Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 115 results (0.080 seconds)

Oct 05 2012 (SC)

Gaytri Bajaj. Vs. Jiten BhallA.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-05-2012

..... his counsel by letter dated 13.01.2012.11. though the above facts stated in the aforesaid i.a. are not mentioned in the report of the mediator submitted to this court, what is stated in the aforesaid report dated 14.01.2012 is that on 14.01.2012 the respondent and the children were ..... the court made the following interim arrangement:"(i) the respondent-husband is directed to bring both daughters, namely, kirti bhalla and ridhi bhalla to the supreme court mediation center at 10 a.m. on saturday of every fortnight and hand over both of them to the petitioner-wife. the mother is free to interact with them ..... at about 12.00 p.m., the respondent took both the children home. thereafter, both the children have declined to visit the mediation centre any further. before the next date for appearance in the mediation centre, i.e., 14.01.2012 the said fact was informed to the learned counsel for the appellant by the respondent through ..... present and that a letter dated 13.01.2012 from the counsel for the respondent had been placed before the mediator wherein it has been stated that though the children had earlier attended the mediation centre they are now refusing to come to the centre and all efforts in this regard made by their father ..... all efforts, did not succeed in persuading the children. at about 1.30 p.m. the respondent, who had left the children in the mediation centre, received a call that he should come and take the children back with him. in the aforesaid i.a. it has been further stated .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 22 2012 (SC)

Devinder Singh Narula Vs. Meenakshi Nangia

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-22-2012

Reported in : (2012)8SCC580; JT2012(7)SC519; 2012(7)SCALE473; AIR2012SC2890; 2012AIRSCW4739

..... presently working overseas in canada. it is with such object in mind that during the pendency of the proceedings under section 12 of the act the parties agreed to mediation and during mediation the parties agreed to dissolve their marriage by filing a petition under section 13-b of the above act for grant of divorce by mutual consent. in the proceedings ..... .2011 indicating that they had settled the matter through the mediation centre and that they would be filing a petition for divorce by mutual consent on or before 15.4.2012. on the strength of the said petition, the hma proceedings ..... . it is pursuant to such agreement during the mediation proceedings that an application was filed by the parties in the aforesaid pending hma on 15.12 ..... before the mediator, the parties agreed to move appropriate petitions under section 13-b(1) and 13-b(2) of the act. a report was submitted by the mediator of the mediation centre of the tis hazari courts to the court in the pending hma no.239 of 2011 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2012 (SC)

V.D.Bhanot Vs. Savita Bhanot

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Feb-07-2012

..... had been resolved and the parties had decided to file an application for withdrawal of the special leave petition. the matter was, thereafter, referred to the supreme court mediation centre and during the mediation, a mutual settlement signed by both the parties was prepared so that the same could be filed in the court for appropriate orders to be passed thereupon. however .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 2012 (SC)

Abdul Nawaz Vs. State of West Bengal.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-10-2012

..... dinghy which they had left behind while they had escaped from the spot in the other dinghy. it is not the case of the prosecution that there was any pre-mediation to commit the murder of the deceased. it is also common ground that the appellant was not armed with any weapon. the weapon allegedly used by him to assault the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 04 2012 (SC)

Vishwanath Son of Sitaram Agrawal Vs. Sau. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-04-2012

..... various decisions in the field, this court took note of the fact that the wife had neglected to carry out the matrimonial obligations and further, during the pendency of the mediation proceeding, had sent a notice to the husband through her advocate alleging that he had another wife in usa whose identity was concealed. the said allegation was based on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 24 2012 (SC)

Rampal Singh Vs. State of Up

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-24-2012

..... to murder. the explanations spell out the elements which need to be satisfied for application of such exceptions, like an act done in the heat of passion and without pre- mediation. where the offender whilst being deprived of the power of self- control by grave and sudden provocation causes the death of the person who has caused the provocation or causes .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 2012 (SC)

Geeta Mehrotra and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-17-2012

..... -parte decree of divorce, is pursuing the present case through her father with the sole purpose to unnecessarily harass the appellants to extract money from them as all efforts of mediation had failed.11. however, the grounds of challenge before this court to the order of the high court, inter alia is that the high court had failed to appreciate that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 2012 (SC)

Brij Mohan Lal Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-19-2012

..... .5,000 crores under the following specific heads: i) operation of morning/ evening/ special judicial-metropolitan magistrate/ shift courts rs.2,500 crores ii) establishing adr centres and training of mediators/conciliators rs.750 crores iii) lok adalat rs.100 crores iv) legal aid rs.200 crores v) training of judicial officers rs.250 crores vi) state judicial academies rs.300 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 2012 (SC)

Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab Alias Abu Mujahid and Others Vs. St ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-29-2012

Reported in : (2012)9SCC1; JT2012(8)SC4; 2012(4)KCCR271(SN); 2012AIRSCW4942; AIR2012SC3565; 2012(7)SCALE553

..... , imran babar also engaged in dialogues with india tv, a popular news channel in the country, and with one levi from the us who apparently intervened as a self-styled mediator to try and save the lives of the jewish hostages.289. the two terrorists holed up in nariman house, imran babar @ abu aqsa and nasir @ abu umar, were finally killed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2012 (SC)

State of Rajasthan and ors Vs. Aanjaney Organic Herbal Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-20-2012

k.s. radhakrishnan, j.1. leave granted.2. we are, in this case, called upon to decide the question as to whether the transfer of land from a member of scheduled caste to a juristic person, other than scheduled caste, is void, in view of the provisions of section 42(b) of the rajasthan tenancy act, 1955 (for short the act).3. the high court of rajasthan has answered the above question in several cases holding that such a transfer would not be hit by the above mentioned provision, since the expression person would not take in a juristic person and that juristic person does not have a caste and, therefore, any transfer made by a scheduled caste person would not be hit by section 42(b) of the act.4. in the impugned judgment, reliance has been placed on an earlier judgment of the high court of rajasthan in state of rajasthan v. indian oil corporation 2004 (5) wlc (raj.) 703, which held as follows: 6. it goes without saying that though the indian oil corporation is a juristic person but it does not have a caste. thus the sale in favour of indian oil corporation by a member of scheduled caste is not covered by the provisions of section 42 of the rajasthan tenancy act. thus taking into totality of the facts and circumstances, we feel that it is not a fit case where the delay of 480 days should be condoned. the special leave is rejected.5. the judgment in ioc (supra) was challenged before this court by the state of rajasthan in c.c. no. 19386 of 2010 with an application for .....

Tag this Judgment!


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