Delhi Court February 1967 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.
S. Vs. R.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-17-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Delhi79
(1) The marriage of the appellant with the respondent has been declared a nullity be the Additional District Judge of Delhi in pursuance of an application under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (to be hereinafter referred to as the Act) made by the respondent. The complaint of the respondent was that the appellant was imptoent at the time of marriage and continued to be so until the institution of the proceedings. That case has been accepted by the trial Judge. The decision of the trial Court was affirmed by Khanna, J., sitting singly. Hence this appeal.(2) Shri Parkash Narain, the learned counsel for the appellant questioned the correctness and legality of the decision in this case on four grounds, namely,-'(1) The appellant was prejudiced in his defense because of the fact that the necessary particulars were nto given by the respondent either in her petition or in the particulars supplied later; (2) the Courts below erred in opining that the respondent has satisfactorily es...
Union of India, Through Secretary to Ministry of Finance and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Delhi219
(1) This Letters Patent appeal is filed by the Union of India and toher against the judgment of a learned Single Judge (Mehar Singh, J.) of the High Court of Punjab, dated 21st August, 1964, directing that writ in the nature of mandamus be issued to the second appellant, Chief Controlling Revenue Authority for Delhi State, to state a case under sub-section (1) of Section 57 of the Indian Stamp act, in writ petition C. W. No. 189-D of 1964 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by the respondent herein.(2) The respondent herein, S. Sarup Singh, filed the aforesaid writ petition C. W. No. 189-D of 1964 in the High Court of Punjab in the following circumstances:(3) The facts stated in the judgment of the learned Single Judge are nto disputed before us. The respondent herein and his sons constituted a joint Hindu family. His wife purchased some time in February 1952, a building site in the Diplomatic Enclave, New Delhi, for about Rs. 41,000. The respondent herein contributed Rs. 23,30...
Devi Charan Vs. Durga Porshad Chhanu Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi128
(1). This Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent (Punjab), is against the judgment of P.D. Sharma, J., dated 30th August, 1963, in Appeal F.A.O. case No. 87-D of 1957, which reversed the judgment and order of Shri S.B. Capoor, District Judge at Delhi, dated 3rd May, 1957, in Probate Case No. 5 of 1956.(2) The application for probate of the will of one Shrimati Jog Maya, out of which this appeal has arisen, was filed on 27th November, 1955, by one Durga Pershad, in the following circumstances:-(3) It was alleged in the application that Smt. Jog Maya was a resident of Mohalla Rangmahal, Nahar Sadat Khan, Delhi that she executed her last will and testament on the 1st of July, 1947, that the applicant was the legatee and executor named in the said will, and that she died at Delhi on the 22nd of October, 1955, leaving at the time of her death the properties described in the schedule to the application, which consisted of a number of fixed deposits in the National Bank o...
Amar Nath Kapur Vs. Pran Nath Khanna
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1967
Reported in: 1968CriLJ1268; 3(1968)DLT15
ORDER(1) This criminal revision, filed by Shrimati Kamla Khanna, through her father and next friend Amar Nath Kapur, is directed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, affirming on revision the decision of the trial Court, whereby an application under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the petitioner against Pran Nath Khanna, respondent was dismissed. (2) The brief facts of the case are that Shrimati Kamla Khanna, petitioner, and Pran Nath Khanna, respondent were married in Delhi on 24th February 1949. They have had no issue from the marriage. They lived together from 1949 till 1957. In 1957, when the parties were living at Calcutta where the respondent was posted as an Estate Officer, Shrimati Kamla was brought to Delhi and was left at her father Amar Nath's place. In April 1959, the respondent was posted in Delhi. In June 1960, a Reception Order, as envisaged by Section 7 of the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912, was made by the Additional Distri...
Durlab Singh Sant Singh Vs. Mehr Chand Khanna and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-06-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi68
S.K. Kapur J.(1). In this petition, we are concerned with the new Delhi Parliamentary constituency. The petitioner applied to the Chief Electoral Officer (4th respondent) for supply of a copy of the Electoral Roll, on 16th Jan. 1967. The office is alleged to have reported that no such copy was available. The petitioner claims that he approached the officer concerned again and the 4th respondent agreed to supply one copy partly in English and partly in Hindi. A copy was in fact supplied to the petitioner and it has been alleged in Paragraph 7 of the petition that it was neither properly arranged nor indexed, nor numbered. Besides there were a large number of loose sheets adding to, altering or amending the various parts of the roll, without any indication on those supplementaries and amending lists as to which particular part of the roll they pertained to:(2) To 1st respondent Shri Mehr Chand Khanna filed two nomination papers being Nos.10 and 11 on the 19th January, 1967. The petitione...
Krishan Lal Vij Vs. Union of India Through Ministry of Home Affairs Go ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi145
1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal directed against the order of a learned Single Judge of the Punjab High Court dismissing the petition presented by the appellant in this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the Director of Intelligence Bureau dismissing the petitioner as also the order of the President of India made in appeal against the order of the said Director.The petitioner, it seems, was appointed as Upper Division Clerk in the Intelligence Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, on 21-1-1950. He was promoted to the post of an Assistant on 1-3-1952. He was served with a charge-sheet on 16-2-1957 by Shri A.G. Rajadhyaksha, Deputy Director of the Intelligence Bureau, which was inter alias as follows:'Shri Krishan Lal Vij, now an Assistant in the record room and formerly an Assistant in the Ngo Branch, is charged as under: '(1) That he kept the sum of Rupees 22P/7/ which he drew from the...
Union of India Vs. Bhagat Ram Parma Nand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-03-1967
Reported in: AIR1967Delhi153
(1) Bhagat Ram plaintiff-respondent booked 205 bags of onions on 2nd October, 1951, from New Delhi to Calcutta under Railway Receipt No. 025841, Invoice No. 871. These goods were loaded in wagon No. 3746/22, G.I.P. Railway. The goods reached Calcutta on 14th October, 1951, and at destination it was found that 69 bags had deteriorated to the extent of 55 per cent while 100 bags to the extent of 45 per cent. Plaintiff Bhagat Ram claimed that in due course of transit the consignment booked on 2nd October, 1951, should have reached Calcutta and delivered to the consignee on 8th October, 1951 but due to carelessness negligence and misconduct on the part of the railway and its employees, the same reached late and was consequently delivered to him in a damaged and deteriorated condition. To prove the period required for journey of goods from New Delhi to Calcutta by a goods train the plaintiff in his plaint and evidence cited an example of antoher consignment of onions booked on 3rd October 1...
Lajya Ram Vs. Jalil-ur Rehman and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-01-1967
Reported in: 3(1967)DLT672
S.N. Andley, J. (1) The plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, -has filed this appeal against the decree of Shri K. K. Gujral, Sub Judge 1st Class, Delhi, dismissing his' suit. The appellant had filed the suit for recovery, of Rs. 12.100.00 on account of brokerage at the. rate of 2% on the basis of anagreement for exchange dated 26th July, 1948, between the respondents or their predecessers-in-interest and the appellant(2) It was further the appellant's case that on 22nd July, 1948, he had brought about antoher agreement of exchange between some of , respondents and Rai Babadur Seth Shiv Rattan Goverthan Dass Mohatta of Karachi, whereby such respondents were to transfer some toher properties of theirs in Delhi to Rai Bahathir SethShiv Rattan Mohatta inexchange for; the latter's property in Karachi comprising of a plto of land. The appellant further stated that a draft agreement of exchange was prepared which was duly signed by the parties concerned and under this agreement, the res...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›