section 148 and sentenced to one year's r.i. a-3 to a-5 were also convicted under section 147 i.p.c. and sentenced to six months r.i. the sentence were directed to run concurrently. before filing this appeal, a-3 died. the remaining accused nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 have preferred this appeal. the prosecution case is as follows:the complainant bhupatsing andaji was residing with his father and mother in samdhi-motawas and doing agricultural work. he had six brothers, he being the eldest. the other brothers were also residing with him. it appears that an election took place in the village two months before the occurrence in which accused no. 1 contested .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 31 1992 (SC)

State of U.P. Vs. Hanif

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-31-1992

Reported in : AIR1992SC1121; 1992CriLJ1429; 1992(2)Crimes14(SC); JT1992(2)SC513; 1992(1)KLT760(SC); 1992(1)SCALE753; (1992)3SCC100; [1992]2SCR371

orderk.ramaswamy, j.1. the respondent was convicted for an offence under section 7 read with section 16 of the prevention of food adulteration act, 37 of 1954, for short 'the act', and was sentenced to undergo 6 months r.i. and to pay a fine of rs. 1000 with usual default clause. on appeal the sessions court confirmed the conviction and sentence. but on revision the high court set aside the conviction solely on the ground that dr. b.s. singh, public analyst, had no jurisdiction to analyse the food article. it was b.s. garg, public analyst, varanasi and allahabad region, alone had the power. consequently the conviction on the basis of the report of dr. s.b. singh that the milk was adulterated was held without jurisdiction and authority of law. accordingly the high court acquitted the respondent by judgment dated february 2, 1981. this appeal by special leave arises against this judgment.2. the main question is whether dr. s.b. singh had jurisdiction over the allahabad area to analyse the articles of food. section 8 of the act reads thus:8. public analysts-the central government or the state govt. may by notification in the official gazette, appoint such persons as it thinks fit, having the prescribed qualifications to be public analysts for such local areas as may be assigned to them by the central government or the state government, as the case may be:provided that no person who has any financial interest in the manufacture, import or sale of any article of food shall be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 17 1992 (SC)

B.R. Mulani Vs. Dr. A.B. Aswathanarayana and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-17-1992

Reported in : AIR1993SC1318; 1993Supp(4)SCC743

order1. the petitioner, the unsuccessful plaintiff in the courts below, seeks special leave to appeal to this court from the judgment and decree dated 1st april, 1992 of the high court of karnataka in regular first appeal no. 37 of 1980 on its file, affirming the judgment and decree of dismissal dated 31st october, 1979 entered by the learned ii additional civil judge at bangalore in o.s. no. 436/1973 of the petitioner's suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 7th may, 1970.2. in his suit, the petitioner-plaintiff alleged that respondents 1 and 2 who are husband and wife, on their own behalf and on behalf of respondents 3 to 5, their children, agreed to sell, and the petitioner to purchase, the suit property for a consideration of rs. 1,10,000/- and that respondents having failed to perform their obligations under the said agreement the petitioner is entitled to a decree for specific performance.3. the execution of the suit agreement, exhibit p-3, was not disputed. but having regard to the nature and circumstances under which the said agreement came into existence with its own peculiar terms, a question of construction of the instrument as to the nature and of the rights and obligations it sought to create fell for consideration before the courts below. the relevant recitals in the exhibit p-3 recapitulate certain antecedent transactions under which respondents had agreed to sell the whole of the properties of which the suit property was a part in favour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 1992 (SC)

NizamuddIn Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-07-1992

Reported in : AIR1994SC1041; 1994CriLJ1386

k. jayachandar reddy, j.1. this appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the high court of madhya pradesh at jabalpur. the petitioner has also filed another special leave petition which was directed to be heard along with the appeal.2. the appellant is convicted under section 302, i.p.c. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life for causing death of mohd. yusuf, the deceased in the case. the appellant along with another accused misawul hasan were tried by the sessions court. the learned sessions judge held that when the appellant stabbed the deceased, acted in exercise of his right of self-defence, but exceeded the same. in that view of the matter, he convicted him under section 304 part 1, i.p.c. and sentenced him to three years r.i. and to a fine of rs. 300/- in default of payment of fine to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment in addition. the other accused is acquitted.3. the state preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal of both the accused. the convicted accused also preferred an appeal. the high court rejected the defence version and accepted the prosecution version and held that the appellant was an aggressor and he had no right of private defence and accordingly set aside the order of sessions court and convicted him under section 302, i.p.c. as stated above. the appeal preferred by the accused was dismissed. the high court convicted the other accused misawul hasan under section 352, i.p.c. and sentenced him to undergo one year's .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 07 1992 (SC)

Jaising Waman Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-07-1992

Reported in : AIR1994SC1683

1. this is an appeal under section 379, cr. p.c. read with section 2(a) of the supreme court (enlargement of criminal appellate jurisdiction) act, 1970. the appellant along with three others were tried for offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34, i.p.c. the appellant was also charged under section. 302 simpliciter. the trial court acquitted all the accused rejecting the testimony of the sole eye-witness, p.w. 7, who is widow of the deceased. the state preferred an appeal to the high court. the learned judge of the high court while confirming the acquittal of a-2 to a-4 convicted the appellant (a-l) under section 302, i.p.c and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. mr. p.h. parekh, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the evidence of p.w. 7 suffers from serious infirmities and she could not have witnessed the occurrence as she was sleeping. at any rate the version given by her is highly unreliable and that her conduct subsequent to the occurrence is highly unnatural. his further submission is that the view taken by the trial court is reasonable one and the high court has grossly erred in interfering with the matter.2. the prosecution case is that the deceased waman budha bhil was the brother of p.w. 5 and husband of p.w. 7. the husband and wife were living in a hut in the field. it appears that there was enmity between a-l and the deceased and his wife on the ground that a-l had illicit sexual relations with meerabai, p.w. 9, the sister .....

Tag this Judgment!


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