Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: supreme court of india Year: 2014 Page 8 of about 192 results (0.138 seconds)

Sep 16 2014 (SC)

Srihari (Dead) Through Lr. Smt. Ch. Niveditha Reddy Vs. Syed Maqdoom S ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-16-2014

reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos.2352-2354 of2008srihari (dead) through lr. smt. ch.niveditha reddy . appellant versus syed maqdoom shah & ors. respondents judgment prafulla c.pant,j.1. all these three appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 21.4.2005 passed by the high court of andhra pradesh in a.s.m.p. no.11880 of 2004, a.s.m.p. no.1098 of 2005 and a.s.m.p. no.1099 of 2005 (moved in a.s. no.734 of 1991) whereby the high court exercising powers under section 152 of the code of civil procedure,1908 (hereinafter referred as the code ), has allowed the applications, and directed that the preliminary decree passed in a.s. no.734 of 1991, be amended allotting and dividing half share of syed makdoom shah (defendant no.11) and syed hussain shah in the suit schedule property in addition to 1/4th share of legal heirs of plaintiff khadar nawaz khan (since dead) and 1/4th share of the legal heirs of defendant feroz khan (died on 22.1.1978).2. brief facts of the case are that one qamaruddin ali khan was original owner and pattadar of agricultural land bearing s.nos. 41 to 43 situated in village kokapet. the land was purchased by khadar hussain khan through a registered sale deed, who died in the year 1942. khadar hussain khan died issueless as an unmarried person, leaving behind his real sister shahzadi bee and two step brothers namely feroz khan and khadar nawaz khan (plaintiff). khadar hussain khan .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2014 (SC)

A.Tajudeen Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-10-2014

reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.5773 of2009a. tajudeen . appellant versus union of india . respondent judgment jagdish singh khehar, j.1. through memorandum dated 12.3.1990 it was alleged, that the appellant herein a. tajudeen, without any general or special exemption from the reserve bank of india, had received an amount of rs.8,24,900/- in two installments, at the behest of abdul hameed, a person resident in singapore. the first installment was allegedly received on 23.10.1989 which comprised of rs.4,00,000/-. the remaining amount was allegedly received in the second installment on 25.10.1989. as per the memorandum the aforesaid amounts had been received from a local person, who was not an authorised dealer in foreign exchange.2. based on the factual position noticed hereinabove, the allegation against the appellant was, that he had violated section 9(1)(b) of the foreign exchange regulation act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as, the 1973 act). section 9(1)(b) aforementioned, is being extracted hereunder:- 9. restrictions on payments (1) save as may be provided in, and in accordance with any general or special exemption from the provisions of this sub-section which may be granted conditionally or unconditionally by the reserve bank, no person in, or resident in, india shall (a) xxx xxx xxx (b) receive, otherwise than through an authorized dealer, any payment by order or on behalf of any person resident outside india; .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 2014 (SC)

B.L. Wadhera Vs. U.O.i. and ors

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-14-2014

reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction special leave petition (c) no.28189 of2014(cc no.2940 of2014 with special leave petition (c) no 28195-96 of2014(cc no.1707 of2014 raunaq education foundation .... petitioner versus state of haryana & ors. ..... respondents order adarsh kumar goel, j.1. delay condoned. heard on merits.2. these petitions have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 27th september, 2013 passed in lpa no.1687 of 2013, order dated 16th september, 2013 passed in lpa no.1618 of 2013 and order dated 16th december, 2013 passed in ra lp no.133 of 2013 in lpa no.1618 of 2013 by the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh, upholding the order of the learned single judge, declining to interfere with the order of the government of haryana dated 18th september, 1998, resuming land measuring 76 acres 5 kanals and 5 marlas, except land measuring 7 acres left to be retained by the petitioner foundation.3. the case of the petitioner is that it gave a proposal on 1st april, 1972 to start a educational complex for the benefit of the residents of the state of haryana. accordingly, the state of haryana released 76 acres of land from the forest department and acquired the same under the land acquisition act, 1894 vide notifications dated 15th may, 1972 and 28th august, 1972 under sections 4 and 6 respectively. award for compensation was given on 21st february, 1973. possession was delivered to the petitioner on 24th january, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2014 (SC)

