Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1993 Page 6 of about 118 results (0.097 seconds)

Jun 11 1993 (SC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Brigadier Sukhjit Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jun-11-1993

Reported in : JT1993(3)SC748; 1993(3)SCALE25; (1993)3SCC459; [1993]3SCR944

madan mohan punchhi, j.1. these two appeals at the instance of the state of punjab, are directed against a common judgment of a learned single judge of the punjab and haryana high court, passed in regular second appeal nos. 1719 and 1720 of 1989 and are limited in scope to the determination of title to a double storeyed building situated in a complex known as jallowkhana in the town of kapurthala. these appeals have arisen in the following manner.2. the respondent herein is brigadier sukhjit singh. he is the son of maharaja paramjit singh and the grand-son of maharaja jagajit singh in the order of primogeniture succession. the ancestry of maharaja jagjit singh is traced to baba jassa singh ahluwalia, the founder of kapurthala state and the ahluwalia dynasty. it is common ground that there is a complex known as jallowkhana at kapurthala which encompasses two historic havelis, which in the context mean palaces, going by the names haveli baba jassa singh and nihal mahal. besides these two havelis, there are open spaces and other structures in the complex and the disputed one is a double storeyed building presently in the occupation of state of punjab through its public works department. the plaintiff-respondent claiming that since the possession of the state of punjab thereon was permissive in character and in the nature of a licence, and despite his terminating the same the state of punjab had not vacated the disputed building, he sought relief by way of a suit for mandatory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 27 1993 (SC)

Deokabai (Smt) Vs. Uttam

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-27-1993

Reported in : JT1993(4)SC374; 1993(3)SCALE255; (1993)4SCC181; [1993]Supp1SCR409

madan mohan punchhi, j.1. this appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated july 29, 1986 passed by a division bench of the nagpur bench of the bombay high court in letter's patent appeal no.69 of 1983 arising in first appeal no.125 of 1982.2. the appellant herein deokabai is an aged widow residing in a portion of a house with her daughter and grand children. on 18.1.79 she entered into an agreement to sell that portion of the house in her possession with uttam, the respondent. the total sale consideration was fixed at rs. 48,000/- out of which rs. 5,000/- was paid to her as earnest money. the agreement for sale was reduced to writing. it contained an important term to the following effect (as translated by us, the original being in hindi):before registration of the sale deed of this house in your name, permission of the competent authority, nagpur, is necessary. therefore, i shall immediately take steps to obtain the permission. after the date of getting the permission from the competent authority, when i would get another suitable house then i would get the sale deed of this house registered in your name.3. it appears that on 19.1.79, the day following the day of the execution of the agreement, she entered into another agreement for sale pertaining to the other portion of the house with one jayanti lai shah and later executed a sale deed, registered in his favour. so far as the present agreement for sale was concerned, she took the step of applying for necessary .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 11 1993 (SC)

Gulzara Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-11-1993

Reported in : JT1993(3)SC668; 1993(2)SCALE808a; (1993)4SCC245; [1993]3SCR645

k. ramaswamy, j.1. the common questions of law arose for decision in these appeals. hence they are disposed of together. notification under section 4(1) of the land acquisition act 1 of 1984 was published in the punjab state gazette on january 27, 1978 acquiring 89 acres 4 canals and 12 marlas of land situated in dhuri village for public purpose, namely to set up new mandi township. the appellants claimed at the rate of rs. 30,000/- per bigha but the land acquisition officer after classifying the lands into six blocks a to f, awarded market value ranging between rs. 30,000/- to rs. 6,000/- per acre. on reference under section 18 of the act, the district judge, sangrur in his judgment dated may 13, 1981 disagreed with the classification and found that all the lands are possessed of the same quality. relying on sale-deeds, ex. p-3 dated september 4, 1972, p-5 dated june 14, 1976, p-2 dated february 23,1977 and p-4 dated july 15,1977, all small extents, he calculated at an average of rs. 1300/- per biswa and awarded to the lands belonging to jaswant kaur, baldev singh and gurdev singh at the rate of rs. 1,000/- per biswa finding that their lands are abutting abadi (village) and for the rest awarded at the rate of rs. 800/- per biswa with statutory solatium at 15% and interest of 6% per annum on enhanced compensation. dissatisfied therewith the state filed the appeals and against disallowed claims, the claimants in one batch filed appeals and in another batch filed cross- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 12 1993 (SC)

Devi Singh and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue for Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-12-1993

