Delhi Court January 1968 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.
Nank Chand Vs. Om Parkash Gupta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT234
I.D. Dua, C.J. (1) The learned counsel for the appellant has addressed very elaborate arguments and has even tried to take me through the pleadings and the evidence led in the case. But inspire of the persuasive arguments addressed, I am afraid, no legal infimity in the conclusion of the lower appellate court on the question of possession of the plto in suit has been made out. It is ntoeworthy that the defendant did nto claim any title in himself and all that was said was that the plaintiffs were nto the owners of the plto in suit. Before me, no attempt has been made to question the conclusion on the title of the plaintiffs. Arguments have been confined to the limited point that the evidence on the record does clearly establish the possession of the defendant with the result that no injunction could have been granted in this case in favor of the plaintiffs, restraining the defendant from using the plto in suit. On this point also, the conclusion of the Lower Appellate Court is one of f...
Siyam Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1968
Reported in: 1968CriLJ1354
ORDERT.V.R. Tatachari, J.1. This Criminal Revision Application has been filed against the judgment of the learn, ed Sessions Judge, Mahasu and Kinnaur Districts, dated 2.6.1967, in Criminal Revision No. 9/K/10 of 1967, confirming the order passed by the Magistrate, 2nd Class, Kalpa, District Kinnaur (H.P), dated 31.12.1966, whereby the learned Magistrate held that a complaint regarding an offence under Section 182, Penal Code., filed against the petitioner herein, was in order.2. The facts which have given rise to this Revision Application may be briefly stated. The petitioner herein, Sujjan Singh, lodged a report on 29.7.1965, at the police post, Sangla, that a burglary had taken place in his house and currency ntoes of the value of Rs. 735/- had been stolen. On investigation, the police found the report to be false. Thereupon, the Station House Officer, Kalpa, sought to file a complaint alleging an offence under 8.182 of the Penal Code against the petitioner herein, in the Court of t...
Bakshish Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-09-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT330
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This Revision Application was filed against the judgment of Shri R.N. Aggarwal, Sessions Judge, Mahasu, dated 12th June 1967, in Crinainal Appeal No. 9 M/14 of 1966, on his file, dismissing the said appeal and confirming the judgment of Shri Nihal Singh, Magistrate, 1st Class, Mahasu District, Kasumti, dated 30th.November 1965 whereby the learned Magistrate convicted the petitioner herein under section 17 of the Himachal Pradesh Passanger and Goods Act, and sentenced him to a fine of Rs. 250.00, and in default of payment of the fine immediately, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. (2) The facts which have given rise to this Revision Application may be stated briefly. On 18th August 1965, Shri M. L. Gupta, Excise and Taxation Inspector, checked Bus No. PNS-596 at Solan. The bus was being driven by one Kanshi Ram and was being conducted by Ved Raj. The bus was owned by Simla Hills Transport Service Limited, which is a limited Company. On checking, the ...
Kailash Nath Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1968
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT426; ILR1969Delhi178
Hardayal Hardy, J.(1) The petitioner in this case is being prosecuted in the court of a magistrate on a charge-sheet submitted against him by the poUce for offences under sections 406, 420 and 477A Indian Penal Code. On 8th April, 1968 the learned magistrate framed charge against him on consideration of the documents referred to in section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offences in respect of which police report had been submitted against him. The petitioner felt aggrieved by that order and preferred a revision against the same in the Court of Sessions Judge, Delhi. The petition was heard by an Addl. Sessions Judge who dismissed the same on September 2, 1968 holding that the charges framed against the petitioner were nto groundless. It may however be mentioned that the revision petition was heard by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the absence of the petitioner's counsel. (2) The petitioner has now come up to this Court with an application under sections 561A and...
Krishna Kumari Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1968
Reported in: ILR1968Delhi237
(1) This revision petition is directed against the order of Shri H. L. Sikka, S. D. M. New Delhi dated 28/5/1966, dismissing the petition filed by the petitioner u/s 488 Criminal Procedure Code . THEfacts of this case are as follows :THEparties to this petition were married on 17/11/1959, at New Delhi. After the marriage the parties lived together as husband and wife and a son was born to the petitioner on 20/10/1960. The allegation of the petitioner is that the respondent and his mtoher were nto satisfied with the dowry brought by the petitioner and accordingly the respondent started mal-treating the petitioner. The petitioner alleged that on a number of occasions the respondent gave her beating. The petitioner alleged that in July, 1962, the respondent gave her severe beating and confined her in a room and she was rescued by Gopal Das, brtoher of the respondent. The petitioner stated that the respondent gave her beating and turned her out of the house and since then she was living wi...
Mt. Krishna Kumari Vs. Sunder Dass
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1968
Reported in: 1968CriLJ988
ORDERI.D. Dua, C.J.1. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, bad made this reference recommending that the order of the learned Magistrate dated 28.5.1966 dismissing Smt. Krishna Kumari's application under Section 488, Criminal P.C., be reversed and maintenance be allowed to her at the rate of Rs. 60 per month from the date of the application. It is unfortunate that revision of this nature should have been kept pending in this Court for more than a year. Cases of maintenance under Section 488, Criminal F.C., which are dealt with summarily for com. pelting a man to maintain his wife or children, deserve priority and they must be set down for hearing with dispatch and an attempt should be made, so far as possible, to see that they are disposed of within a period of six months, for, undue delay in such cases must tend to defeat the very purpose of such summary proceedings.2. The parties were married in November, 1959 and a son was born from this wedlock on 20.10.1960. That son is l...
C.D. Bids Was Vs. Lachhami Bai and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-1968
Reported in: 4(1968)DLT230; ILR1968Delhi85
I.D. Dua, C.J. (1) This is a second appeal under Section 39 of Delhi Rent Control Act of 1958 (hereinafter called the Act) and is directed against the order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 11/3/1964 affirming the order, of the Rent Controller dated 21/9/1963 directing eviction of the tenant (appellant in this Court). The Rent Controller gave to the tenant six months' period where after the order was to be executed. The ground on which the order of eviction was made was bona fide requirement of the landlord within the contemplation of section 14(1)(e) of the Act.(2) The only point which has been canvassed before me on behalf of the appellant is that an application was made on 21/9/1963 before the Rent Controller for permission to adduce evidence in support of the assertion made on that date that Hari Ram, one of the petitioninglandlords had been alltoted a quarter by the Railway and that he had falsely deposed before the Rent Controller that he had neither been alltoted any quarter b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›