Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: supreme court of india Year: 2012 Page 7 of about 115 results (0.178 seconds)

Aug 21 2012 (SC)

Vidur Impex and Traders Pvt. Ltd. and Others. Vs. Tosh Apartments Pvt. ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-21-2012

g. s. singhvi, j.1. leave granted.2. whether m/s. vidur impex and traders pvt. ltd., and five other companies (hereinafter described as the appellants), who are said to have purchased the suit property, i.e. 21, aurangzeb road, new delhi in violation of the order of injunction passed by the learned single judge of the delhi high court are entitled to be impleaded as parties to suit no.425/1993 filed by respondent no.1 m/s. tosh apartments pvt. ltd. is one of the two questions which arises for consideration in these appeals filed against judgment dated 20.2.2009 of the division bench of the delhi high court. the other question which needs consideration is whether the delhi high court was justified in appointing a receiver with a direction to take possession of the suit property despite the fact that the calcutta high court had already appointed a receiver at the instance of m/s. bhagwati developers pvt. ltd. (for short, bhagwati developers).3. the suit property was leased by the secretary of state for india to sidh nath khanna and sukh nath khanna sometime in 1930. after 12 years, the governor general in council sanctioned the grant of perpetual lease in favour of one of them, namely, sidh nath khanna. in the family partition which took place in december 1955, the suit property fell to the share of shri devi prasad khanna, who was one of the heirs of sidh nath khanna. he rented out the same to the sudan embassy on 12.9.1962. in october 1977, the name of respondent no.2- .....

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!

Aug 24 2012 (SC)

Subramanian Swamy. Vs. A. RajA.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-24-2012

o r d e rk.s. radhakrishnan, j.1. common questions arise for consideration in both these applications, hence they are being disposed of by a common order. slp (crl.) 1688 of 2012 arises out of an order dated 04.02.2012 in cc no.01(a)/11 passed by the special judge, cbi (04) (2g spectrum cases), new delhi. i.a. no. 34 of 2012 has been filed by the appellants in civil appeal no. 10660 of 2010 claiming almost identical reliefs.2. dr. subramanian swamy, the petitioner in special leave petition filed a criminal complaint on 15.12.2010 before the special judge, cbi of central/delhi to set in motion the provisions of prevention of corruption act (for short the pc act) against a. raja, the then minister of telecommunications and to appoint him as a prosecutor under section 5(3) of the pc act. the complaint was numbered as cc no.1 of 2010 and was heard on several occasions. the case was later transferred to the special judge, cbi (04)(2g spectrum cases), new delhi. cbi, after investigation, filed a charge sheet in that complaint on 2.4.2011 regarding commission of offences during 2007-2009 punishable under sections 120b, 420, 468, 471 ipc and also punishable under section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(d) of the pc act, against a. raja and others. special judge took cognizance on 2.4.2011. cbis further investigation disclosed that the monetary involvement was much more and charge was laid. special judge took cognizance of the aforesaid charge sheet on 25.4.2011. both the charge .....

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!

Aug 30 2012 (SC)

Rajan Purohit and Others Vs. Rajasthan University of Health Science an ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-30-2012

a.k. patnaik, j.civil appeal no. 8142 of 2011, civil appeal no.8143 of 2011 and civil appeal no.8144 of 2011:1. these are appeals by way of special leave under article 136 of the constitution of india against the common order and judgment dated 03.09.2009 of the division bench of the rajasthan high court, jaipur bench, in special appeal nos.241 of 2009 and 386 of 2009.facts2. the facts very briefly are that the secretary, medical education, government of rajasthan, held a meeting on 04.12.2007 for the purpose of conducting a common entrance test for admission to the medical and dental colleges in the state of rajasthan for the academic year 2008-2009. besides the secretary, medical education, government of rajasthan, the registrar, rajasthan medical university of health sciences, jaipur, professor anatomy of medical college, jaipur, special officer, technical education department, government of rajasthan, representative from the federation of private medical and dental colleges of rajasthan, jaipur, managing director, geetanjali medical college, udaipur, managing director, national institute of medical sciences, jaipur, were also present in the meeting. geetanjali medical college and hospital (for short the college) was yet to receive its permission from the government of india and affiliation from the rajasthan university of medical sciences and on 12.12.2007, the chairman and managing trustee of the geetanjali foundation shri jagdish prasad agarwal gave a written .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 31 2012 (SC)

Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Others. Vs. Securitie ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-31-2012

Reported in : (2013)1SCC1

k.s. radhakrishnan, j.1. we are, in these appeals, primarily concerned with the powers of the securities and exchange board of india (for short 'sebi') under section 55a(b) of the companies act, 1956 to administer various provisions relating to issue and transfer of securities to the public by listed companies or companies which intend to get their securities listed on any recognized stock exchange in india and also the question whether optionally fully convertible debentures (for short 'ofcds') offered by the appellants should have been listed on any recognized stock exchange in india, being public issue under section 73 read with section 60b and allied provisions of the companies act and whether they had violated the securities and exchange board of india (disclosure and investor protection) guidelines, 2000 [for short 'dip guidelines'] and various regulations of the securities and exchange board of india (issue of capital and disclosure requirements) regulations, 2009 [for short 'icdr 2009'], and also whether ofcds issued are securities under the securities contracts (regulation) act, 1956 [for short 'scr act'].2. sahara india real estate corporation limited (for short 'sirecl') and sahara housing investment corporation limited (for short 'shicl), appellants herein (conveniently called saharas), are the companies controlled by sahara group. saharas have raised almost identical issues on facts as well as on questions of law before us and hence we are disposing off both the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 04 2012 (SC)