Kulwant Singh and ors Vs. Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-28-2014

non-reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos. 9927-28 of2014(arising out of slp (civil) nos.1499-1500 of2014 with civil appeal nos. 9929-30 of2014(arising out of slp (civil) nos 29128-29129 of2014(cc nos.4232-4233 of2014 kulwant singh & ors. ..... appellants versus oriental insurance company ltd. ..... respondents judgment adarsh kumar goel j.1. delay condoned in slp (c) no of 2014 [cc. nos.4232-4233 of 2014]..2. leave granted in all the matters.3. these appeals have been preferred against common judgment and order dated 5th august, 2011 in mac appeal nos.70 and 68 of 2011 and dated 8th march, 2013 in review petition nos.793 and 776 of 2011 respectively of the high court of delhi at new delhi.4. the question raised for consideration is whether the insurance company is entitled to recovery rights on the ground of breach of conditions of insurance policy when the driver possesses valid driving licence for driving light vehicle but fails to obtain endorsement for driving goods vehicle.5. the claim petition was filed before the motor accident claims tribunal by the dependents of the deceased rizwan s/o kadir @ abdul kadir who died in a road accident on 8th october, 2005 at about 05.30 a.m. while driving tempo no.hr-g-5234 which was hit by a tempo (tata-407) bearing no.dl-1l-d3186. the tribunal held that the death was on account of negligence of the driver of the offending tempo (tata-407) bearing no.dl-1l- d3186 and the claimants were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 2014 (SC)

Neeru Yadav Vs. State of U P and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-05-2014

in the supreme court of india criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal no.2587 of2014(arising out of s.l.p. (crl.) no.8469 of 2014) neeru yadav ... appellant versus state of u.p and another ...respondents judgment dipak misra, j.leave granted. the present appeal, by special leave, calls in question the legal substantiality and defensibility of the order dated 22.09.2014 passed by the high court of judicature at allahabad in criminal misc. bail application no.31078 of 2014 whereby the learned judge, in exercise of power under section 439 of code of criminal procedure, 1973 (cr.pc) had admitted the 2nd respondent to bail in crime no.237 of 2013 instituted for offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 394, 411, 454, 506, 120b and 34 of the indian penal code (ipc). as the impugned order would reveal, it was contended on behalf of the 2nd respondent that similarly placed co-accused, ashok, had already been enlarged on bail by the high court by order dated 23.9.2013 in criminal misc. bail application no.21876 of 2013 and role of the accused-respondent no.2 was identical to that of ashok kumar and he should be released on bail. thus the foundation of the prayer for grant of bail was on the bedrock of parity. the said prayer for grant of bail was opposed with vehemence by the learned a.g.a. contending, inter alia, that the accused had criminal antecedents and the role attributed to him was different. the same was controverted by the accused asserting that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2014 (SC)

Uday Gupta Vs. Aysha and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-21-2014

reportable in the supreme court of india criminal appellate jurisdiction special leave petition (crl.) no.3390 of2014(crl m.p. no.6817 of 2014) uday gupta petitioner versus aysha & anr. respondents order permission to file special leave petition is granted. this petition has been filed by an advocate of this court though not a party before the madras high court wherein the judgment impugned dated 17.6.2013 had been passed in criminal r.c. no.674 of 2007 making certain observation regarding the relationship between man and woman and particularly the institution of marriage. mr. m.r. calla, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the observations made by the high court that a valid marriage does not necessarily mean that all the customary rights pertaining to the married couple are to be followed and subsequently solemnized are not legally tenable. it has been pointed out by mr. calla, learned senior counsel that such observations demolish the very institution of marriage itself, and therefore, are liable to be set aside. in view of the nature of the order we propose to pass, we do not consider it necessary to issue notice to anyone. we have gone through the judgment and order impugned and perused the record of the case. we are of the view that such observations had been made in the facts of that case. in fact, what the learned judge wanted to say is that if a man and woman are living together for a long time as husband and wife, though never .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 2014 (SC)

M/S. Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of T.N. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-06-2014

in the supreme court of india civil original/appellate jurisdiction writ petition (c) no.232 of2005m/s. kone elevator india pvt. ltd. petitioner versus state of tamil nadu and ors. respondents with writ petition (civil) nos. 298/2005, 487/2005, 528/2005, 67/2006, 511/2006, 75/2007, 519/2008, 531/2008, 548/2008, 569/2008, 186/2009, 23/2010, 62/2010, 232/2010, 279/2010, 377/2010, 112/2011, 137/2011, 181/2011, 207/2011, 278/2011, 243/2011, 372/2011, 398/2011, 381/2011, 468/2011, 547/2011, 107/2012, 125/2012, 196/2012, 263/2012, 404/2012, 567/2012, 145/2013, 241/2013, 454/2013, 404/2013, 723/2013, 440/2012, 441/2012, 156/2013, 533/2013, 403/2012, 824/2013, 428/2009, 1046/2013, 1047/2013, 1048/2013, 1049/2013, 1050/2013, 1051/2013 1052/2013, 1098/2013, with civil appeal nos. 5116-5121 of 2014 (arising out of slp (c) nos. 14148-14153/2005) with civil appeal nos. 5135-5141 of 2014 (arising out of slp (c) nos. 14961-14967/2005) with civil appeal nos. 5142-5147 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) nos. 17842-17847/2005 with civil appeal no.5152 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) no.5377/2006 with civil appeal no.5153 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) no.7037/2006 with civil appeal no.5154 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) no.30272/2008 with civil appeal no.5156 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) no.30279/2008 with civil appeal no.5157 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) no.5289/2009 with civil appeal nos. 5159-5160 of 2014 [arising out of slp (c) nos. 6520-6521/2009 with civil appeal nos.5162-5164 of .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 09 2014 (SC)

