Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Year: 1977 Page 6 of about 475 results (0.019 seconds)

Apr 12 1977 (HC)

Haji S.P.E.S. Mohamed Aboobacker, Mutawalli of Haji Pitchai Mohideen R ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Apr-12-1977

Reported in : (1977)2MLJ164

t. ramaprasada rao, o.c.j.1. the appellant, not satisfied with the order of mohan j., passed in w.p. no. 2808 of 1976 whereby he made certain interim directions and ultimately dismissed his writ petition, is the appellant before us. the admitted facts are that 'haji pitchai mohideen rowther wakf' was created by late mohideen rowther and it is common ground that the petitioner-appellant is the mutawalli of that wakf and is functioning in accordance with the terms of the deed of wakf. the petitioner claims that he was discharging his duties properly. one of the ordainments in the said wakif deed as per the intentions of the wakf was that an arabic school madarasa at kayatar in tirunelveli district to propagate the arabic language was to be maintained and education given to the students seeking for such benefits. originally, to wit, during the year 1973, the wakf board which was in charge of the school sought for a sum of rs. 750 per month for the maintenance and upkeep of that madarasa. in august, 1974, they demanded a sum of rs. 2,500 from the appellant who was admittedly in possession of both the movables and immovable belonging to the wakf. no doubt, there was no previous notice to the mutawalli about the proposed increase in the demand as above. the mutawalli, therefore, sought for a reconsideration of the demand on the ground that it was excessive. thereafter, it is said that as many as 18 charges were framed as against the appellant in connection with the alleged male .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1977 (HC)

Mitthan Lal Vs. Smt. Parwati and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-03-1977

Reported in : AIR1977All236

h.n. kapoor, j. 1. this is judgment-debtors appeal against the order andjudgment dated 20-11-1974 of 1st addl. civil judge, dehradun, in miscellaneous appeal no. 39 of 1971, confirming the order of the execution court (munsif dehradun) in execution case no. 283 of 1966, rejecting the objections of the judgment-debtor and holding that the application for execution which was moved on 25-11-1966 was within time. 2. the facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:-- in suit no. 86 of 1953, parwati v. mitthan lal, a decree was passed on 31-3-1354 for the ejectment of the defendant-appellant and for recovery of arrears of rent and mesne profits. an application for execution was moved but the execution was stayed by bringing another suit (suit no. 115 of 1955). the stay continued till 10-6-1956 from 10-3-1955. there was then a compromise during the execution proceedings in the present suit on 28-5-1957, according to which two years' time was granted to the judgment-debtor to vacate the premises. the judgment-debtor also paid rs. 50 towards decretal amount and damages. it was further settled that he would pay further damages in monthly instalments of rs. 16 per month. the first instalment was to be due in july, 1967. it was also stipulated that in default of payment of any instalment a total default shall be treated and it would be open to the decree-holder to get the decree for possession executed and to realise the entire decretal amount. the execution court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1977 (HC)

Davinder Nath Vs. Madan Gopal

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jan-24-1977

Reported in : (1977)79PLR238

order1. madan gopal (hereinafter called the landlord) filed a petition for eviction of davinder nath petitioner (to whom i will refer in this order as the tenant) under s. 13 of the east punjab urban rent restriction act, 1949, which was decreed ex parte in favour of the landlord on sept. 6, 1973. during the pendency of the petition for eviction before the civil court, the haryana urban (control of rent and eviction) act (haryana act no. 11 of 1974) was passed and enforced with effect from april 27, 1973. the learned senior subordinate judge was correct in continuing the proceedings which were pending before him as rent controller at the time of coming into force of the principal haryana act because of the requirements of the proviso to s. 24 of that act. the relevant portion of s. 24 is quoted below:-- 'the east punjab urban rent restriction act, 1949(east punjab act no. 3 of 1949) is hereby repealed: provided that such repeal shall not affect any proceedings pending or order passed immediately before the commencement of this act which shall be continued and disposed of or enforced as if the said act had not been repealed. x x x' the tenant made an application on october 26, 1973, for setting aside the ex parte order. while issuing notice of the same for nov. 2, 1973, execution of the order for eviction was stayed by the senior subordinate judge acting as rent controller on oct. 27, 1973. during the pendency of the application for setting aside the ex parte order, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 24 1977 (HC)

Madan Mohan Vs. Revti Prasad and anr.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Feb-24-1977