State of Kerala and ors. Vs. the Tribal Mission.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-04-2012

k. s. radhakrishnan, j.1. leave granted.2. we are, in this case, concerned with the question whether the state is duty bound to grant recognition to an unaided educational institution on the touchstone of article 21a of the constitution of india overlooking the procedure laid down under rule 2 and rule 2a of chapter v of the kerala education rules (for short ker).3. respondent established a school by name betham english medium school in the year 2001 at attappady in the palakkad district, state of kerata in the unaided sector. an application for recognition was submitted by the respondent school in the year 2003 before the government. the deputy direction of education, however, forwarded a report/letter no. b1/8863/07 dated 19.10.2007 to the state government pointing out existence of a three recognized schools within a distance of 5 km from the respondent school following tamil and malayalam mediums having standard 1 to 7, of which one is situated within a distance of 2.5 km. further, it was pointed out that the respondent school though was having sufficient infrastructure, granting recognition would adversely affect the other aided schools functioning in that area and the possibility of division fall in these schools could not be ruled out.4. the government rejected the application for recognition on the ground that it would violate the governments policy referred to in go (p) no.107/07/g edn dated 13.06.2007. further, it was also pointed out that the procedure for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2012 (SC)

Bhawna Garg and anr. Vs. University of Delhi and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-05-2012

a. k. patnaik, j.1. leave granted.2. these are appeals against the common judgment and order dated 23.12.2011 of the division bench of the high court of delhi in writ petition (c) no.7103 of 2011 and writ petition (c) no.4299 of 2011 declining to grant relief to the appellants in the matter of admission to the mbbs course in the medical colleges under delhi university for the academic session 2011-2012.3. the facts very briefly are that the delhi university issued a bulletin of information for admissions to the under-graduate degree courses for the academic session 2011-2012 (for short the bulletin). para 2 of the bulletin dealt with admissions to mbbs course. para 2.1.1 of the bulletin stated that the university conducts the mbbs course in three medical colleges, namely, lady hardinge medical college (lhmc), maulana azad medical college (mamc) and university college of medical sciences (ucms). para 2.1.1 of the bulletin further stated that only female candidates were to be admitted in lhmc. para 2.1.2 of the bulletin stated that candidates for 15% seats were to be selected directly by the directorate general of health sciences (dghs) based on the result of the examination conducted by the cbse, new delhi, as per the directions of this court. para 2.1.3 of the bulletin deals with admissions to seats by nominees of government of india (ngoi) and it states that candidates who wish to be considered for admission to this category of seats need not appear in the delhi university .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 07 2012 (SC)

Maruti Nivrutti Navale Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-07-2012

p. sathasivam, j.1) leave granted.2) this appeal is directed against the final order dated 19.09.2011 passed by the high court of judicature at bombay in criminal application no. 786 of 2011 whereby the high court dismissed the application for anticipatory bail filed by the appellant herein.3) brief facts:(a) the appellant is the founder president and managing trustee of sinhgad technical education society, pune (in short the society). the society is engaged in imparting formal and informal education by establishing various schools, colleges and institutions in the state of maharashtra. respondent no.1 is the state and chainsukh sobhachand gandhi- respondent no.2 herein is the original complainant and is a trustee of pawan gandhi charity trust (in short the trust) working for the upliftment of economically and socially impoverished sections of the society.(b) respondent no. 2 was running a school on land bearing survey no.154/6/1 admeasuring 57 acres situated at ambavet, tal. mulshi, dist. pune, on which a building in the area of 650 sq. mts. was constructed. in the year 2008, it was decided to run the school with the help of other educational institutions by leasing out the property. respondent no. 2 approached the appellant herein for the same. the appellant herein has also shown interest in acquiring lease hold rights in order to run school activities in the said property. pursuant to the same, negotiations took place and it was offered to lease out the said school .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 2012 (SC)

Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-11-2012

s.h. kapadia, cji.introduction1. finding an acceptable constitutional balance between free press and administration of justice is a difficult task in every legal system.factual background2. civil appeal nos. 9813 and 9833 of 2011 were filed challenging the order dated 18.10.2011 of the securities appellate tribunal whereby the appellants (hereinafter for short sahara) were directed to refund amounts invested with the appellants in certain optionally fully convertible bonds (ofcd) with interest by a stated date.3. by order dated 28.11.2011, this court issued show cause notice to the securities and exchange board of india (sebi), respondent no. 1 herein, directing sahara to put on affidavit as to how they intend to secure the liabilities incurred by them to the ofcd holders during the pendency of the civil appeals.4. pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 28.11.2011, on 4.01.2012, an affidavit was filed by sahara explaining the manner in which it proposed to secure its liability to ofcd holders during the pendency of the civil appeals.5. on 9.01.2012, both the appeals were admitted for hearing. however, ia no. 3 for interim relief filed by sahara was kept for hearing on 20.01.2012.6. on 20.01.2012, it was submitted by the learned counsel for sebi that what was stated in the affidavit of 4.01.2012 filed by sahara inter alia setting out as to how the liabilities of sahara india real estate corporation ltd. (sirecl) and sahara housing and investment corporation (shicl) were to be .....

Tag this Judgment!


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