Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: supreme court of india Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 118 results (0.073 seconds)

Jul 11 2005 (SC)

Shanti Prasad Devi and anr. Vs. Shankar Mahto and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-11-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC2905; 2005(4)ALD116(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)848; 2005(3)AWC2537(SC); 2005(2)BLJR1608; (SCSuppl)2005(4)CHN119; 2005(3)CTC550; JT2005(6)SC6; 2005(II)OLR(SC)431; (2005)5

..... before the expiry of original period of lease and second, fixation of terms and conditions for the renewed period of lease by mutual consent and in absence thereof through the mediation of local mukhia or panchas of the village. the aforesaid renewal clauses (7) & (9) in the agreement of lease clearly fell within the expression 'agreement to the contrary' used in ..... . the renewal as provided in the original contract was required to be obtained by following a specified procedure i.e. on mutually agreed terms or in the alternative through the mediation of mukhias and panchas. in the instant case, there is a renewal clause in the contract prescribing a particular period and mode of renewal which was 'an agreement to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 2005 (SC)

Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-02-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC3353; 2005(5)ALD1(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)876; 2005(3)ARBLR81(SC); 2005(3)AWC2996(SC); 2005(3)BLJR1934; 2005(6)BomCR839; (2006)2GLR1312; JT2005(6)SC486; 2005(6)KarLJ5

..... suit or in any other suit or proceedings.(vii) such other categories of persons as may be notified by the high court.rule 6 : venue for conducting mediation :the mediator shall conduct the mediation at one or other of the following places:(i) venue of the lok adalat or permanent lok adalat.(ii) any place identified by the district judge within the ..... commit to participate in the proceedings in good faith with the intention to settle the dispute, if possible.rule 20 : confidentiality, disclosure and inadmissibility of information:(1) when a mediator receives confidential information concerning the dispute from any party, he shall disclose the substance of that information to the other party, if permitted in writing by the first party.(2 ..... directed to examine it and if agreed, it shall request the planning commission and finance commission to make specific financial allocation for the judiciary for including the expenses involved for mediation/conciliation under section 89 of the code. in case, central government has any reservations, the same shall be placed before the court within four months. in such event, the ..... , the court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for--(a) arbitration;(b) conciliation;(c) judicial settlement including settlement through lok adalat; or(d) mediation.(2) where a dispute has been referred--(a) for arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply as if the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2005 (SC)

Bal Patil and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-08-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC3172; 2005(5)ALD123(SC); 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)973; 2005(3)AWC2796(SC); 2005(6)BomCR769; [2005(4)JCR60(SC)]; JT2005(7)SC185; (2006)2MLJ186(SC); (2005)6SCC690; 2005(2)LC1

..... . there were also apprehensions expressed by many prominent muslim leaders that there might be interference with and discouragement to their cultural, religious and educational rights. abdul kalam azad acted as mediator in negotiations between the national leaders of the times namely late nehru and patel on one side and late jinnah and liaqat ali on the other. nehru and patel insisted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2005 (SC)

Gopal Zarda Udyog Etc. Vs. the Commissioner of Central Excise, New Del ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-30-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC4243; 2005(102)ECC513; 2005(188)ELT251(SC); JT2005(12)SC119; 2005(8)SCALE26; (2005)8SCC157

..... in the manufacture of chewing tobacco (final product) falling under sub-heading 2404.40 of tariff act, 1985. in the manufacture of the final product, they were using an inter-mediate product known as 'additive mixture'. an intelligence was collected by the officers of the preventive wing of the commissionerate to the effect that the appellants were manufacturing the said 'additive .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 03 2005 (SC)

G. Srinivas Goud Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-03-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC3647; 2005CriLJ4367; JT2005(12)SC215; 2005(8)SCALE34; (2005)8SCC183; 2005(2)LC1509(SC)

..... and proceeded to the place in question along with two constables. on his way he took two persons along, one of them being a police constable to act as a mediators/independent persons. the memo of search proceeding is exhibit p.1. after reaching the spot he prepared a panchnama. exhibit p.2 which is signed by the accused persons, two ..... our view, there is no substance in the argument. p.w. 5 is a reserve policeman and there is no bar in law for a policeman to act as a mediator/paunch witness. it should be kept in view that this was a raid which was conducted by excise officials and not by the police.6. the main thrust of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 2005 (SC)

State Through Inspector of Police, A.P. Vs. K. Narasimhachary

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-07-2005

Reported in : AIR2006SC628; 2006(1)ALD(Cri)32; 2006CriLJ518; JT2005(12)SC553; (2005)8SCC364

..... at cuddapah. according to pw- 1, he approached pw-8 at 6.35 a.m., whereas according to pw-8, he came to him at 8.00 a.m. the mediators were summoned and the trap was laid after making all arrangements therefore at about 12.30 p.m. after the transaction was completed, the respondent was found having not only .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 28 2005 (SC)

Triloki Nath and ors. Vs. State of U.P.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-28-2005