Reported in : AIR1977Raj191; 1977()WLN70

orderd.p. gupta, j.1. learned counsel for the parties agree that both the revision applications may be heard together and as respondent no. 1 alone would be affected by the decision of these revision applications, they may be heard and disposed of without effecting service upon the remaining respondents.2. in a suit for grant of a perpetual injunction restraining the defendant no. 1 from executing his decree for ejectment obtained against the remaining respondents, an application for temporary injunction was moved by the plaintiff. the trial court granted a temporary injunction, which was set aside on appeal by the learned additional district judge no. 2, jaipur city by his order dated january 29, 1977. the learned additional district judge agreed with the trial court on the question that the plaintiff continued to be in possession of the properties in question, but he concluded that the execution of a decree lawfully obtained could not be stayed by means of a temporary injunction, and on that basis it was held that the plaintiff was unable to prove a prima facie case.3. it is not in dispute between the parties that the ownership of the property in question vested in the idol of shri gor-dhan nathji. the case of the plaintiff is that the father of revti prasad, respondent no. 1 had appointed one grange bux as a pujari in the year 1913 for doing 'sewa-pooja' in the temple and by a subsequent document of the year 1923 all rights relating to the sheibaitship of the property were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 1977 (HC)

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Dharampur Leather Cloth Company Private ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-03-1977

Reported in : [1978]41STC274(Bom)

madon, j.1. these are three references made by the sales tax tribunal at the instance of the commissioner of sales tax. the respondents in all these references are the same and two identical questions have been referred to us in each of these references. the material facts necessary for deciding these references are also the same, the only difference being that sales tax reference no. 100 of 1976 is under the central sales tax act, 1956, in respect of the assessment period 1st april, 1958, to 31st march, 1959; sales tax reference no. 101 of 1976 is under the bombay sales tax act, 1953, in respect of the assessment period 1st april, 1959, to 31st december, 1959; and sales tax reference no. 102 of 1976 is under the central sales tax act, 1956, in respect of the assessment period 1st april, 1959, to 31st december, 1959. sales tax reference no. 101 of 1976 is made under section 34(1) of the bombay sales tax act, 1953, while the other two references are made under the said section 34(1) read with section 9(2) of the central sales tax act, 1956. as this, however, makes no difference to the decision of these reference, it will be convenient to dispose of these by a common judgment. 2. the respondents were registered as dealers both under the bombay sales tax act, 1953, and the central sales tax act, 1956. they carry on business as manufactures, inter alia, of rexine cloth and bookbinding cloth. in respect of their assessments both under the bombay act and the central act in respect .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1977 (HC)

Harabati and ors. Vs. Jasodhara Debi and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Feb-14-1977

Reported in : AIR1977Ori142; 43(1977)CLT524

s. acharya, j.1. the plaintiffs have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree passed in title appeal no. 28/72------- by the addl. district judge,58/69 berhampur confirming the decision of the additional subordinate judge, berhampur in title suit no. 18 of 1968.2. to appreciate the facts of this case, the admitted genealogy showing the relationship of the parties is given below:-- mukunda pani ______________________|_________________________ | | | arjun kasi chandrasekhar (dead) (dead) (dead) | | | | madan mohan | | (d.4) | | adopted son | _________|____________ ____________________|____________ | | | | | | | benu ballabha madan mohan hara nisamani srimati dileswar (dead) (d.3) (d.4) (p.1) (p.2) (p.3) (dead) =brundabati (adopted to =jasodhara (d.2) kasi) (d.1)3. the plaintiffs, as shown in the genealogical tree, are the sisters of dileswar and defendants 2 to 4 are the distant cousins of dileswar.4. the plaintiffs in the plaint alleged that jasodhara (defendant no. 1), respondent no. 1 in this appeal, was not the legally married wife of dileswar. but on the finding of the trial court that jasodhara (d, 1) was the legally married wife of dileswar, the plaintiffs in the lower appellate court and also in this court do not challenge that fact. in view of the above position, it is not necessary to state the averments made in the plaint on that aspect of the matter.5. the relevant averments made by the plaintiffs which are necessary for the determination of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 1977 (HC)

Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Hansraj Vishram Ravani

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-17-1977

Reported in : (1977)6CTR(Bom)368

madon, j. 1. this is a group of eight references under s. 34(1) of the bombay sales tax act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said act'), which can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment. 2. the assessees, who are the respondents before us in all these eight references, are a partnership firm. the assessee-firm was registered as a dealer under the said act. the place of business of the respondents was situate within the jurisdiction of the sales tax officer, licence circle, iii division, bombay. at the relevant time, the sales tax, officer, licence circle, iii division, bombay, was one v. s. nadkarni. accordingly, the respondents were filing their quarterly returns before the said nadkarni. on october 28, 1955 the place of business of the respondents was raided by one v. s. deshpande, who was the sales tax officer (iii), enforcement branch, bombay, and certain books of account were seized. thereafter in respect of the assessment year 1953-54, that is, april 1, 1953 to march 31, 1954, two assessment orders were made by the said nadkarni, both dated october 31, 1955, one in respect of the general tax payable by the respondents and the other in respect of the special tax payable by respondents. on december 16, 1955 a notice was issued to the respondents by the said deshpande in which it was stated that it was revealed from the inspection of the respondents' books of account that they had not kept a true account of the goods bought and sold by them and had thus .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 1977 (SC)

