Delhi Court October 1966 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1966 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.016 seconds)indra Perfumery Co. and ors. Vs. Moti Lal Lalu Mal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi14
1. This appeal was settled by Grover J., by his order dated 7th of February, 1966, on the basis that the same had become infructuous, the application for eviction having been dismissed. That order was passed by Grover J., at the instance of the respondents without notice to the appellants and without hearing them. In this situation, an application was filed for setting aside of the order of Grover J. This application is nto objected to by the learned counsel for the respondents. I would accordingly vacate the order of Grover J., and restore the appeal for hearing,2. This second appeal is directed against the decision of the Rent Control Tribunal upholding the decision of the Rent Controller under Section 15(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. This case has an interesting history. The premises in dispute form part of a larger building belonging to one Mohd. Shafi. The building is situate in Gandhi Market. The dispute relates to a part of the building denoted by No. 9830. This part o...
Tag this Judgment!Official Receiver, Indore (Madhya Pradesh) and anr. Vs. Gurbax Singh a ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi115
ORDER(1) This is an application under Art. 134 (1) (c) of the Constitution, read with Order 21, Rule 2, of the Supreme Court Rules, for grant of a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court from the judgment, dated February 23, 1966, of a Division Bench consisting of Capoor and Grover Jj, in Criminal Revisions Nos. 355-D and 387-D of 1965. Today the learned counsel for the applicants has moved antoher application seeking same relief in the alternative under Article 133 of the Constitution.(2) There was a criminal case against respondent 2. H.K. Gupta alias Natwar Lal, for having cheated various persons, including respondent 1, Dr. Gurbax Singh, and having thus relieved them of considerable amounts of money. He was convicted in that case. After his conviction, respondent 1 applied for payment of Rs.1,17,000 out of the amount or amounts recovered from respondent 2. This application was under Section 517 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was rejected by the trial Court. Ag...
Tag this Judgment!