Shree Ram Urban Infras.Ld.Forml.S.R.Mill Vs. Court Receiver,high Court ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-09-2014

reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.5528 of2014[arising out of slp(c) no.30298 of 2010]. shree ram urban infrastructure ltd. (formerly known as shree ram mills ltd.) .. appellant :versus: the court receiver, high court of bombay respondent judgment pinaki chandra ghose, j.1. leave granted.2. this appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 16th september, 2010 passed by the high court of judicature at bombay in civil revision application no.452 of 2009, dismissing the civil revision application filed by the appellant-tenant. the brief facts, necessary for the disposal of this appeal are thus: an immovable property known as dev ashish is a tenanted property situated at padam tekri, peddar road, bombay (hereinafter referred to as the suit property ). the respondent herein was appointed by the bombay high court to take charge of the suit property in suit no.234 of 1987, which was filed on the original side of the bombay high court, in terms of prayer clause (a) of the notice of motion which reads as follows: (a) that pending the hearing and final disposal of above suit, the court receiver, high court, bombay or some other fit and proper person be appointed as a receiver of an immovable property known as dev ashish situate on sub-plot no.1 of plot no.c.s.s.755 at padam tekdi, pedder road, bombay 400 026, with all powers under order xl, rule 1 of the code of civil procedure, 1908, including the owner to recover, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2014 (SC)

Gram Panchayat,village Bahmanian Vs. Jagir Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-26-2014

in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.10562 /2014 [arising out of s.l.p. (civil) no.35854 of 2009]. gram panchayat, village bahmanian ... appellant (s) versus jagir singh and others ... respondent (s) judgment kurian, j.: leave granted. alleging that the first respondent had encroached upon the land belonging to the panchayat, more particularly, a public street, the appellant-gram panchayat has been airing its grievance before various forums. it succeeded in getting an order of eviction from the competent authority. that order was challenged in civil writ petition no.20116 of 2005 by the first respondent. the learned single judge of the high court of punjab and haryana, in judgment dated 30.05.2009, passed the following order: ".it appears that the panchayat is unnecessarily trying to create problem for the petitioner. the petitioner apparently has constructed a house and as per the report has not encroached upon any street. his plea is that it may be a private street leading to his house constructed on a land bought by him from the private respondent. this will explain the attitude of respondent no.4 in objecting to the proposal being accepted. the petitioner, thus, is given liberty to deposit the compensation at twice the collector rate for the land in his possession in the accounts of the gram panchayat. this order is basically passed in equity considering that the petitioner has constructed a house and is ready to compensate the gram .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2014 (SC)

Gram Panchayat,village Bahmanian Vs. Jagir Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-26-2014

in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.10562 /2014 [arising out of s.l.p. (civil) no.35854 of 2009]. gram panchayat, village bahmanian ... appellant (s) versus jagir singh and others ... respondent (s) judgment kurian, j.: leave granted. alleging that the first respondent had encroached upon the land belonging to the panchayat, more particularly, a public street, the appellant-gram panchayat has been airing its grievance before various forums. it succeeded in getting an order of eviction from the competent authority. that order was challenged in civil writ petition no.20116 of 2005 by the first respondent. the learned single judge of the high court of punjab and haryana, in judgment dated 30.05.2009, passed the following order: ".it appears that the panchayat is unnecessarily trying to create problem for the petitioner. the petitioner apparently has constructed a house and as per the report has not encroached upon any street. his plea is that it may be a private street leading to his house constructed on a land bought by him from the private respondent. this will explain the attitude of respondent no.4 in objecting to the proposal being accepted. the petitioner, thus, is given liberty to deposit the compensation at twice the collector rate for the land in his possession in the accounts of the gram panchayat. this order is basically passed in equity considering that the petitioner has constructed a house and is ready to compensate the gram .....

Tag this Judgment!


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