Reported in : JT1993(6)SC152; 1993(4)SCALE202; (1994)1SCC215; [1993]Supp3SCR221; 1994(1)LC103(SC)

order1. these appeals are directed against a common order dated 28.7.81 made by the high court of rajasthan, jaipur bench in civil writ petition nos. 164 to 168 of 1977.2. the cause for these appeals is a direction issued by the board of revenue, rajasthan, a functionary established under the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 empowered, in the regular course, to hear second appeals. five suits were filed by the respective appellants in these appeals against the state of rajasthan in the court of the assistant collector, bharatpur seeking declaration that by virtue of section 5(4) of the rajasthan zamindari and biswedari abolition act, 1959 they had become khatedars for they were owners in actual cultivation over the said area on the crucial date. the suits were contested by the state of rajasthan. in support of their claim the appellants, the plaintiffs therein, produced revenue records such as jamabandis of the samvat 2002, 2006, 2018 and 2026 showing consistent actual possession over the lands claimed by them. it appears that jamabandi for the samvat 2015 was not produced by either party and this jamabandi could have been the closest to the date on which the zamindari and biswedari under the act was abolished. the gap therein was filled by the plaintiffs appellants by production of oral evidence which the trial court believed. the only witness examined by the state being the patwari of the village could be of no assistance to defend the suit. as a result the suits were decreed. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1993 (SC)

Satpal and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-14-1993

Reported in : 1995Supp(1)SCC206

a.m. ahmadi,; m.m. punchhi and; k. ramaswamy, jj.and1. the appellants herein feeling aggrieved by the judgment rendered by a division bench of the punjab and haryana high court dated 4-2-1993 have preferred these appeals by special leave. the brief facts which need to be noticed for the disposal of these appeals are as under:2. on receipt of a requisition from the director of land records for filling vacancies in the post of patwaris, an advertisement was issued on 7-5-1987, inviting applications from eligible candidates for the existing 485 vacancies. pursuant to this advertisement, over a lakh of candidates applied for the post of patwari. it appears that thereafter the subordinate service selection board (hereinafter called the board) was dissolved on 22-6-1987, and was reconstituted on 25-6-1987. thereupon, a fresh advertisement was issued for filling in the said 485 vacancies on 22-7-1987. on the requisition of the director, the total number of vacancies were enlarged to 1000 or thereabout. as a very large number of candidates had applied, the board constituted various committees for interviewing the candidates at different stations. on receipt of the recommendations from these committees, the board selected 2318 candidates. however, the government reduced the number to 1313 candidates. on their successful completion of the training they would eventually be appointed patwaris under the provisions of the haryana revenue patwaris (group c) service rules, 1981 ( .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 27 1993 (SC)

Surjit Kaur Vs. Garja Singh and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-27-1993

Reported in : AIR1994SC135; 1994(2)BLJR1056; II(1993)DMC443SC; 1993(4)SCALE302; (1994)1SCC407; [1993]Supp3SCR428; 1994(1)LC223(SC)

orders. mohan, j.1. the facts leading to this civil appeal are as under :the suit property in question was originally owned by one gulaba singh. he died on september 5,1969. the plaintiffs laid a suit no. 217/137 in the court of sub judge, 1st class, dhuri on 18.6.1970 for possession of the suit property on the plea that they were the grand sons of the father's brother of the said gulaba singh. they also based their claim on the will stated to have been executed by gulaba singh in their favour on august 16, 1969. it was further averred in the plaint that the first defendant has no right, title or interest in the suit property. her claim that she was validly married to gulaba is baseless. the karewa nama dated october 28, 1965 alleged to have been executed between gulaba singh and the first defendant was a nominal transaction. in fact, the karewa nama recited that the first defendant was married to bishan singh who died about four years ago on april 22, 1964. the mutation of inheritance of the deceased was sanctioned in favour of the first defendant surjit kaur. therefore, it had become necessary for the plaintiffs to file a suit for possession of the land and the house in question. an additional plea was made for permanent injunction restraining the first defendant from alienating the land in dispute. 2. the first defendant contested the suit on the ground that she was the legally wedded wife of gulaba singh who had contracted karewa form of marriage with her. in evidence .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 15 1993 (SC)

Union of India and Others Vs. Hindustan Development Corpn. and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-15-1993

Reported in : AIR1994SC988; JT1993(3)SC15; 1993(2)SCALE506; (1993)3SCC499

orderk. jayachandra reddy, j.1. by our order dated 14th january, 1993 while disposing of these special leave petitions we gave our conclusions and we proposed to deliver the detailed judgment at a later stage giving all the reasons in support of those conclusions. we hereby deliver the detailed judgment.2. in our earlier order we stated the relevant facts and the issues involved in a concussedform. however, we think it appropriate and necessary to refer to some of them for a better appreciation of the reasons in their proper perspective.3. every year the railway board enters into contracts with the manufacturers for the supply of cast steel bogies which are used in turn for building the wagons. cast steel bogies come under a specialised item procured by the railways from the established sources of proven ability. there are 12 suppliers in the field who have been regularly supplying these items. two new firms simplex and beekay also entered the field. among them admittedly m/s. h.d.c., mukand and bhartiya are bigger manufacturers having, capacity to manufacture larger quantities. on 25.10.91 a limited tender notice for procurement of 19000 cast steel bogies was issued to the regular suppliers as well as the above two new entrants for the year namely from 1.4.92 to 31.3.93. the last date for submission of offers to the ministry of railways was 27.11.91 by 2,30 p.m. and the tenders were to be opened on the same day at 3 p.m. it was also stated therein that the price was subject .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 07 1993 (SC)

Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, Chandigarh Through Its ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-07-1993

Reported in : AIR1994SC1023; 1994CriLJ1368; JT1993(6)SC650; 1993(4)SCALE636; (1994)1SCC616; [1993]Supp3SCR915; 1994(1)LC199(SC)

1. special leave granted.2. this appeal is a sequel to an unfortunate occurrence dated january 25, 1993 wherein kulwant singh, advocate, practicing at the district courts, ropar, his wife and a child aged about two years were alleged to have been abducted and murdered. the lawyer fraternity in general and the advocates practising at the high court and the district courts in the states of punjab, haryana and the union territory of chandigarh were not satisfied with the police investigation. the punjab and haryana high court bar association (bar association) demanded a judicial enquiry into the occurrence by a sitting judge of the high court or a district judge or a vigilance judge belonging to the higher judiciary. their demand, having not been acceded to the by state government, the bar association went on indefinite strike with effect from february 6, 1993. later on, the district bar associations in the states of punjab, haryana and the union territory of chandigarh also went on strike thereby stopping the functioning or the courts throughout the jurisdiction of the punjab and haryana high court. an action committee formed by the bar association held an enquiry into the matter and submitted its report on february 14, 1993. the report is reproduced hereunder : - report of the killing of mr. kulwant singh advocate, his wife and two years old association of punjab and haryana high court formed an 'action committee' for the release of mr. kulwant singh, advocate, his .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 1993 (SC)

R.C. Poudyal and ors. Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-10-1993

Reported in : AIR1993SC1804; JT1993(2)SC1; 1993(1)SCALE489; 1994Supp(1)SCC324; [1993]1SCR891

order1. these petitions under article 226 of the constitution of india - which were originally filed in the high court of sikkim and now withdrawn by and transferred to this court under article 139-a- raise certain interesting and significant issues of the constitutional limitations on the power of parliament as to the nature of the terms and conditions that it could impose under article 2 of the constitution for the admission of new state into the union of india. these issues arise in the context of the admission of sikkim into the indian union under the constitution (35th amendment) act, 1975 as the 22nd state in the first schedule of the constitution of india.2. earlier, in pursuance of the resolution of the sikkim assembly passed by virtue of its powers under the government of sikkim act, 1974, expressing its desires to be associated with the political and economic institutions of india and for the representation of the people of sikkim in india's parliamentary system, the constitution (35th amendment) act, 1974 had come to be passed inserting article 2a which gave the state of sikkim the status of an 'associate state', but later sikkim became, as aforesaid, an integral part of the indian union as a full-fledged state in the union by virtue of the constitution (36th amendment) act, 1975, which however, provided for special provisions in article 371-f to accommodate certain historical incidents of the evolution of the political institutions of sikkim. it is the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1993 (SC)

Raja Video Parlour and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-14-1993

Reported in : AIR1993SC2330; JT1993(4)SC227; 1993(3)SCALE105; (1993)3SCC708; [1993]Supp1SCR149

s.c. agrawal, j.1. leave granted.2. heard learned counsel for the parties.3. these appeals are directed against the judgment of the high court of punjab & haryana dated august 5, 1992 dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellants wherein they had challenged the orders refusing to grant or renew the licence for exhibition of video films through video cassette recorder (vcr) video cassette player (vcp) and a video projector on a separate screen in the video parlours run by them. the appellants have also challenged the validity of the proviso to sub-rule (3) of rule 10 and rule 5(3) of the punjab exhibition of films on television screen through video cassette player (regulation rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules') made by the government of punjab in exercise of the powers conferred on it by punjab cinemas (regulation) act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act').4. the appellants are running video parlours wherein they exhibit pre-recorded video cassettes of cinematograph films with the aid of a vcr/vcp and a video projector on a large screen of the size of 100 inches or 120 inches. the premises in which they conduct the said business are having a capacity of more than 50 seats. in the punjab cinemas (regulation) rules, 1952 that were framed by the government of punjab in exercise of the powers conferred by the act, there was no special provision for grant of licence for such public exhibition of films. on january 10, 1986, the government of punjab .....

Tag this Judgment!

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