Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 1999 Page 1 of about 100 results (0.139 seconds)

Feb 02 1999 (SC)

Rajendra Rai Vs. State of Bihar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-02-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC996; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)345; 1999(1)ALT(Cri)188; 1999(1)BLJR628; 1999CriLJ1448; 1999(1)Crimes57(SC); JT1999(1)SC334; 1999(1)SCALE314; (1999)2SCC423; 1999(1)LC421(SC)

..... to that place hearing shouts of his mother. this does not appear to be a case where the murders of krishnandan and bir bahadur were committed because of any pre-mediation and in a cold blooded manner.7. both the sessions court and the high court have failed to consider the above referred facts and circumstances and have erroneously proceeded on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1999 (SC)

The Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors. Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-10-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC3125; 1999(4)ARBLR502(SC); 1999(3)BLJR2191; JT1999(5)SC422; 1999(4)SCALE516; (1999)9SCC620; [1999]Supp1SCR146

..... including the sugarcane from the farms to the purchase centers of the factories.2. spread of information regarding prices of agricultural produce for information of growers of sugarcane.3. providing mediation facility to enable the growers of sugarcane to get higher price for sugarcane as compared to the minimum prices fixed under the control orders.4. supervision of weighment of sugarcane ..... of supply of necessary information regarding the prevalent prices of sugarcane are made available by the market committee. but even apart from that, the market committee can act as a mediator in enabling the sugarcane growers to get better price of sugarcane above the minimum price fixed under the control order and the sugarcane act and this role of the market .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 1999 (SC)

Thyssen Stahlunion Gmbh Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-07-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC3923; [2000]99CompCas383(SC); JT1999(8)SC66; 1999(6)SCALE441; (1999)9SCC334; [1999]Supp3SCR461

..... the arbitral tribunal remains within the limits of its jurisdiction;(v) to minimise the supervisory role of courts in the arbitral process;(vi) to permit an arbitral tribunal to use mediation, conciliation or other procedures during the arbitral proceedings to encourage settlement of disputes;(vii) to provide that every final arbitral award is enforced in the same manner as if it .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 12 1999 (SC)

K.C. Singh Deo Vs. Niladri Sahu (Dead) by L.Rs. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-12-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1856; 88(1999)CLT385(SC); JT1999(4)SC482; 1999(II)OLR(SC)166; 1999(3)SCALE576; (1999)4SCC500; [1999]3SCR538; 1999(2)LC1018(SC)

..... by the person under the government and (a) the person holding the land is a temporary lessee doing personal cultivation on the land for agricultural purposes or (b) holds it mediately or immediately under temporary lessee or (c) is successor-in-interest of any such person. we, however, do not agree with the high court that possession of the land is ..... who are temporary lessees in personal cultivation of lands in the vested estates held under government for agricultural purposes, persons who are in personal cultivation of such lands held either mediately or immediately under such temporary lessees and the successor-in-interest of any such persons:provided that nothing in this clause shall apply to char or diara lands or lands ..... held by the person under the government and (iii)(a) the person holding land is a temporary lessee in personal cultivation of the land for agricultural purposes, or (b) holds mediately or immediately under such temporary lessee or (c) is a successor in interest of any such persons.5. regarding factual aspects, the high court confirmed the declaration of the revenue .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1999 (SC)

Ajaib Singh Vs. the Sirhind Co-operative Marketing Cum-processing Serv ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-08-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1351; [1999(82)FLR137]; JT1999(3)SC38; (1999)ILLJ1260SC; (1999)IIMLJ89(SC); 1999(2)SCALE508; (1999)6SCC82; [1999]2SCR505

..... could be used whenever considered fit to intervene in industrial disputes. this act was amended in the year 1938 authorising the central and provincial governments to appoint conciliation officers for mediating in or promoting the settlement of industrial disputes. shortly thereafter the government of india promulgated the defence of india rules to meet the exigency created by the second world war .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1999 (SC)

Dnyanoba Bhaurao Shemade Vs. Maroti Bhaurao Marnor

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-05-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC864; JT1999(1)SC265; 1999(1)SCALE262; (1999)2SCC471; 1999(1)LC398(SC)

orders.b. majmudar, j.1. in this appeal by special leave, the appellant-plaintiff had brought in challenge the judgment and order rendered by a learned single judge of the high court of judicature of bombay at aurangabad in second appeal no. 188-a of 1982. the high court, by the impugned judgment, has allowed the appeal of respondent defendant and has dismissed the appellant's suit. in order to appreciate the grievance of the appellant against the impugned judgment, a few introductory facts are required to be noted at the outset.introductory facts2. the appellant had purchased 2 acres and 33 gunthas of agricultural land from survey no. 23 aa situated at village shekta in gevrai taluka of beed district in state of maharashtra from one dagdu in the year 1967. it is his case that as he was in need of money and when the respondent - defendant advanced him rs. 10007he got executed a sale deed from the appellant for survey no. 21/aa of the same village on 29th january, 1973 as a security. after some time, the appellant was in a position to return the said amount with interest to the respondent - defend ant. both, therefore, came to gevrai for re-executing the sale deed in respect of survey no. 21/aa. according to the appellant at that time respondent - defendant demanded rs. 500/- more and he was not prepared to re-execute the sale deed in respect of survey no. 21/aa unless and until rs. 500/- more were paid to him by the appellant. as the appellant was not having rs. 500/- more, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1999 (SC)

