Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: old Court: supreme court of india Year: 2012 Page 8 of about 115 results (0.109 seconds)

Sep 14 2012 (SC)

Dr. Sunil Clifford Daniel Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-14-2012

dr. b.s. chauhan, j.1. this appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 1.4.2009, passed by the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh in criminal appeal no. 399-db of 2000, by which it has affirmed the judgment and order dated 21.8.2000 passed by the sessions judge, ludhiana in sessions case no. 28 of 1996, convicting the appellant under sections 302 and 201 of the indian penal code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the ipc), and awarded him a sentence to undergo ri for life and to pay a fine of rs.2,000/- and in default of this, to undergo further ri for a period of 3 months. the appellant has further been sentenced to undergo ri for two years and to pay a fine of rs.1,000/- and in default of this, to undergo further ri for a period of 2 months under section 201 ipc. it has further been directed that the sentences would run concurrently.2. the facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under:a. the appellant got married to dr. loyalla shagoufta, deceased, on 29.10.1993. both of them being qualified doctors, were working in the christian medical college (hereinafter referred to as cmc), hospital ludhiana. the relationship between the husband and wife became strained and they have been living separately since june 1994.b. as per the appellant, a petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed on 20.2.1996, under section 28 of the special marriage act, 1954 in the court of the district judge, ludhiana, and both parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2012 (SC)

Mahesh Chandra Verma and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-19-2012

(smt.) ranjana prakash desai, j.1. leave granted.2. these appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment dated 07/03/2011 delivered by the division bench of the jharkhand high court. they involve the same questions of law and facts and hence can be disposed by a common judgment. the appellants in these appeals were posted as additional district judges, fast track courts. they are direct recruits from the bar. by the impugned order, the high court disposed of the writ petition filed by the judicial officers who are members of the subordinate judiciary of the state of jharkhand, challenging the appointment of the appellants to the posts of additional district judge (for short, adj), fast tract courts (for short, ftc). the writ petitioners before the high court, inter alia, claimed that they were eligible for being appointed as adjs and that they are directly affected persons in monetary terms as well as in terms of their future promotional avenues because of the appellants appointments. they sought a declaration that the entire selection process for appointment of the appellants to the post of adjs, ftcs pursuant to advertisement dated 23/5/2001 is illegal. they prayed that the notifications dated 2/2/2008 and 12/8/2002 whereby the appellants were appointed be quashed. they are respondents before this court. the high court by the impugned judgment allowed the writ petition.3. it is necessary to state case of respondents 5 to 35 before the high court for better .....

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!

Sep 20 2012 (SC)

Payal Vision Ltd. Vs. Radhika Choudhary

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-20-2012

t.s. thakur, j.1. leave granted.2. in a suit for possession and recovery of mesne profit filed by the plaintiff- appellant before the trial court of additional district judge, delhi, the plaintiff prayed for a decree for possession in its favour on admissions, invoking the courts powers under order xii rule 6 of the code of civil procedure, 1908. the trial court examined the prayer and held that the jural relationship of landlord and tenant was admitted between the parties and so was the rate of rent as settled by them. service of a notice terminating the tenancy of the defendant-respondent also being admitted, the trial court saw no impediment in decreeing the suit for possession of the suit property. the application filed by the plaintiff-appellant under order xii rule 6 of the cpc was accordingly allowed and the suit filed by the plaintiff to the extent it prayed for possession of the suit property decreed in its favour.3. aggrieved by the decree passed against the respondent, the respondent filed regular first appeal no. 81 of 2009 before the high court of delhi which was allowed by the high court in terms of its order dated 14th march, 2011 reversing the judgment and decree passed by the trial court and remanding the matter back to the said court for disposal in accordance with law. the present appeal by special leave assails the correctness of the said judgment.4. mr. nagendra rai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, strenuously argued that the high .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2012 (SC)

