Delhi Court December 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.
E.T. Sen (Retd.) Vs. Edatata Narayanan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-12-1968
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi201; 1969CriLJ884; 5(1969)DLT348; ILR1969Delhi157
Inder Deo Dua, C.J. 1. These two criminal original applications (Criminal Original Nos. 39 and 40 of 1868) by Brig. E T. Sen (Retd.) under section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution, raising as they do common questions, are being disposed of by one order.2. Brig. E. T. Sen is a retired Brigadier of the Indian Army, having retired in May, 1967 and is at present the Resident Manager of Messrs Ceat Tyres of India Ltd.. New Delhi He filed a criminal complaint under Sections 500, 501 and 502, Indian Penal Code, against D. P. Sinha, the Printer and Publisher of 'New Age', an English newspaper published from New Delhi; for having printed and published a pamphlet 'I was a Cia agent in India', alleged to have been written by one John D. Smith, an American, who is stated to have defected to Russia, on the averment that the said pamphlet contained serious libelous and defamatory statements against the complainant. That complaint is pending in the Court of Sh...
R.P. Kapur, Ics (Retd.) Vs. the Chief Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1968
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT77
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) The petitioner is a member of a registered Co-operative Society, the Secretary of which is respondebt.No. 3. The land of the Society was acquired by the Union of India. In accordance with the Government's scheme of Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of land in Delhi', the President of India entered into an agreement (Anenxure R-l to the written statement of respondents I and 2), the relevant terms of which are as follows :- Clause No. 1 : The Co-operative Society was firstly to prepare a lay-out plan and get it sanctioned by the proper Municipal or toher Authorities, and secondly the said Society was to carry out and complete to the satisfaction of the Chief Commissioner, at its own cost and expense, development including metalling of streets, provision of sewers and drains, water and electric mains, amenities and toher conveniences in and on the said land, in accordance with the lay-out plan. Clause Viii : Upon the completion of the development of ...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Kuldip Lal Bhandari and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-09-1968
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi37; 5(1969)DLT543
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) Due to ant to the D.T.U. bus No. Dlp 658 belonging to the appellant-Municipal Corporation of Delhi, a lady named Mrs. B. Bhandari suffered injuries which resulted in her death. The respondents, as her legal representatives, claimed compensation from the appellant before the Mtoor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Delhi on the ground that the injuries caused to Mrs. Bhandari were due to the negligence of the appellant's employees, viz. the Driver and the Conductor of the bus. The claim was dismissed by the Tribunal but was partially decreed by a learned Single Judge of the then Circuit bench of the Punjab High Court for Delhi in an appeal preferred to the High Court against the award of the Tribunal under Section110-D of the Mtoor Vehicles Act, 1939.(2) The present appeal was preferred before a Division Bench of this Court under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent applicable to this High Court. It is common ground that such an appeal lies from the judgment of a single Judge ...
Ram Kali Vs. Same Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1968
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT519
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) The appellant in btoh these appeals is the wife of the respondent against whom a decree for restitution of conjugal rights has been passed by Shri Sagar Chand Jain, Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Delhi on an application filed by her husband under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. By the same order the wife's application for judicial separation under section 10 of the Act has been dismissed. The appellant being aggrieved by the order made by the learned Subordinate Judge has filed two separate appeals, one against the decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed against her and toher against the dismissal of her application for judicial separation. Although two separate decrees have been framed by the trial court a.nd also two separate appeals have been filed against them, the order in btoh the cases being common, btoh the appeals have been heard together. (2) The parties are Hindus by religion and were married at village Kerala, Delhi in the year 1958 ...
Prithi Singh Vs. Bachitar Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1968
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT583
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This second appeal has been filed by Pirthi Singh and tohers against the judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Hoshiarpur, date 28th November 1963, in Civil Appeal No. 197 of 1963 on his file, whereby the leartied Senior Supordinate Judge confimed the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, First Calss, Una, dated, 19th August, 1963, passed in Civil Suit No. 326 of 1962.(2) The aforesaid suit was filed by the appellants herein for a permanent injunction restraining the respondents herein from raising any construction in the suit land of the extent of 2 Kanals and 2 Marlas, situate in village Basoli, Tehsil Una. The case of the appellants- plaintiffs was that said land was jointly owned and possessed by them and respondents Nos. 1 and 2, that the slid respondents Nos. 1 and 2 had exchanged portions of the said land with respondents Nos 3 to 6, that the respondents had no right to raise any construction on the suit land, and that, thereforee,...
Sukh Ram Vs. Faturia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1968
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT574
S.N. Andley, J.(1) This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to quash the order dated April 20, 1968 of the Sub-Divisional Judge, Bilaspur which had been passed under Section 93 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1952.(2) The respondent complainant had filed a complaint against the petitioner under sections 277/283 of the Indian Penal Code before the Nyaya Panchayat of village Dadhole, District Bilaspur. He was convi- cted by a Bench of the Nyaya Panchayat and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50.00 . I he petitioner filed an appeal before a Full Bench of the Nyaya Panchayat and the Full Bench accepting the appeal acquitted him. Against this acquittal the respondent filed a revision before the Sub-Divisional Judge, Bilaspur who, by the aforesaid order, quashed the order passed by the Full Bench of the Nyaya Panchayat acquitting the petitioner and restored the original order of conviction of a Bench of the Nyaya F'anchayat.(3) The petitioner's comp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›