Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Year: 1956 Page 3 of about 332 results (0.020 seconds)

Jan 05 1956 (HC)

Mohd. MohsIn and anr. Vs. Kausar Raza and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-05-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All422

kidwai, j.1. the following pedigree will elucidate the facts of the case: khairat husain _______________________|_________________________ | | tahir-un-nissa tayyab-un-nissa | | _______|_____________________________ | | | | |firasat nifasat mohd. zair | husain hussain | | ___________________________________________________|_______________ | | | | jawad taeed rashid saeed husain husain husain husain2. khairat husain, a shia muslim, died leaving two daughters as his heirs. his immovable property consisted of 3 villages, garhi rakhmau, murligang and rasoolabad. after the death of tayyab-un-nissa, her eldest son, jawad husain, laid claim to the whole property and got mutation effected in his favour alone. it is no longer in dispute that as a matter of fact tahir-un-nissa, and after her, her sons, were entitled to and the latter got, an eight annas share and each of the four sons of tayyab-un-nissa was entitled to and eventually got a two annas share.3. on 7-12-1883, tahirunnissa executed a deed under which jawad husain was allowed possession of her eight annas share in the property and jawad husain undertook to pay her an allowance of rs. 500/- per annum. on 16-2-1886 speed executed a deed agreeing to take rs. 125/- per annum in lieu of his share which would have been 2 annas. the other two brothers of jawad executed no deed but he continued in possession of their shares also.4. on 21-12-1895, jawad mortgaged the whole property to raja tasadduq rasul khan of jahan girabad to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 1956 (HC)

Bhuyan Shyam Sunder Mohapatra and anr. Vs. Ch. Nilakantha Das and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Feb-17-1956

Reported in : AIR1956Ori165

p.v.b. rao, j.1. civil revision no. 260 of 1949 and first appeal no. 44 of 1951, involve common questions of fact and law and are heard together. they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. civil revision no. 260 of 1949 arises out of an order passed by the learned subordinate judge of cuttak in misc. case no. 1 of 1949 on an application filed by the petitioners, who will be referred to hereafter as mortgagees, under sections 151, 152 and 153, civil p. c. for amendment of the decree and judgment passed in a suit for foreclosure.3. first appeal no. 44/51 is against the decree and judgment of the additional subordinate judge of cuttack, in original suit no. 9/49. the suit was filed by the plaintiffs (mortgagees) for a declaration of their title to the properties described in schedule b and for delivery of possession of the same, or in the alternative for a claim of a sum of rs. 5922-12-0 being the value of the suit property from defendant 1.the petitioners in misc. case no. 1 of 1949 and the plaintiffs in original suit no. 9 of 1949 are the same. defendant 40 in the original suit is the mother of these plaintiffs who are the sons of one bhuyan bhaskar chandra mohapatra, who died in 1938, & is the original mortgagee. defendants 4 to 39 are the co-sharers of defendant 1 who are pro forma defendants.defendant 1 borrowed rs. 30,000/- from the plaintiffs' father on 13-4-32 on a registered mortgage by conditional sale, the properties mortgaged being situated in the districts of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1956 (HC)

State of Orissa Vs. Indian Chemical Products Ltd. and anr.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Nov-22-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Ori203

p.v.b. rao, j. 1. this is an application filed by the state of orissa through the secretary to the government of orissa, finance department under section 38 of the indian companies act (act vii of 1913) praying to order that the register of members of the company (the indian chemical products limited). opposite party no. i be rectified by inserting therein the name of the petitioner as the holder of 7500 fully paid up shares in the company being shares nos. 1 to 7500, scrip no. 12, in the place of opposite party no. 2. the maharaja of mayurbhanj. 2. according to the petitioner's allegations, the indian chemical products ltd., which will hereafter be referred to as the company, was incorporated on 29-11-47 as a company limited by shares with its registered office at baripada, district mayurbhanj now in orissa. the capital of the company is rs. 25,00,000/- divided into 25,000 shares of rs. 100/- each and according to the balance sheet of the company filed by the registrar of joint stock companies, orissa, the subscribed capital of the company is rs. 7,75,000/- being the fully paid up capital of 7750 shares. out of these 7750 shares, opposite party no. 2, the maharaja of mayurbhanja, is the registered holder of 7500 fully paid up shares of the value of rs. 7,50,000/-. the objects of the company, according to the memorandum of association annexure a (the annexures to the petition filed by the petitioner are marked a, b, c, etc. and the annexures filed along with the counter- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1956 (HC)

