Delhi Court December 1968 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1968 Page 1 of about 16 results (0.010 seconds)Zalam Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi285; 5(1969)DLT203
S.N. Shankar, J.1. The petitioners in this case were tenants of the respondent in occupation of premises bearing No, 8583-86/XV, situated at Ara Kashan Road, Paharganj, Delhi. On an application made before the Rent Controller by the predecessor-in-interest of the present respondents, Shri Wasakha Singh, who died during the pendency of this litigation and whose legal representatives were thereafter brought on the record as respondents, Shri Asa Singh Gill, Rent Controller, Delhi, passed orders of eviction in favor of the landlord against the petitioners. The petitioners have assailed the validity of these orders by this petition and the only ground urged in support of the contention that the impugned orders of Shri Asa Singh Gill are illegal, null and void and without the authority of Jaw is that he had nto been validly appointed under Section 35 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, to act as a Rent Controller. The matter came up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court. The au...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhaiya Lal Sharma and ors. Vs. Mahanat Abhai Das and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT321
I.D. Dua, C.J.(1) In this regular second appeal, the judgment and decree of a learned Additional District Judge, Delhi, dated 23rd March, 1966 affirming the decree of a learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Class dated 20th September, 1965 is impugned. (2) Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, Smt. Ferozi Deviand Smt. Bhanwari Devi (appellants in this Court) instituted the suit, out of which this appeal arises, for a declaration and consequential relief and for rendition of accounts and injunction against six defendants. The only issue on the merits which arose for trial was whether the plaintiffs had given up their share in the qutoa rights in suit as alleged in the written statement. The trial Court, in a fairly detailed judgment, came to the conclusion that the plaintiffs had given up their share in the qutoa rights in suit in consideration of the amount paid to the plaintiffs vide cheques Exhibits D. W. 3/1 to D. W. 3/3. (3) The matter was taken by the plaintiffs on appeal to the Court of the Distric...
Tag this Judgment!Sher Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT302
I.D. Dua, C.J. (1) This appeal has been presented from jail, but Shri Daijit Singh, Advocate, a distinguished member of the High Court Bar, has been very kind to agree to assist me as amices curiae. The Court is thankful to him for his valuable assistance. Sher Singh appellant has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 326. I. P. C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. He was charged under section 307, I. P. C., but on evidence, his case was found to be covered only by section 326, I. P. C. The prosecution case is that Smt. Suresha, an Aya in the employment of Shri Jagat Narain Khanna in Darya Ganj, Delhi, was .stabbed on her back with a knife on 22nd August, 1967 at about 7.30 p. m. The accused who is stated to have been employed with the (2) The learned Additional Sessions Judge after summarizing the evidence in the case, dealt with the question of the guilt of the accused in the following words :- '* * * when there was no eye witness in...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi NaraIn Oil Mills and anr. Vs. Mamraj Musadilal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi311
1. This revision under Section 115, Civil P. C. is directed against the order of a learned Subordinate Judge 1st Class dated 16-12-1967 allowing amendment of the plaint. The plaint had been presented on 9-5-1967 and the application for amendment was made in the Court below on 18-10-1967 before the issues were framed. As a matter of fact, on 30-9-1967, the case was adjourned by the trial Court to 18-10-1967 for issues. The revision in this Court was presented on 14-3-1968, though the copy of the impugned order was obtained on 5-2-1968. The copy was applied for on 11-1-1968.2. The learned Subordinate Judge has observed in his order that the amendment prayed for had been sought at a very early stage and that the defendants could be sufficiently compensated by payment of costs and they would nto be taken by surprise. Amendment was allowed in order to avoid multiplicity of suits as the trial Court considered it to be permissible under the Supreme Court decisions.3. The plaint, as originally...
Tag this Judgment!Shakti Raj Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT140
Inder Dev Dua, J.(1) The petitioner, who is serving a sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment is also being proceeded against for an alleged offence under section 333/353/186, Indian Penal Code . The commitment proceedings are pending in the Court of Shri K. N. Joshi, Magistrate I Class, Delhi. The present application has been forwarded from District Jail, Hissar, where the petitioner is at present lodged as a convict. In this application he is described to be originally a resident of Amritsar and he seeks to have the commitment proceedings transferred to the Court of some toher Magistrate. The grounds on which transfer is sought are that the petitioner has, on occasions, been pressurised by the learned Magistrate into making a confession and the Court is treating the accused as if he is a criminal though he is entitied to be presumed to be innocent till proved guilty. The learned Magistrate has also been described to be acting in accordance with the desire of the police authorities...
