Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: supreme court of india Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 118 results (0.370 seconds)

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!

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!

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!

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 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!

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!

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!

Nov 14 2005 (FN)

Schaffer Vs. Weast

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-14-2005

..... , special education expenditure project). congress has also repeatedly amended the act in order to reduce its administrative and litigation-related costs. for example, in 1997 congress mandated that states offer mediation for idea disputes. individuals with disabilities education act amendments of 1997, pub. l. 105 17, 615(e), 111 stat. 90, 20 u. s. c. 1415(e). in 2004, congress added ..... , evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or [2] to the provision of a free appropriate public education, of the child, has the opportunity to resolve such disputes through a mediation process. 20 u. s. c. a. 1415(a), (b)(6)(a), (k) (supp. 2005). the act further provides the parent with an opportunity for an impartial due process hearing provided ..... the state hearing(s), to bring a civil action in a federal district court. 1415(i)(2)(a). in sum, the act provides for school board action, followed by (1) mediation, (2) an impartial state due process hearing with the possibility of state appellate review, and, (3) federal district court review. the act also sets forth minimum procedures that the parties .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 2005 (SC)

Harbans Vs. Om Prakash and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-10-2005

Reported in : AIR2006SC686; 2006(1)AWC312(SC); 2006(1)CTC678; JT2005(5)SC625; (2006)2MLJ54(SC); (2006)142PLR852; RLW2005(4)SC2923; (2006)1SCC129

arijit pasayat, j.1. judgment of a learned single judge of the punjab and haryana high court dismissing the second appeal filed by the appellant under section 100 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (in short the 'code') is the subject matter of challenge.2. background facts sans unnecessary details are as follows:a suit was instituted by the appellant against the defendants seeking decree of declaration to the effect that the plaintiff had become the owner in possession to the extent of 4 share and defendants 2 and 3 have become owner and possession of the balance suit property, on the ground of foreclosure since limitation for redemption of the land had expired. consequential relief of permanent injunction, for restraining defendant no. 1 from alienating the suit land and in any manner from interfering with the peaceful possession of plaintiff and defendants 2 and 3 was sought for.3. specific stand of the plaintiff was that forefathers of the plaintiff alongwith forefathers of prem and lakhpat sons of banswari took the land in suit as mortgagees from the ancestors of bhira about more than 100 years ago, and since then they have continued to be in possession of the suit land as mortgagees. therefore, the plaintiff and defendants no. 2 and 3 are in cultivating possession of the suit land since smt. patori daughter of nanha has not been seen and heard by the plaintiff since he attained majority and her name has been wrongly shown by halqa patwari in place of banwari son of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 19 2005 (SC)

Ramlal and anr. Vs. Phagua and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-19-2005

Reported in : AIR2006SC623; 2005(6)ALT70(SC); 2005(5)CTC282; [2006(1)JCR82(SC)]; JT2005(9)SC47; RLW2006(2)SC1506; 2005(8)SCALE427; (2006)1SCC168

ar. lakshmanan, j.1. the above appeal was filed by the unsuccessful defendants against the final judgment and order dated 06.08.1998 passed by the high court of madhya pradesh at jabalpur in second appeal no. 500 of 1989 whereby the high court allowed the second appeal filed by the respondent/plaintiff. 2. the short facts of the case are as follows:- the respondent/plaintiff executed a sale deed in favour of mst. hasrat bi after obtaining a loan of rs. 400/- and also executed an agreement stating therein that in case she returns rs. 400/- to mst. hasrat bi within 3 years, property shall be reconveyed to him. the respondent failed to repay the loan within the stipulated period of 3 years. therefore, mst. hasrat bi got her name recorded in the revenue and sold the property to the appellant ramlal shyamlal and one pyarelal by a registered sale deed for a sum of rs. 4,000/-. according to the appellants, they came in possession of the property and are cultivating since then. respondent no.1 - plague filed a suit for declaration that the sale deed dated 01.12.1965 executed by her in favour of mst. hasrat bi was only a nominal sale and she continues to be the owner of the suit land. she also prayed for possession of the suit land. the trial court held that the registered sale deed dated 01.12.1965 has not been executed nominally and accordingly the trial court dismissed the suit. the plaintiff/respondent herein filed first appeal before the district judge who also dismissed the .....

Tag this Judgment!

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