Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Year: 1956 Page 2 of about 332 results (0.040 seconds)

Jun 27 1956 (HC)

Poona Mazoor Sabha Vs. G.K. Dhutia and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-27-1956

Reported in : AIR1956Bom743; (1956)58BOMLR817; ILR1957Bom6

chagla, c.j.1. this petition raises a rather important question with regard to conciliation proceedings under the industrial disputes act. it appears that there was a dispute between the second opponent company and its workers with regard to wages, dear-ness allowance, leave facilities etc. and on 30-1-1955 a meeting of the workers was called where one mahadik was authorised by his co-workers to make representations to the second opponent company with regard to their demands.the second opponent company wanted to negotiate with the workers who had a representative capacity and therefore the government labour officer was approached to hold a meeting at which representatives of the workers would be elected under his supervision. accordingly a meeting was-held on 17-3-1955 at which five workmen were elected by the workers present to be their representatives.on 7-4-1955 the second opponent company and the elected representatives of the workers wrote a letter to the conciliation officer to the effect that they had come to a negotiated agreement in regard to the demand relating to wages, dearness allowance and leave facilities and that they desired to sign a memorandum of settlement before him. accordingly on 11-4-1955 both the parties appeared before the conciliation officer, the first opponent, and produced before him a draft agreement. this draft agreement was considered by the conciliation officer and he explained to the elected representatives of the workers in marathi the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1956 (HC)

Mst. Sudehaiya Kumar and anr. Vs. Ram Dass Pandey and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-05-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All270

desai, j.1. this is an appeal by the defendants from a judgment of a civil judge allowing an appeal and decreeing the suit of ram dass plaintiff.2. the property in dispute admittedly belonged to the last male owner jangi who died on 10-6-1901, leaving his widow mst. deobarta, his sister mst. sudami and his mother mst. bageshra. on his death, mst. deotoarta and mst. bageshra obtained mutation in their favour in respect of the property left by jangi. mst. bageshra died in 1911, and on her death, the name of mst. sudami was added. in 1912 a suit-was brought by the sons of matadin for possession and, in the alternative, for a declaration that they were entitled to the property after the deaths of mst. deobarta and mst. sudami. matadin was jangi's grand-father's brother. his sons, who filed the suit, were dudh nath proforma defendant respondent, sripat and banwari.it was decreed only for the alternative relief. subsequently mst. sudami died and on 6-5-1932 mst. deobarta made a gift of a substantial portion of the property in favour of her husband ram sewak defendant-appellant no. 2. thereupon suit no. 155 of 1933 was instituted by dudh nath against mst. deobarta and ram sewak. ram das plaintiff-respondent first cousin of dudh nath was at that time a minor living jointly with, and under the guardianship of, dudh nath. dudh nath sought the relief of cancellation of the gift deed on behalf of himself and ram das. the suit was contested by mst. deobarta and ram sewak on various .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 1956 (HC)

Sarup Lal Vs. Sm. Kaushalya Devi and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Mar-14-1956

Reported in : AIR1956P& H225

kapur, j.1. this is an application made by sarup lal who has obtained leave to appeal to the supreme court against a judgment of this court dated 24-12-1953. this certificate was granted on 21-7-1954. he has now applied under order 45 rule 13 civil p. c. praying that the operation of the order of this court be suspended and respondents 1 & 2 be restrained, from alienating the property sold to them. rule was issued by me and as i was of the opinion that this matter should be heard by a division bench and not by a single bench the case has been placed before this bench.2. leave was granted on 21-7-1954 and the application for stay was made on 26-9-1955.3. an objection has been raised that under order 45 the prayer made in this petition cannot be granted. the present petitioner sold to the opposite parties some land and disputes arose in the revenue department as to mutation and the chief commissioner ordered the mutation to be set aside and mutation proceedings to be started de novo.it was against this order that the opposite parties brought a petition to this court under article 226 of the constitution. this petition was allowed and in the present application made by sarup lal petitioner it is stated that during the years 1954 and 1955 the opposite parties entered into 41 transactions of sale with the result that about half of the land sold has already been sold.4. the petitioner relies upon clauses (b) and (d) of rule 13(2) of order 45, but in proceedings such as the one now .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1956 (HC)

State Vs. Raghunath Prasad

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-16-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All273