Mehtab Singh Gurbachan Singh Vs. Amrik Singh and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Nov-06-1956

Reported in : AIR1957P& H146

bishan narain, j. 1. this second appeal has been filed by mohtab singh plaintiff agairst the dismissal of the suit by both the lower courts. according to the plain- tiff's allegations the parties are related to each other though a little distantly and the genealogical table set up by the plaintiff so far as it is relevant to the present case is as follows: jai singh _________________|______________ | | jawahar singh bahadar singh | | lehna singh=mt. raj=mst. attar=mst. | (d.s.p.) kaur kaur bhagwani | | (widows) | mst. lachmi mohar singh (daughter) ___________|___ | | | | gurbachan singh sadhu singh | _________|______________ | | | | | | mehtab raja daulat naran- | singh singh singh jan singh | (plaintiff) | ____________________________________________ | | gaja singh sardara defedant | no. 2. ajit singh defendant no. 1.2. the property in dispute originally belonged to jawahar singh son of jai singh. he had a son lehna singh who died in the life-time of his lather leaving three widows. jawahar singh is alleged to have executed a will on 2nd april, 1901 and it is alleged that he got it registered. jawahar singh died on 7th december, 1901 and after his death the three widows of his pre-deceas-ed son took possession of the property.subsequently attar kaur and then raj kaur died and then bhagwani alias bhagwan kaur alone got posseision of the property. she executed a will on 8th march, 1937. bequeathing the property to mehtab singh. she then gifted the same property to him by a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 1956 (SC)

Deoki Nandan Vs. Murlidhar

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-04-1956

Reported in : AIR1957SC133; 1957(0)BLJR355; [1956]1SCR756

venkatarama ayyar, j. 1. the point for decision in this appeal is whether a thakurdwara of sri radhakrishnaji in the village of bhadesia in the district of sitapur is a private temple or a public one in which all the hindus are entitled to worship. 2. one sheo ghulam, a pious hindu and a resident of the said village, had the thakurdwara constructed during the years 1914-1916, and the idol of shri radhakrishnaji ceremoniously installed therein. he was himself in management of the temple and its affairs till 1928 when he died without any issue. on march 6, 1919, he had executed a will whereby he bequeathed all his lands to the thakur. the provisions of the will, in so far as they are material, will presently by referred to. the testator had two wives one of whom ram kuar, had predeceased him and the surviving widow, raj kuar, succeeded him as mutawalli in terms of the will and was in management till her death in 1933. then the first defendant, who is the nephew of sheo ghulam, got into possession of the properties as manager of the endowment in accordance with the provisions of the will. the appellant is a distant agnate of sheo ghulam, and on the allegation that the first defendant had been mismanaging the temple and denying the rights of the public therein, he moved the district court of sitapur for relief under the religious and charitable endowments act xiv of 1920, but the court declined to interfere on the ground that the endowment was private. an application to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 21 1956 (HC)

Thailambal Ammal Vs. Kesavan Nair

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Dec-21-1956

Reported in : AIR1957Ker86

varadaraja iyengar, j.1. this appeal is by the plaintiffs in a suit for declaration of their reversionary title as against the limited estate holder and her alienees, which has been dismissed by the court below.2. the disputed properties belonged originally to the joint family of two brahmin brothers chidambara iyer and ramaswami iyer. ramaswami iyer died in 1056 leaving his wife parvathi ammal deceased and a daughter kavery ammal who is the 2nd defendant in the case. parvathi came into possession of the properties in 1056 after the death of her husband ramaswami and continued in possession until her death in 1100, when she was succeeded by the 2nd defendant kaveri.soon thereafter, one of the sons of chidambara filed suit o. s. 342 of 1100 before the district munsiff's court of chittur against her as 2nd defendant and her lessee as the 1st defendant for recovery of the properties on foot of alleged title under a partition arrangement of 1087 entered into between the sons of chidambara after his death in that same year.that partition scheme assumed that parvathi was let into possession by chidambara under maintenance arrangement enuring for her life and the properties were accordingly recoverable after her death by the members of chidambara's branch. the 2nd defendant denied the maintenance arrangement and set up a case of her mother's succession to her father to whom she alleged, the properties were allotted in partition in the family. she accounted for her possession, as .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1956 (HC)