Chief Executive Officer Vs. Surendra Kumar Vakil and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-23-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC2294; JT1999(2)SC315; 1999(2)SCALE208; (1999)3SCC555; [1999]2SCR118; (1999)2UPLBEC1360

sujata v. manohar, j.1. these appeals pertain to a property admeasuring 11.37 acres comprising survey no. 392 and known as bungalow no. 39, sagar cantonment. as per the general land register maintained under the cantonment land administration rules of 1925, the said property is shown as held on 'old grant' terms and stands in the name of shri s. n. mukherjee. the site is described as b-3 land and is placed under the management of defence estate officer, jabalpur circle, jabalpur.2. according to the respondents, by a sale deed dated 27th of september, 1927, s. n. mukherjee and his wife, sarjubala devi, purchased the said property together with the adjoining bungalow no. 40 from one pandit murlidhar dubey. the terms of the sale deed, however, do not disclose the nature of the rights possessed by dubey over the land comprising bungalow nos.39 and 40.3. s.n. mukherjee who was the occupancy holder as recorded in the general land register died in the year 1972 leaving behind 11 legal heirs. bungalow no. 39 which is the subject matter of the present appeals, however, was not mutated in the names of the legal heirs since they did not apply for mutation. by four registered sale deeds dated 26.2.1983, the heirs of s.n. mukherjee sold the entire property consisting bungalow no. 39 in favour of 24 persons who are the respondents. one gopal das soni obtained power of attorney from both the vendors as well as the vendees for dealing with the said property and taking all proceedings in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1999 (SC)

Punjab Wakf Board Vs. Gram Panchayat @ Gram Sabha

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-01-1999

Reported in : JT1999(9)SC544; (2000)126PLR477; 1999(7)SCALE404; (2000)2SCC121; [1999]Supp5SCR127

m. jagannadha rao, j.1. this appeal is preferred by the punjab wakf board against the judgment of the punjab high court in r. s.a. no. 1712/1995 dated 6.12.1996. by that judgment, the punjab high court confirmed the judgment of the additional district judge, dated 5.10.94, which had affirmed the judgment of the learned subordinate judge, samrala dated 31.3.1992. all the courts have dismissed the present suit filed by the punjab wakf board on merits as well as on the ground that, by virtue of section 13 of the punjab village common lands (regulations) act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act), the present suit was barred from the jurisdiction of the civil court. it is against this judgment that the punjab wakf board has come up in appeal.2. the facts of this case in brief are as follows: on 19.9.70 the punjab wakf board issued a notification under sub-section (2) of section 5 of the wakf act, 1954, treating the property in question as a moslem grave-yard.3. it appears that on 21.5.1972, the director of land records, punjab, wrote to the revenue officer concerned for mutation of the land in the name of the punjab wakf board. accordingly, the patwari of the area mutated the property in the name of the punjab wakf board. thereafter, the matter was taken up by the gram panchayat (gram sabha) of hariom khurd, tehsil samrala, district ludhiyana before the assistant collector, grade 1, samrala, contending that the property was community property which stood vested in the gram .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1999 (SC)

Mehar Singh and Others Vs. Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-14-1999

Reported in : AIR2000SC492; JT1999(10)SC85; 1999(7)SCALE489; (2000)2SCC97; 2000(1)LC213(SC)

orderm. jagannadha rao, j.1. leave granted in special leave petition (c) no. 12083 of 1984.2. the civil appeal no. 1921 of 1984 has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment of the high court of punjab & haryana in fao no. 170 of 1972 dated 2.6.1982. the high court, by the said judgment, confirmed the award of the sikh gurudwara tribunal, punjab dated 20.1.1972 in petition no. 143 of 1963 whereby the claim of the appellants being successors of one bhai arjan singh filed under section 5(1) of the sikh gurudwaras act, 1925 (hereinafter called the 'act') was partly allowed and partly dismissed.3. the civil appeal arising out of slp (c) no. 12083 of 1984 is filed against the order dated 10.7.1984 in fao no. 44/75 and that relates to possession under section 25 of the act. it is admitted that it depends solely on the result of ca no. 1921 of 1984.4. the gurudwara sahib padshahi chemi was declared to be a sikh gurudwara, under the notification of the punjab government no. 1211 dated 20.7.59 and figures at serial no. 325 in schedule i of the act, thereafter, by notification no. 162 y.p. dated 19.1.1962, issued under section 3(2) of the act, the list of rights,-titles and interests were claimed as belonging to the gurudwara. that notification contains a list of agricultural lands and other properties claimed by the gurudwara. after the said notification was published, bhai arjan singh (since deceased) put forward his claim by petition under section 5(1) of the act. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1999 (SC)

Sharif Mian and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-11-1999

Reported in : JT1999(9)SC633; (1999)6SCC37

order1. the case has a chequered litigative history but we pick up the thread from 1973 when the present appellants before us initiated a case for mutation of their names which was rejected by the anchal adhikari, bhabhua. appeal filed against the aforesaid orders of the anchal adhikari was dismissed by the deputy commissioner, land reforms on 7-5-1976. thereafter, the appellants filed appeal before the collector, rohtak who dismissed the appeal on 22-6-1977. against that order a revision was filed before the commissioner, who by his order dated 4-2-1980, allowed the revision and directed that an enquiry be made to ascertain if the land in question was in actual physical possession of the appellants. this order was challenged in the high court, which by its judgment and order dated 11-9-1985 allowed the writ petition and held that the commissioner had no jurisdiction to hear and decide the revision filed by the appellants. it is against this order that the present appeal has been filed.2. relying upon section 8 of the bihar land reforms act, 1950 and rule 8 framed there under, the high court held that the commissioner had no jurisdiction to entertain a revision against the order of the collector. for that purpose, the high court relied upon an earlier decision of its own in baldeo prasad sah v. commr. of bhagalpur division 1960 bljr 19. this decision has since been followed by that high court in another case, namely, sk. gajar v. state of bihar : 1986(34)bljr45 in which the .....

Tag this Judgment!


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