Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Year: 2005 Page 10 of about 2,223 results (0.021 seconds)

Jul 25 2005 (TRI)

income Tax Officer Vs. Mugatlal B and Sons

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Decided on : Jul-25-2005

Reported in : (2006)100TTJ(Ahd.)1042

..... the certificate, it was also mentioned as the assessee-firm was builder and distributor of tata pipe and genith pipe and fixtures, they have to pass on secret commission to mediators. our attention was also drawn to the affidavit of shri govardhan, proprietor of moti builders & organisers who was carrying on business as a builder and developer of immovable property for ..... of the nature of business the assessee was involved, there was a general practice that secret commission is given by the traders or suppliers to the purchasers or to the mediators of the purchasers. as per the certificate in the activities of builder and developer, plumber used to purchase on behalf of developer or builder, therefore generally trader passes on the .....

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!

Sep 02 2005 (HC)

Moulasab Bandgisab Goundi Vs. Yamanappa Ameenappa Hikodi

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Sep-02-2005

Reported in : AIR2005Kant412; ILR2005KAR5230; 2006(5)KarLJ295

huluvadi g. ramesh, j.1. this second appeal is by the plaintiff being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the ii addi. district judge, bijapur in r.a. no. 7/88 wherein the learned district judge has dismissed the appeal filed by the plaintiff and confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the addl. civil judge, bijapur in o.s. no. 169/83.2. the plaintiff had filed a suit to declare that the defendant no. 5 has not acquired any right, title or interest in the alleged sale deed dated 10-5-1982 executed by defendants 1 to 4 and also to issue permanent injunction restraining the defendant no. 5 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit land by the plaintiff and to order for delivery of possession if the court finds that the plaintiff is not in possession or lost the possession of the suit land. the plaintiff said to have purchased the suit schedule property from defendants 1 to 4 for a valuable consideration of rs. 10,000/- under a sale deed dated 30-7-1979 which is to the extent of 3 acres 10 guntas situated at tadalagi village, basavana bagewadi taluk. it is stated that immediately after the sale deed the title of the suit property passed to the plaintiff and the possession was also given and he started cultivating the property, and that subsequently, defendants 1 to 4 without the knowledge of the plaintiff have executed the sale deed dated 10-5-1982 in favour of defendant no. 5 in respect of the same property for a sale consideration .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2005 (HC)

Kasinath Patel Vs. Radha Bai and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-20-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)ALD859; 2005(4)ALT740

n.v. ramana, j.1. the appellant, assailing the judgment and decree dated 14.11.1994 passed by the subordinate judge, bodhan, nizamabad district, dismissing the suit o.s. no. 35 of 1985, filed by him for specific performance of agreement of sale dated 5-5-1983, filed the present appeal.2. the appellant is the plaintiff and the respondents are the defendants. for the sake of expediency, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the suit.3. the brief case of the plaintiff, as pleaded by him in the plaint and the amended plaint is that - plaintiff claims that defendant no. 1 agreed to sell him an extent of ac. 10-34 guntas in sy. no. 47 and ac. 11-00 in sy. no. 135 of kandharpalli village of madnoor taluk, for a sale consideration of rs. 48,000/-, and accordingly defendant no. 1 executed an agreement of sale dated 5-5-1983 in his favour, and pursuant thereto, he having paid an amount of rs. 12,005/-, claims that defendant no. 1 had also put him in possession of the said lands. thereafter, he claims to have paid an amount of rs. 10,201/- on 19-5-1983 and rs. 4,450/- on 2-8-1984 towards sale consideration, and in acknowledgement of which, defendant no. 1 also passed on receipts. the plaintiff claims that he in all paid an amount of rs. 26,656/- to defendant no. 1, and that though he is ready and willing to pay the balance sale consideration of rs. 21,344/-, in spite of repeated oral requests, defendant no. 1 had not come forward to perform her part of the contract, and deferred the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2005 (HC)

Syed Meer Jakeer HussaIn Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-08-2005

Reported in : 2005(2)ALD(Cri)575; 2005CriLJ4276

..... . injection bottle, one used syringe with needle, a bottle containing snake poison were recovered. m.os. 3 to 8 being these articles. ex. p5 is the mediators report p.w. 1 also witnessed ex. 6 mediator's report for recovery of m.04 ear studs at the instance of the accused from pawn broker shop. this witness also witness for recovery of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 09 2005 (HC)

K. Munirathnam Naidu Vs. K. Aadi Lakshmamma and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-09-2005

Reported in : 2005(6)ALD534

..... share of the produce from out of the schedule properties. third defendant has no right to do so and he is not justified in doing so. the efforts of the mediators also became futile. the plaintiff reliably learnt that the third defendant brought into existence some sham, nominal, collusive and fraudulent documents for a portion of the plaint schedule properties in ..... extent of ac.2-14 cents in s.no. 114 situated in pudipatla to five persons, in the year 1986. prior to the filing of the suit there was no mediation with regard to the so-called interest of the plaintiff in respect of the demands of her share in the suit properties. the plaint schedule properties are not joint family .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 07 2005 (HC)

Pothyamsetti Satyanarayana Reddy and ors. Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-07-2005

Reported in : 2006CriLJ27

..... the behaviour of the accused towards her to him and other family members. she underwent mental agony and requested him for action. he requested p.w. 6 and others for mediation and the deceased narrated the happenings to them and they in turn asked the accused to keep quiet. on that, the accused kept quiet for some time. but, later they ..... mind. the deceased asked him to change the house and he was trying to shift the house. on account of the activities of the accused, the deceased underwent mental agony. mediators were also sent by p.w. 1 to the accused and they stopped their activities for some time and later resorted to the same practice in more aggressive form. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 30 2005 (HC)

Suruvu Parshaiah Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-30-2005

Reported in : 2005(2)ALD(Cri)806; 2006CriLJ824

..... of offence panchanama is not substantive evidence and that mere marking of panchanama is not sufficient and that the contents of panchanama are to be brought on record through the mediators or through the investigating officer through whom the panchanama is marked. i have come across several cases where the contents of panchanama were not brought on record and simply panchanamas ..... used only to corroborate the oral testimony given in the court. here in the instant case, ex. p-20 is said to have been prepared in the presence of two mediators viz. karunabathula premsagar rao and nandi rajendra prasad and they are cited as witnesses in the charge-sheet as lws-15 and 16. lw-15 was not examined and nandi .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 20 2005 (HC)

Thippiripati Ijaiah Alias Ajay Vs. State of A.P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-20-2005

Reported in : 2006(1)ALD(Cri)339; 2006CriLJ1117

..... came to the police station and informed that her elder sister set fire to herself. then he got admitted kattamma into hospital.16. pw-7 is one of the inquest mediators. his evidence indicates that he was not present at the time of inquest. the remaining evidence available on record is two dying declarations. one is recorded by pw-13 and ..... -14, c.i. of police at the relevant point of time, conducted inquest on the dead body of the deceased in the presence of panch witnesses. pw-7 is inquest mediator, ex. p. 14 is inquest report. as per the inquest report, the deceased said to have died due to burn injuries, which were caused by pouring kerosene on the deceased .....

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!


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