Gainda Raghuvir Vs. the State

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Jan-24-1956

Reported in : 1957CriLJ157

bapna, j.1. this is an appeal by gainda, son of raghuvir kachi of nagla-bhensa, police station rupbas, who has been convicted under section 165a of the indian penal code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, and to pay a fine of rs. 200 /-, and in default, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months by the learned special (sessions) judge, bharatpur, by judgment dated 15-6-1955. the sum of rs. 100/-, which was sought to be offered as bribe was directed to be forfeited to the government.2. the case for the prosecution is that mutation of one bigha and twelve taiswas of land in khasra no. 1543 in village bhensa was made in favour of girraj nai by shri kaluram, naib tehsildar, rupbas, by order dated 31-10-1954. this order was by consent of gainda, in whose name that land previously stood. gainda, however, changed his mind, and approached shri kalurarn to reverse the entry and on 4-11-1954, offered to pay illegal gratification to shri kaluram.shri kaluram refused to be tempted, but gainda accompanied by deoji went to his house on the next day, that is, 5-11-1954. the naib tehsildar suspected that they had come for the same purpose of offering him a bribe again, and wrote to the police officer to come and take action. he also sent for two respectable persons of the locality, nashilal and pyarelal. after the arrival of the sub-inspector nathi singh, pyare lal and nathilal, the naib tehsildar entered his baithak. gainda offered rs. 100/-, and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1956 (HC)

Daya Ram and ors. Vs. Jagir Singh and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-29-1956

Reported in : AIR1956HP61

ramabhadran, j.c. 1. this second appeal by defendants arises out of a suit for the possession of 8 bighas and 8 biswas of land situated in village palthi, pargana teun. the plaintiffs' case was that the land in suit had reverted to them alter the death of mt. santi and mt. nazku, w/o prabhu, the last male occupancy tenant. mutation was effected in favour of the plaintiffs on 21-5-f950. the defendants, however, took forcible possession of the land on 15-6-1950. consequently, the plaintiffs contended that the defendants, as trespassers, were liable to be evicted. 2. the suit was resisted by the defendants on various grounds. inter alia, it was contended that the suit was bad for non-joinder of daya ram, bali ham and certain other heirs of mt. nazku. in the second place, it was alleged that one khayalu, the common ancestor of the defendants and prabhu (the last male occupancy tenant) had once been in possession of the suit land. on that score, the defendants claimed occupancy rights for themselves. in the third place, the defendants alleged that they were joint occupancy tenants and, therefore, after the death of mt. santi and mt, nazku, the interests of the latter devolved upon them by survivorship. 3. the trial court (subordinate judge first class, bilaspur) directed that daya ham, ball ram and others should be impleaded as parties. on the other issues, it held that khayalu had never been in possession of the land in suit and that the defendants were not joint tenants. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 1956 (SC)

H.H. Raja Harinder Singh Vs. S. Karnail Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Dec-20-1956

Reported in : AIR1957SC271; [1957]1SCR208

venkatarama aiyar, j. 1. the appellant was one of the candidates who stood for election to the legislative assembly of the patiala and east punjab states union from the faridkot constituency in the general elections held in 1954. he secured the largest number of votes, and was declared duly elected. the result was notified in the official gazette on february 27, 1954, and the return of the election expenses was published therein on may, 2, 1954. on may 18, 1954, the first respondent filed a petition under s. 81 of the representation of the people act no. xliii of 1951, hereinafter referred to as the act, and therein he prayed that the election of the appellant might be declared void on the ground that he and his agents had committed various corrupt and illegal practices, of which particulars were given. the appellant filed a written statement denying these allegations. he therein raised the further contention that the election petition had not been presented within the time limited by law, and was, therefore, liable to be dismissed. rule 119, which prescribes the period within which election petitions have to be filed, runs, so far as it is material, as follows : 119. 'time within which an election petition shall be presented :- an election petition calling in question an election may, - (a) in the case where such petition is against a returned candidate, be presented under section 81 at any time after the date of publication of the name of such candidate under section 67 but .....

Tag this Judgment!

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!


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