Reported in : AIR2006SC321; 2006(1)ALD(Cri)1; JT2005(9)SC370; (2005)13SCC323

..... 'may be that the lathi used by khuddey hit triloki'. merely a suggestion was given to pw-3 on behalf of the appellants that triloki nath and sahdev tried to mediate between the two groups and after they started beating triloki nath and sahdev with lathi and in the melee triloki nath and sahdev in turn assaulted others, but the same .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2005 (SC)

Calcutta Municipal Corporation and ors. Vs. Shrey Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-09-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC1879; (SCSuppl)2005(2)CHN120; 100(2005)CLT235(SC); JT2005(3)SC143; (2005)4SCC245

s.h. kapadia, j.1. the short question which arises for determination in these civil appeals by grant of special leave by calcutta municipal corporation is - whether the imposition for the process of change in the name of the owner in the assessment books of the corporation is in the nature of 'a fee' or 'tax'.2. for the sake of convenience, we refer to the facts of civil appeal no.5631 of 2000.3. premises bearing no.9a, jatindra mohan avenue, calcutta - 700 006 belonged to tapas ghosh, meenakshi sinha and gayatri chandra. by several deeds of conveyance, they sold the said premises to m/s shrey mercantile (p) ltd., m/s drishti mercantile (p) ltd. and m/s kic resources ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the developers'). the building in the premises was very old and was in a dilapidated condition. the developers decided to construct a new building after demolishing the existing old structure. the developers submitted the building plan for sanction which the corporation refused to accept without the names of the developers being brought on record by way of mutation. on 21.3.1997, the developers applied for mutation by deletion of the names of the previous owners and substitution of their names for which the corporation demanded mutation fees of rs.3 lacs under calcutta corporation (taxation) regulations, 1989. this demand was challenged by filing of writ petition in the calcutta high court.4. the calcutta municipal corporation (amendment) act, 1988 was passed by the state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 11 2005 (SC)

iqbal Singh Marwah and anr. Vs. Meenakshi Marwah and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-11-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC2119; 2005(1)ALD(Cri)717; 2005CriLJ2161; 118(2005)DLT329(SC); JT2005(3)SC195; 2005(3)MhLj530; 2005(II)OLR(SC)102; (2005)4SCC370; 2005(1)LC675(SC)

g.p. mathur, j.1. leave granted in special leave petition (crl) no.4111 of 2000.2. in view of conflict of opinion between two decisions of this court each rendered by a bench of three learned judges in surjit singh v. balbir singh : 1996crilj2304 and sachida nand singh v. state of bihar 1998 (2) scc 493, regarding interpretation of section 195(1)(b)(ii) of code of criminal procedure 1973 (for short 'cr.p.c.'), this appeal has been placed before the present bench.3. the facts of the case may be noticed in brief. the appellant nos.1 and 2 are real brothers of mukhtar singh marwah, while respondent nos.1 and 2 are his widow and son respectively. mukhtar singh marwah died on 3.6.1993. the appellant no.1 filed probate case no.363 of 1993 in the court of district judge, delhi, for being granted probate of the will allegedly executed by mukhtar singh marwah on 20.1.1993. the petition was contested by the respondents on the ground that the will was forged. on their application the appellant no.1 filed the original will in the court of district judge on 10.2.1994. thereafter, the respondents moved an application under section 340 cr.p.c. requesting the court to file a criminal complaint against appellant no.1 as the will set up by him was forged. a reply to the said application was filed on 27.7.1994 but the application has not been disposed of so far. thereafter, the respondents filed a criminal complaint in may 1996 in the court of chief metropolitan magistrate, new delhi, for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 2005 (SC)

Sona Bala Bora and ors. Vs. Jyotirindra Bhatacharjee

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-11-2005

Reported in : 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)1128; 2005(2)AWC1593(SC); (SCSuppl)2005(3)CHN114; 100(2005)CLT147(SC); 2005(1)CTLJ345(SC); JT2005(4)SC418; (2005)4SCC501; 2005(1)LC626(SC)

ruma pal, j1. leave granted.2. the first appellant is the widow of bhogirath bora. the appellants 2-4 are their children. they reside in a bungalow which is situated in an area of .176 acres of land at shillong. there are two other bungalows on the same plot which are tenanted. the respondent claims to have purchased the three bungalows and the land from bhogirath in 1977 for a consideration of rs. 69,000/-.3. in 1978, the respondent filed a title suit against, inter alia the appellants and bhogirath, (who was named as a proforma defendant) claiming a declaration that he was the absolute and exclusive owner of the land and buildings, for a decree for vacant possession by evicting the appellants and the tenants therefrom, for mesne profits, interest thereon and costs.4. the appellants also, filed a suit against the respondent and bhogirath claiming a declaration that bhogirath did not have the absolute right to transfer the property to the respondent, that the sale made to the respondent was void and should be set aside, for a declaration that bhogirath was bound by the terms of a compromise petition dated 10th june, 1977 filed in ct. case no. 3/1977 and that the appellants had a preferential right and a right of preemption to purchase the other two houses on the land.5. it is an admitted position that in 1977, bhogirath had filed a complaint (case no. 3/1977) against some of the appellants before the magistrate under section 107 of the code of criminal procedure. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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