..... obtained possession of that set.raghunath prasad was prosecuted on the allegation that, though he had mortgaged the radio set with nathu lal agarwal, he had continued to be in 'mediate possession of the set'. the learned magistrate held that raghunath prasad was not in possession of it and, consequently, acquitted' raghunath prasad.3. we have heard learned deputy government advocate .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 1956 (HC)

Newspaper Ltd. Vs. State Industrial Tribunal and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-08-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All597; (1957)ILLJ32All

..... the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person.' it authorises the central or the, state government to appoint conciliation officers charged with the duty of mediating in and promoting the settlement of industrial disuptes and also for the constitution of boards of conciliation for promoting the settlement of industrial disputes and courts of inquiry and industrial .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1956 (HC)

Rajamma Vs. Varadarajulu Chetti and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-18-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad198

..... chetti, the plaintiff's father is said to have settled the maintenance claim of his daughter by executing ex. b-3 in pursuance of the arbitration award ex. b-2 mediated under the muchalika ex, b-l. the plaintiff has always been residing with her lather, because she has not joined her husband, this being a pre-puberty marriage. in 1950 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1956 (HC)

Palwanna Nadar and ors. Vs. Annamalai Ammal

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-27-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Mad330

..... have up till now a female child by name annamalai ammal aged six years. as regarding to my promise given at the time of your marriage in the presence of mediators that i should give you immovable pioljerlies. i have by this deed given you the properties shown in schedule hereto valued at rs. 600 and now itself placed you in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1956 (HC)

Promode Lal Moitra Vs. Additional District Magistrate, 24 Parganas and ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-12-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Cal164,61CWN11

sinha, j. 1. the facts in this case are as follows: the petitioner is a resident of baranagore, which is within the jurisdiction of the baranagore municipality. for the purposes of the general election of the said municipality, fixed on 11-3-56, the final electoral roll of the said baranagore municipality was published under the election rules made under the bengal municipal act, 1932 and the petitioner's name appears as a male voter in ward no. 3. the respondent no. 3, amar mazumdar is also a recorded voter in the same ward. for the purposes of the said election, both the petitioner and the respondent no. 3 filed their respective nomination papers with the respondent no. 2, who is the chairman of the municipality. the nomination and registration of candidates standing in an election held under the bengal municipal act, 1932, are governed by a set of rules framed by the government of bengal, under powers conferred by section 44 of the said act. rule 17 lays down that not less than 45 days before the election day the commissioners shall fix for the nomination of candidates, a date which shall not be less than 35 days before the election day. on or before the date of nomination, every candidate for election is to file his nomination paper in the prescribed form and in accordance with the prescribed formalities, with the chairman. the chairman then publishes a notice fixing the time and date of the scrutiny of the nomination paper, and on the date so fixed, scrutinises the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 1956 (HC)

Kiriti Bhushan Saha Mandal Vs. Tarubala Dasi

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-29-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Cal511,61CWN572

..... a right. (3) 'under-tenant' means a person who has acquired a right to hold non-agricultural land for any of the purposes provided in this act either immediately or mediately under a tenant and includes also the successors in interest of persons who have acquired such a right.' 14. the definition in section 2(5) is very wide. literally read .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 19 1956 (HC)

Arnold Dominic Rodricks Vs. Sunder Vinayak Navalkar and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-19-1956

Reported in : AIR1956Bom404

chagla, c.j. 1. this is an appeal against a judgment of desai j. by which he ordered probate to issue to the petitioners of a will of one louisa catherine rodricks. the will was opposed by the appellant substantially on two grounds. one was that the petition for probate was not in we proper form and that proper court-fees had not been paid, and the other ground was that the will had been obtained by undue influence. with regard to the first ground the position is this.in the petition for probate in schedule i the two petitioners have shown the value of moveable properties as rs. 850/-. that is the only property which has been shown in this schedule. then they have annexed schedule iii and in that schedule they have shown the value of immoveable property at rs. 35,000/-, and with regard to this schedule there is an averment in para 9 of the affidavit, in support of the petition that this property is the subject-matter of the suit filed by the deceased testatrix in which suit she claimed this property as belonging to her.admittedly, no court-fees have been paid on the value of this immoveable property viz., rs. 35,000/- and the direction given by the learned judge with regard to this property was that the petitioners should file a statement in the courtshowing the result of the suit and the petitioners should undertake to pay the probate duty if the suit was determined in their favour, and mr. gauba on behalf of the appellant has contended that the order passed by the learned .....

Tag this Judgment!


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