Thiru John Vs. the Returning Officer and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-12-1977

Reported in : AIR1977SC1724; (1977)3SCC540; [1977]3SCR538

r.s. sarkaria, j.1. the basic facts giving rise to these appeals being common, the same will be disposed of under one judgment. 2. notice calling for nominations to be filed before 3 p.m. on 11-3-1974, for filling six vacancies to the rajya sabha from the state of tamil nadu in the biennial elections was issued on march 4, 1974. eleven candidates filed their nominations. on scrutiny which was held on march 12, 1974, all those nominations were found to be valid. on 14-3-1974, which was the last date fixed for withdrawal, three candidates withdrew their nominations leaving eight in the field. the poll was held on 21-3-1974. counting of votes took place on the same date. the result was published according to which, the contesting candidates secured the votes noted against their names as follows:1. shri khadar sha - 3500 2. shri khaja mohideen - 3700 3. shri v. subrahmanyan - 300 4. shri c.d. natarajan - 3500 5. shri r. mohanarangam - nil 6. shri s. ranaganathan - 4100 7. g. lakshmanan - 3600 8. d.c. john alias valampuri john - 3700 3. the requisite quota to secure the election of a candidate was fixed at 22,400 + 1/6+1 = 3201 and candidates mentioned at serial nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 were declared elected. 4. two election petitions were filed by the unsuccessful candidates. election petition 1 of 1974 was filed by shri r. mohan rangam and election petition 2 of 1974 by shri v. subrahmanyan. the petitioners prayed that the election of shri d.c. john be declared void and set .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1977 (HC)

Simatul Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Cibatul Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Aug-09-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Guj216; (1978)0GLR315

thakkar, j.1. one will have to reflect a great deal before saying 'what is in a name?' for everything centers around a name (cibatul? simatul?) in the battle between two business houses giving rise to the present appeal. and the question debated before the court is as to whether the trial court was right in holding that the name 'simatul chemical industries pvt. ltd.' under which the appellant-defendant is doing business is so deceptively similar to the name of the respondent-plaintiff 'cibatul limited' that the public at large and the consumers are likely to be deceived into believing that they are dealing with the same company or companies having some connection or association with each other and that in order to protect the plaintiff company from its goodwill being invaded and in order to' prevent confusion among the public at large and consumers, it was necessary to restrain the defendant company from carrying on business under any name and style comprising the words 'simatul' or 'cibatul' or any other word comprising the plaintiff's name and style so as to represent or induce into believing that the defendant-company is the same as the plaintiff-company or that if the goods manufactured and sold by the defendantcompany are the goods manufactured and sold by the plaintiff-company2. a public limited company known as the atul products limited isengaged in the manufacture of dyes and chemicals of various types since 1947. in collaboration with a swiss co. with international .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1977 (HC)

Gobinda Chandra Bhowmick Vs. the State of West Bengal

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Mar-30-1977

Reported in : AIR1977Cal371

sankar prasad mitra, c.j. 1. this bench has been constituted pursuant to a reference under chap. vii of the appellate side rules by a division bench consisting of mr. justice p. k. chanda and mr. justice sudhamay basu.2. the question referred to us is as follows :--'for the purpose of determining whether a person is a child or not within the meaning of section 28 of the west bengal children act, 1959, is the age to be determined with reference to the date of the commission of the offence or when the person is brought before the court or with reference to some other date ?'3. in criminal appeal no. 470 of 1'974, (madan pradhan v. the state) reported in 1976 (1) cal lj 224 mr. justice p. c. barooah sitting with mr. justice h. n. sen has held that if a person be a child 'on the date of the commission of the offence for which he was convicted' his trial along with an adult is 'clearly without jurisdiction being in contravention ofthe specific provision of section 28(1) of the act'.4. the other division bench of mr. justice p. k. chanda and mr. justice sudhamay basu was unable to agree with this view. according to their lordships it is the date of trial and not the date of commission of offence that is relevant.5. our difficulty is that in view of the facts of the instant case the answer that we may give to the question referred to us would be academic.6-8. the case of the petitioner is that on the date when the alleged offence took place the petitioner was below 18 years of age. .....

Tag this Judgment!

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