Delhi Court December 1966 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Jai Parkash Vs State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi111; 1967CriLJ1495
ORDER(1) Jai Parkash son of Shri Bir Bhan has applied under Section 561-A Code of Criminal Procedure, praying that the record of the lower Court be summoned and the proceedings pending therein be ordered to be quashed.(2) This case is one of the very few instances which bring out a very dark aspect of our judicial process. A criminal case against the petitioner under Sections 409 and 420, Indian Penal Code was started as far back as in 1956. One Roshan Lal Kapur is his co-accused. The facts out of which this criminal prosecution arises are concerned with a limited company called the National Planners Ltd., which has apparently since gone into liquidation and of which one Shri Hardit Singh is functioning as the liquidator. The challan was put into Court more than 9 years ago in April 1957 and practically no progress has been made in this case during the last more than 9 years. At the present moment, I am informed that the case is pending in the Court of Shri M. L. Grover, Sub-Divisional...
Rabinder Nath Malik Vs. Regional Passport Officer, New Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi1
Dua, AG. C.J. (1). This petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been placed before us in pursuance of the referring order dated 4-11-1966 made by my learned brtoher S.K. Paur, J. Considering the matter to be important and, thereforee deserving of consideration by a larger Bench.(2) The petitioner claiming to be a citizen of India and regular Travel Agent and Adviser of Messrs. Lufthansa Airlines and toher International Wirelines working in Delhi for the last more than three years, made an application to the Regional Passport Officer, New Delhi, respondent No. 1 on 5-7-1966 along with the requisite guarantee bond and original character certificate signed by the Competent Authority. This application had been made by the petitioner in anticipation of an invitation of Messrs. Lufthansa a German Airlines who had decided to introduce a flight between Hamburg and Oslo and are to operate an inaugural flight on 12-11-1966. The petitioner was to leave on 11-11-1966. By means of ...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Sinha Govindji
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi88; 1967CriLJ1300
ORDER(1) The respondent Shri Sinha Govindji is the proprietor of Messrs Sinha Govindji carrying on business at Bellary in Mysore State. The said firm had an office in Bombay. On 18th January, 1960, the respondent was granted a license for import of 31/2 tons of Cellulose Nitrate sheets, rods, etc. Of the value of about Rs.75,000/- the license was 'actual User's license', so that the goods could be consumed by the respondent himself, and he was nto entitled to sell the same. He imported 44 cases of the material from London and the delivery thereof was taken in July, 1961. In December, 1961, the respondent addressed a letter to one Shri Bijayasankar Bhargava of Sankar Brtohers, Delhi offering to sell the material at Rs. 7 per pound. This letter was sent by the respondent from Bombay to the purchaser in Delhi. Shri Bhargava accepted the offer by a letter which he sent from Delhi to the respondent at Bombay. According to the complaint, Shri Bhargava instructed the respondent to send the go...
Turat Singh Shadi Ram Vs. Custodian of Evacuees Property and Regional ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-20-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi54
ORDER(1) This petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution was admitted by a bench of the Punjab High court on Circuit on 6-3-1959 and the petitioner was released on bail on furnishing security for appearance before the Revenue Assistant if and when necessary after the decision of the writ petition.(2) The petitioner has alleged in his writ petition that he had inherited in 1927 from his late father Shri Shaddi Ram Property bearing Municipal (Old) No. 304 and (new). No.1051 situated in Gali Hiranand, Maliwara, Wrd No.5 Delhi, which had been acquired by his father by purchase on 18-8-1992. From 1927 1d0 1941, he treated that property as his by various acts of ownership and possession. He also mortgaged it and redeemed the mortgages so created. On 4-6-1941, there was some award in a controversy between him and his two sons when the property was divided, one third share falling to the petitioner's share. The award was duly registered. On 23-8-44, he mortgaged his divide one-thir...
