Delhi Court January 1968 Judgments
Shri Krishan Gopal Vs. Haji Mohammed Muslim and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-31-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi126a
1. Hafiz Zahir-ud-din, Haji Mohamed Hasham and Mst. Khatun Mahshar instituted a suit against nine defendants, including Shri Krishan Gopal (defendant No. 6 and appellant In this Court) for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 433.50 and ejectment of defendants Nos. 1 to 6 from a plto of land. The grounds on which the suit was based were that Shri Nand Lal deceased, husband of defendant No. 1 and father of defendants Nos. 2 to 6 had taken the vacant plto of land on lease from the plaintiffs and defendants Nos. 7 to 9 and had also executed a rent note in their favor. The lease was taken from Mohamed Hasham, plaintiff No. 2, for a cycle-stand and rent was being paid to Mohamed Hasham in his capacity as the Manager on behalf of all the landlords.Shri Nand Lal died in March, 1959. leaving behind defendants Nos. 1 to 0 as his legal heirs and representatives. After Nand Lal's death, Krishan Gopal was running the cycle-stand and paid rent to Mohamed Hasham under the terms of the rent deed at the rate ...
Tag this Judgment!Rattan Lal Vs. Gajanand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT486
Hardayal Hardy, J.(1) This order will dispose of two connected appeals viz S.A.O No. 117 D of 1964 and S.AO No. 20 D of 1985 which raise the same point. (2) The only point urged by the learned counsel for the appellant in this case is that on the admitted findings of the authorities constituted under the Delhi Kent Control Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), the respondent-landlord s application for eviction of the tenant-appellant merits dismissal (3) It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that Gaja Nand respondent has been held to be a coowner of the property from which the appellants eviction in bo! b the cases was claimed by him. His applications for eviction of the appllants tinder section 14(1)(e) of the Act have been allowed by the Rent Controller as well as by the Rent Control Tribunal on the basis of Single Bench decision of Chief Justice Falshaw (as he then was of the Punjab High Court in Vir Bhan v. Avlar Krishan etc, holding that : - 'WHE...
Tag this Judgment!S.P.N. Sharma Vs. the Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-23-1968
Reported in: AIR1968Delhi158; 1968CriLJ1059; ILR1968Delhi263
I.D. Dua, C.J.(1) This petition was received in this Court through Central Jail, Jabalpur (Madhya Pradesh). The prayer contained in this petition covers a fairly wide field including a declaration that Rules 88, 89 and 112-A of the Air Force Act Rules, 1950, are ultra vires, being vocative of Articles 14 and 22 of the Constitution. The petitioner's trial by General Court-Martial and the finding and sentence by the said Court as also the confirmation of the said sentence are challenged as ultra vires, being vocative of Articles 14, 21 and 22 and (2) of the Constitution as also contrary to the provisions of the Air Force Act and the Rules framed there under. Founded on these main challenges is the prayer that the petitioner be set at liberty. Ntoice of this petition was given to the respondents and since the petitioner was nto represented by a counsel and the petition had also presumbly been drafted by him apparently without legal advice, we requested Shri Keshav Dayal, an Advocate of th...
Tag this Judgment!Kaul (S.N.) Vs. National Productivity Council and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-23-1968
Reported in: (1968)IILLJ85Del
ORDERT.V.R. Tatachari, J.1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 276 of the Constitution of India for this issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the award of the labour court, Delhi, in Industrial Dispute No. F. 53 of 1966.2. For a proper appreciation of the contentions pto forward on behalf of the petitioner and the respondents, it is necessary to state the material facts which have given rise to this writ petition. The petitioner, S. N. Kaul, was taken in the service of respondent 1, the management of the National Productivity Council, 38, Golf Links, New Delhi, on 5 December 1960, as press operator. According to the petitioner, his services were arbitrarily and illegally terminated by respondent 1 on 9 March 1964. It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner approached the Chairman of respondent 1, on several occasion, and that be was finaly informed on 28 November 1965, that his case could nto be considered any more by the Council. He, thereafter, sent a ntoice to ...
Tag this Judgment!Dulo Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-19-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT511
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This is a refarence made by the learned Sessions.Judge, Kangra, at Dharmashala, recommending the setting aside of an order of attachment issued by Shri I.P. Anand, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class. Hamirpur, and for remitting the fine imposed upon one Dalo Ram. (2) The said Dulo Ram was convicted by the Magistrate, 1st Class Hamirpur, on 29th April, 1966, under section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, and was sentenced to six months rigorous im prisonment, and a fine of Rs. 1000.00. or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 4 months. Dulo Ram had served out the substantive sentence of imorisonment as also the imprisonment default of payment of fine. A ntoice was issued to Dulo Ram by the Court of the Magistrate, 1st class, for the realisation of the fine,even though he had already served out the substantive imprisonment as well as the imprisonment in default of payment of fine. Dulo Ram pleaded inability to pay. The learned Magistra...