Ash Mohammad Vs. Shiv Raj Singh Alias Lalla Babu and anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-20-2012

dipak misra, j.leave granted.2. the present appeal by special leave has been preferred assailing the legal defensibility of the order dated 26.04.2012 passed in criminal application no. 28461 of 2011 by the high court of judicature at allahabad and praying for quashment of the same, and further to cancel the grant of bail to the accused-respondent (hereinafter referred to as the accused) in respect of offences punishable under sections 365/506 of the indian penal code (for short the ipc).3. the facts material for adjudication of this appeal are that an fir was lodged by the present appellant on 29.05.2011 alleging that while he was going to his in-laws place in village samadia, p.s. patwai along with bihari lal near canal of milk road from patwai which leads to samdia khurd, two persons came on a motorcycle and after inquiring about the identity of bihari lal told him that they had been asked by lalla babu @ shiv raj singh to compel him to accompany them. as there was resistance, they threatened to kill him and eventually made bihari lal sit in between them on the hero honda motorcycle and fled towards patwai. the incident was witnessed by munish and rajbir. in quite promptitude the appellant went to the patwai police station, district rampur and lodged the fir as a consequence of which crime no. 770 of 2011 was registered for offences punishable under section 364 and 506 of the ipc. on the basis of the fir the criminal law was set in motion and the accused was arrested .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 24 2012 (SC)

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-24-2012

Reported in : (2012)10SCC303

r.m. lodha, j.1. when the special leave petition in gian singh v. state of punjab and another came up for hearing, a two-judge bench (markandey katju and gyan sudha misra, jj.) doubted the correctness of the decisions of this court in b.s. joshi and others v. state of haryana and another [2003) 4 scc 675], nikhil merchant v. central bureau of investigation and another [2008) 9 scc 677] and manoj sharma v. state and others [2008) 16 scc 1] and referred the matter to a larger bench. the reference order reads as follows :heard learned counsel for the petitioner.the petitioner has been convicted under section 420 and section 120b, ipc by the learned magistrate. he filed an appeal challenging his conviction before the learned sessions judge. while his appeal was pending, he filed an application before the learned sessions judge for compounding the offence, which, according to the learned counsel, was directed to be taken up along with the main appeal. thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition under section 482, cr.p.c. for quashing of the fir on the ground of compounding the offence. that petition under section 482 cr.p.c. has been dismissed by the high court by its impugned order. hence, this petition has been filed in this court.learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on three decisions of this court, all by two judge benches. they are b.s. joshi vs. state of haryana (2003) 4 scc 675; nikhil merchant vs. central bureau of investigation and another (2008) 9 scc 677; and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 25 2012 (SC)

Tehri Hydro Dev. Corpn. Ltd Vs. Jai Prakash Asso. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-25-2012

ranjan gogoi, j1. this appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20th july, 2006 passed by the high court of uttaranchal at nainital whereby the decree passed by the learned trial court under the arbitration act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the act) has been modified. the terms of award as passed by the learned arbitrator and the decree passed by the learned trial court as well as the modification thereof by the high court will now have to be noticed :2. the appellants and the respondent herein had entered into a contract for execution of certain works in connection with the tehri hydro dam project. the agreement between the parties was executed on 29th march, 1978 and the works in question were completed on 31st december, 1985. the completion certificate was issued by the competent authority of the appellant-corporation on 27th april, 1986. as the final bill of the respondent-contractor had not been prepared and security money, furnished by way of bank guarantee was not released, the parties went to arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause under the contract/agreement. in the course of the aforesaid arbitration proceeding the appellant- corporation submitted a final bill which according to the respondent- contractor entitled it to receive a sum of rs.10,17,461.09 on account of work done besides a sum of rs. 12..50 lakhs that was lying in deposit with the corporation. as the amounts due. according to the respondent- contractor, had become .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2012 (SC)

Om Prakash and ors Vs State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary, Depart ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-26-2012

(smt.) ranjana prakash desai, j.1. leave granted.2. in both these appeals, by special leave, judgment and order dated 1/5/2006 delivered by the jharkhand high court in criminal misc. petition no.822 of 2005 and criminal misc. petition no.640 of 2005 filed under section 482 of the criminal procedure code (for short, the code) is challenged. criminal misc. petition no.640 of 2005 was filed by shri rajiv ranjan singh, deputy superintendent of police, (dy.s.p.) headquarter(ii), jamshedpur. criminal misc. petition no.822 of 2005 was filed by the police personnel posted at jamshedpur in different capacities. in the petitions, before the high court, the prayer was for quashing the criminal proceedings in complaint case no.731 of 2004 and order dated 14/06/2005, passed thereon by the judicial magistrate first class, jamshedpur, taking cognizance of the offences alleged in the complaint.3. brief facts of the case need to be stated:appellant kailashpati singh is the complainant. on 23/7/2004, he filed a complaint in the court of c.j.m, jamshedpur being complaint case no.731 of 2004 against (1) rajiv ranjan singh, dy.s.p.-ii, (2) pradeep kumar, s.i., (3) omprakash, s.i., (4) shyam bihari singh, constable and (5) bharat shukla, constable. in the complaint, the complainant alleged that his son amit pratap singh @ munna singh (for convenience, deceased munna singh) was killed in a fake encounter by the accused named in the complaint including three others on 1/7/2004 at about 10.30 p. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2012 (SC)

Ashrafkhan Alias Babu Munnekhan Pathan and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-26-2012

chandramauli kr. prasad, j.these appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 31st of january, 2002 passed by additional designated judge, court no.3, ahmedabad city in tada case nos. 15/1995 and 6/1996 consolidated with tada case nos. 32/1994 and 43/1996.according to the prosecution, abdul wahab abdul majid khan was arrested in a case of murder. on being interrogated in that case, he made startling and shocking revelations. he disclosed that accused yusuf laplap, who is involved in illegal business of liquor and running a gambling den is in possession of four foreign made hand grenades, revolvers and ak-47 rifles. the fountainhead of the weapons, according to the information is notorious criminal abdul latif shaikh and came at the hand of accused yusuf laplap through his close associate accused abdul sattar @ sattar chacha. sattar gave the arms and explosives to accused siraj @ siraj dadhi, a constable attached to vejalpur police station. he in turn delivered those arms and explosives to accused imtiyaz nuruddin, the servant of yusuf laplap at latters instance. the aforesaid information was passed on to a.k. suroliya, the deputy commissioner of police, crime branch. the police party searched the house of the accused yusuf laplap in the night and found him leaving the house with two bags. from one of the bags one revolver with isi mark and five foreign made hand grenades were recovered and from another bag five detonators having clips affixed to it were found. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 2012 (SC)

Abdul Rehman and anr. Vs. Mohd. Ruldu and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-27-2012

p. sathasivam, j.1. leave granted.2. this appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 13.11.2007 passed by the high court of punjab & haryana at chandigarh in civil revision no. 4486 of 2007 whereby the high court dismissed the revision filed by the appellants herein and confirmed the order dated 06.06.2007 passed by the civil judge (jr. division) malerkotla in an application filed by the appellants herein for amendment of the plaint.3. brief facts:a. originally one jhandu, resident of village haider nagar, was the owner and in possession of land admeasuring 53 bighas 11 bis was at village haider nagar, tehsil malerkotla and 33 big has 15 biswas situated at village binjoli kalan, tehsil malerkotla. jhandu died leaving behind khuda bux as his son and aishan and kaki as his daughters. the mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of khuda bux alone being his son.b. feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid mutation, kaki and aishan(daughters of jhandu) filed suit no. 280/162 against khuda bux claiming 9/36 share each in the said lands before the subordinate judge, ist class, sangrur, camp at malerkotla. by order dated 20.12.1971, the sub-judge dismissed the said suit.c. challenging the said judgment, kaki and aishan filed an appeal being civil appeal no. 21 of 1972 before the district judge, sangrur. vide order dated 04.07.1972 passed by the district judge, the said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. according .....

Tag this Judgment!


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