Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Sorted by: recent Court: us supreme court Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 61 results (0.068 seconds)

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!

Jun 27 2005 (FN)

Castle Rock Vs. Gonzales

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-27-2005

..... , 542, 544 546 (describing the problems that attend a discretionary arrest regime: even when probable clause is present, police officers still frequently try to calm the parties and act as mediators . three studies found the arrest rate to range between 3% and 10% when the decision to arrest is left to police discretion. another study found that the police made arrests ..... in domestic violence cases that had been conducted in minneapolis. in this study, police handled randomly assigned domestic violence offenders by using one of three different responses: arresting the offender, mediating the dispute or requiring the offender to leave the house for eight hours. the study concluded that in comparison with the other two responses, arrest had a significantly greater impact ..... for mandatory-arrest statutes and policies derived from the idea that it is better for police officers to arrest the aggressor in a domestic-violence incident than to attempt to mediate the dispute or merely to ask the offender to leave the scene. those other options are only available, of course, when the offender is present at the scene. see hanna .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 27 2005 (FN)

Metro-goldwyn-mayer Studios Inc. Vs. Grokster, Ltd.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-27-2005

..... the user can download desired files directly from peers computers. as this description indicates, grokster and streamcast use no servers to intercept the content of the search requests or to mediate the file transfers conducted by users of the software, there being no central point through which the substance of the communications passes in either direction.[ footnote 4 ] although grokster and ..... servers. the advantage of peer-to-peer networks over information networks of other types shows up in their substantial and growing popularity. because they need no central computer server to mediate the exchange of information or files among users, the high-bandwidth communications capacity for a server may be dispensed with, and the need for costly server storage space is eliminated .....

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!

Aug 05 2005 (SC)

Kishun @ Ram Kishun (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Bihari (D) by Lrs.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Aug-05-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC3799; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)936; 2005(6)ALT2(SC); 2005(3)AWC2783(SC); 2005(6)BomCR913; (SCSuppl)2006(1)CHN10; [2005(4)JCR87(SC)]; JT2005(6)SC614; 2005(4)MhLj1; 2005MPLJ1

p.k. balasubramanyan, j.leave granted.1. one ram charan had two sons, ram kishun called kishun and ram prasad called behari. on 22.09.1966, ram charan gifted a piece of agricultural land to his son kishun by way of a deed of gift. thereupon, behari filed a suit for cancellation of that gift impleading kishun as defendant no. 1 and his father ram charan, as defendant no. 2. he contended that the property was joint family property and hence could not be gifted by the father ram charan and that in any event the deed of gift was got executed by kishun, by practicing fraud. kishun and ram charan filed written statement denying the claim of behari.2. pursuant to the deed of gift in his favour, kishun had approached the tehsildar for effecting mutation. it is claimed by behari that before the tehsildar, a compromise was entered into and an application for recording the compromise was moved. under the compromise, according to behari, the parties agreed that the property would be taken half and half by the two brothers. since this compromise set up by behari was not accepted by kishun and ram charan, the tehsildar did not pass any final order either in respect of the compromise or in respect of the dispute.3. in the suit, behari filed an application under order xxiii rule 3 of the code of civil procedure (for short 'the code') asserting that there was a compromise of the dispute between the parties and that the same may be accepted and the seal of approval affixed thereon by the court .....

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!

Jul 11 2005 (SC)

N.V. Srinivasa Murthy and ors. Vs. Mariyamma (Dead) by Proposed Lrs. a ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-11-2005

Reported in : AIR2005SC2897; 2005(5)ALD113(SC); 2005(3)AWC2541(SC); 2005(3)CTC545; JT2005(6)SC1; 2005(5)KarLJ17; 2005(II)OLR(SC)425; (2005)5SCC548; 2005(2)LC898(SC)

d.m. dharmadhikari, j. 1. in these appeals preferred by the plaintiffs the only question involved is whether the trial court and the high court were right in holding that the plaint under order vii rule 11 of the code of civil procedure was liable to rejection. the high court by the impugned order passed in misc. second appeal reversed the order of the first appellate court and upheld that of the trial court.2. learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff in this appeal contends that if the plaint allegations containing all facts are read in proper perspective, 'cause of action' has clearly been pleaded and the high court grossly erred in rejecting the plaint on the ground that it does not disclose any cause of action.3. with the assistance and on the comments and counter comments of the parties, we have carefully gone through the contents of the plaint. we find that the plaint has been very cleverly drafted with a view to get over the bar of limitation and payment of ad valorem court fee. according to us, the plaint was rightly held to be liable to rejection if not on the alleged ground of non-disclosure of any cause of action but on the ground covered by clause (d) of rule 11 of order vii of code of civil procedure namely that 'the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be clearly barred by law'.4. as per the plaint allegations of the plaintiffs, their late father had incurred some debts and had therefore borrowed a sum of rs. 2000/- from the predecessor in title .....

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!

May 12 2005 (SC)

Kedar Nath Dubey (D) by Lrs. and ors. Vs. Sheo NaraIn Dubey (D) by Lrs ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-12-2005

Reported in : 2005(2)AWC1800(SC); (SCSuppl)2005(4)CHN39; JT2005(5)SC467; (2005)10SCC621

arijit pasayat, j.1. leave granted.2. challenge in this appeal is to the decision by a learned single judge of the allahabad high court holding that the auction sale on 18.8.1989 and confirmation thereof was illegal. kedar nath dubey, the predecessor of the appellant was the successful bidder. objection filed by sheo narain dubey, the predecessor of non-official respondents was rejected by order dated 18.8.1989.3. a brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice.4. the writ petitioner, sheo narain dubey, the predecessor of non-official respondents had taken a loan for purchasing pumping set from u.p. state sahkari agricultural avam gram vikas bank limited, salenpur, deoria. as the said loan was not repaid within the stipulated time, proceedings were initiated for recovery of amount as arrears of land revenue under the uttar pradesh zamindari abolition and land reforms act, 1950 (in short 'the act'). land belonging to the writ petitioner was auctioned on 18.8.1989. bid of kedar nath dubey, the predecessor of the present appellant was accepted. sheo narain dubey filed objection under rule 285(1) of the uttar pradesh zamindari abolition and land reforms rules, 1953 (in short 'the rules'). the stand taken was that there was material irregularity in the service of notice as well as in conducting the sale and thereby rule 285(a) of the rules had been violated. the said objection was rejected and the sale was confirmed. the writ petition was filed in 1991. mutation proceedings .....

Tag this Judgment!


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