Mohd. Umar Vs. Inshalla Bi.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Delhi5; 3(1968)DLT13
1. This regular second appeal is concluded by a finding of fact and must, thereforee, be dismissed with costs.2. Mst. Inshalla Bi instituted a suit for the possession of the premises in question and the defense raised was that the defendant Mohammad Umar was a tenant in respect of such premises. The true position, as disclosed in the pleadings, is that the plaintiff claimed to be the owner of a piece of property alleging that the defendant was a tenant of the ground floor only. A short time prior to the institution of the suit, round about the second week of May, 1964, the defendant was alleged to have occupied the first floor illegally without any right and it was for the eviction of the defendant from this part of the premises that the suit was instituted Mohammad Umar as observed earlier, pleaded that he was a tenant of the first floor as well. The trial Court came to the conclusion that Mohammad Umar was a tenant of the entire building and on this finding, the court also proceeded ...
Hira Lal Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee, New Delhithrough Its Secre ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi24
1. The plaintiff appellant installed three wooden almirahs in Block A Connaught Place, New Delhi, near Wangers Restaurant. It appears that on 16th July, 1956, some member of the staff of New Delhi Municipal Committee inspected the site and made a report dated 18th July, 1956. Exhibit D/2, which inter alias recites 'during my round on 16th July 1956, I ntoiced that Sh. Hira Lal has gto constructed three wooden almirahs, two in the corner and one on the wall in the verandah of Block `A' Con. Place, near 'Wangers', without the permission of the Committee. In pursuance of this report, the respondent New Delhi Municipal Committee, issued a ntoice to Hira Lal under section 195 of the Punjab Municipal Act requiring the appellant to demolish the said Almirahs. 2. The ntoice recites the description of the almirahs as 'two wooden almirahs measuring 6'x 5' each in the corners and one wooden Almirah measuring 6'x 3' along with the puce walls in the verandah of Block `A' ... ' On 18th December, 196...
Munshi Vs. Abdul Qadeer and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-12-1966
Reported in: 3(1967)DLT79
I.D. Dua, J.(1) These two civil Revisions (Civil Revision Nos. 358-D and 359-D of 1966) raise a common question of law and are, thereforee being disposed of by one judgment. Facts may be stated only in the case of Munshi Ram v. Shri Abdul Qadeer. C. R. 358-D 1966.(2) On 1-6-1957, the respondents obtained a decree for ejectment against the petitioner Munsi Ram, their tenant, Munshi Ram was under the terms of decree to remain in possession till 31-5-1959, where after the decree was to be executable. The premises in respect of which this decree for ejectment was made are admittedly located in a slum area within the meaning of Slum Areas (Clearance and Improvement) Act, 96 of 1956 (hereafter described as the Slum Act). The respondents applied for permission to competent authority to execute the decree which was granted on 12-6-1964 under section 19 of the Slum Act. On 7-9-1965, the application for execution of the decree was presented and this revision arises out of those proceedings. The ...
Pehlad Singh Vs. Surjan Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-06-1966
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT587
S.N. Andley, J.(1) Pehald Singh, Harnam Singh, Jaishi Ram sons of Swan Singh and Mr. Kidko, daughter of the paid Swan Singh, filed a suit for prossession of land against Surjan, Rattan Chand, jit Singh and Partap Singh. They claimed possession of the land which had belonged to Mt. Mal to alias Rahanso. They claimed possession of this land as the nephews of Mt. Malto. defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were grand nephews of Mt. Malto while defendant No. 1 Surjan was her nephew being the son of a brtoher of her husband. Mt. Malto had executed a will with respect to her property on October 3, 1961, and beneficiaries under this will were Rattan Chand, Jit Singh and Pratap Singh (Defendants Nos. 2 to 4). The will was gto registered: before the Sub-Registrar, Hamirpur. On the same date, Mt Malto; executed a document wherein she acknowledged that she had executed the aforesaid will; that the defendants had been faithfully serving her and looking after her property ; that they had paid off her debts a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›