Tag this Judgment!Harbhajan Kaur Vs. Sant Singh
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi298; 1969CriLJ1243; ILR1968Delhi545
1. In this application for a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court from an order made on revision by this Court in proceedings under Section 488, Cr. P. C, a preliminary objection has been raised that Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution is inapplicable because proceedings under Section 488 are civil proceedings and nto criminal proceedings. Reliance in support of this preliminary objection has been placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in Nand Lal Misra v. K.L. Misra, : 1960CriLJ1246 . Emphasis has been laid on the observations In this Judgment that Chapter xxxvi of the Code of Criminal Procedure is a self-contained one and the relief given under it is essentially of a civil nature. From this sentence, it is sought to be argued that the proceedings under section 488 are civil proceedings and nto criminal proceedings. Reliance has also been placed on a still more recent Judgment of the Supreme Court in Narayan Row v. Ishwar Lal, : [1965]57ITR149(SC) , in which whi...
Tag this Judgment!The State (Delhi) Vs. Dewan Ram Dass T. Chugani
Court: Delhi
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi319; 1969CriLJ1380; 5(1969)DLT526
S.K. Kapur, J. (1) Rent Control Appeal No. 772 of 1966 filed by Ram Dass P. Chugani was dismissed by the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, on 24th November, 1966. The Tribunal received a letter dated 29th November, 1966, from Shri Chugani on 5th December, 1966, by registered post. The said letter has been admitted by Shri Chugani. The main grievance made by Shri Chugani in the said letter against the Tribunal is about his nto having been properly heard. On the basis of that letter I would have been disinclined to take action for contempt and Mr. Misra, the learned counsel for the State, also agreed that there was ntohing very objectionable in the said letter. It appears from the order of the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, dated 8th February, 1967, that the Tribunal considered that the writing of that letter as an indiscreet act. It was indiscreet in the sense that no person is entitled to enter into private correspondence with a Judge about any cause or matter. Anyhow, as the Tribunal says,...
Tag this Judgment!Bashiru-dIn Alias Bashir Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT553
I.D. Dua, C.J. (1) BASHIR-UD Din and Saleman have approached this Court on revision and have challenged their conviction and sentence under section 224, 332 and 379. I. P. C. and under section 332, I. P. C respectively imposed on appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. (2) The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, before whom five accused were standing trial, and the charge I. P. C., dropped title charge under section 148, I. P. C., and indeed this was done on the concession made by the prosecuting Sub-Inspector. The learned Magistrate convicted Bashir ud-Din under sections 147/149/332/379/224. I. P. C. and Ikram, Suleman and Shaukat under sections 147/149/332 I. P. C. and Moor Jahan under section 149/332 I. P. C. Noor Jahan was given a benefit of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and was required to furnish security (personal bond) of Rs. 1,000.00 with one surety in the like amount for being of good behavior for a period of one year, and in default, to undergo r...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Lal Kharbanda Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT578
I.D. Dua, C.J. and V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The petitioner has prayed that the respondents, who are the Officers of the Union of India, in charge of the Northern Railway, particularly, the Personnel Department of it may be committed for contempt of this Court. It is necessary to ?tate the circumstances in which the petition was filed so that it may be properly understood.(2) The petitioner is a Draughtsman in the Northern Railway. He was selected and placed in the grade of Rs. 150-225 as per the Railway Board Letter No. 752-E/83/E-11 I dated I 1th August.1956 But the Railway Board issued antoher Circular No. E (NG)54/EM/113 dated 29th July, 1967 by which the selection made in the year 1956 was nullified and the draughtsman grade Rs. 150.00-225.00 in which the petitioner was placed, was classified as non-selection post. The petitioner challenged the action of the Railway Board in this Court by Cw 372-D of 1964, in which he prayed that he be restored to the seniority position which he held...
Tag this Judgment!T.R. Verma Vs. Union of India Through Ministry of Commerce and Industr ...
Court: Delhi
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi587
S.K. Kapur, J.(1) Termed as harsh and yet firmly established rule, namely, the rule of rest judicata has been invoked in this case by the Union of India, respondent by way of defense to the appellant's suit for a declaration that the orders of the appellant's reduction in rank and subsequent dismissal on September 16, 1954, from Government service are illegal and for recovery of Rs.52,075.00 on account of pay and allowances by way of consequential relief.(2) It was in March 1941 that the appellant joined as a Lower Division Clerk in the Commerce Department of the Government of India. He made a marked progress and on June 27, 1948, was promtoed as Administrative Officer, Gazetted, in the office of Chief Controller of Exports which post was, on September 1, 1949, re-designated as that of Assistant Controller. In 1950 the posts of Chief Controller of Exports and Chief Controller of Imports were merged but the appellant continued to hold the charge as Assistant Controller of Exports. On Ma...
Tag this Judgment!