Tag this Judgment!Krishan Gopal Vs. Haji Mohammad and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi126; 4(1968)DLT371
I.D. Dua, C.J. (1) Hafiz Zahir-ud-din, Haji Mohamed Hasham and Mst. Khatun Mahshar instituted a suit against nine defendants, including Shri Krishan Gopal (defendant No. 6 and appellant in this Court) for the recovery of a sum of Rs 433 50 and ejectment of defendants Nos. 1 to 6 from a plto of land. The grounds on which the suit was baled were that Shri Nand Lal deceased, husband of defendant No. 1 and father of defendants Nos. 2 to 6 had taken the vacant plto of land en lease from the plaintiffs and defendants Nos 7 to 9 and had also executed a rent ntoe in their favor. The lease was taken from Mohamed Hasham, plaintiff No. 2, for a cycle-stand and rent was being paid to Mohamed Hasham in his capacity as the Manager on behalf of all the landlords. Shri Nand Lal died in March, 1959, learing behind defendants Nos. 1 to 6 as his legal heirs and representatives After Nand Lal's death, Krishan Gopal was running the cycle-stand and paid rent to Mohamed Hasham under the terms of the rent-dee...
Tag this Judgment!Muna Lal Vs. Shiv Raitan G. Mohatta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT401
I.D. Dua, J.(1) The property which is the subject-matter of the present proceedings is situated at No 22, Feroze Shah Road, New Delhi and admittedly, it was in the occupation of Seth Munna Lal Aggarwal as a tenant in 1954 at Rs. 142.00 per mensem The landlord Seth Shiv Rattan G. Mohatta instituted a suit for eviction of the tenant and also for arears of 'rent amounting to Rs. 1,704.00. This suit was opposed by the tenant and some evidence was recorded by the Court after framing issues The parties, however, entered into a compromise and a decree for eviction and arrears of rent was made in favor of the plaintiff. According to this compromise decree, the tenancy came to an end on 31st July, 1957, but Munna Lal was permitted to continue to stay in the premises up to 31st December, 1960. The tenant enjoyed the fruits of this compromise decree without any let or hindrance on the part of the landlord, but when the time for vacating the premises, according to this compromise decree, drew near...
Tag this Judgment!Devi Ram Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-1968
Reported in: 1970CriLJ536; 4(1968)DLT363
T.V.R. Tatachari, J.(1) This Revision habeen filed against the judgment of Shri Rajinder Nath Aggarwal, Sessions Judge, Mahasu, dated 16th September, 1937, in Criminal Appeal No. 33/M-10 of 1967, dismissing the appeal and upholding the order of conviction and sentence passed by Shri Roop Singh Negi, Magistrate, 1st Class, Jubbal, dated 28th July, 1967, against Devi Ram, the petitioner herein. (2) The case of the prosecution was as follows : - One Jhinu Ram had obtained a decree for Rs. 1891.50 paise againt one Bir Singh, a resident of the village Kadi. The decree holder, in execution of the decree, gto the property of the judgment-debtor attached. On 8th January 1964, the executing court issued a warrant of sale which was made returnable on 27th February 1964. The date of sale was fixed as 18th February 1964 The warrant of sale that was issued was for Rs. 1391 50 paise. The said warrant was sent to the Tehsildar, Chopal, for execution, and the said Tehsildar entrusted the warrant for e...
Tag this Judgment!M.M. Kochar Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi21; 1969CriLJ45; ILR1968Delhi248
S.N. Andley, J. (1) This revision is directed against the order dated 10/5/1966 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1965 by which he made an order for granting a pardon to Sardari Lal Sabharwal, one of the accused in the aforesaid Sessions case. The revision has been filed by the petitioner who was one of the toher co-accused.(2) On 13/9/1959, a complaint was lodged with the Police that the petitioner, along with Durgadas Moondhra and the said Sabharwal had, in or about 1957, entered into a conspiracy as a result of which they forged documents and made unauthorised endorsements on import licenses which had been issued to M/s. E.M. Alloock and Mehta (private) Ltd. Calcutta, of which the said Moondhra was the Finance Director and the said Sabharwal was the Import Assistant. It was alleged that the petitioner had worked as an Assistant Controller of Imports and Exports in the office of the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, New Delhi, up to 4/11/1957 ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Rakha Vs. Ramji Das
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT196
Jagjit Singh, J. (1) This second appeal is against the decree of the Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, dated May 17, 1966. The learned Additional District Judge confirmed the decree of the Subordinate Judge, First class, Una, in a suit to pre-empt a sale. (2) It would be necessary to state certain facts in order that the contentions raised in the appeal may be properly appreciated. Dina Nath, Ramji Das and Smt. Savitri Devi, widow of Banka Rama, jointly 595,603,382-Min, owned 43 Kanals and 10 Mardas of land (Khasra Nos. -- -- -- - - 29-3 0-19 1-0 603,604,606, 882-Min), -- --- - --- situated in village Bhulola.Tehsil Una. Banka 7-6 2-11 2-0 0-11 Ram was brtoher of Dina Nath and Ramji Das. Their father was Haria Ram On September 1, 1961, Dina Nath and Smt Savitri sold their two-third share in the land to Ram Rakha Mall, by a registered sale-deed. In the sale deed the sale price was mentioned to be Rs. 800.00 Ramji Das, on May 5, J 1962, instituted a suit to prempt the sale of the la...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »