Delhi Court January 1969 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.
Devinder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi114
T.V.R. Tatachari, J.(1) This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 9 of 1968 and Murder Reference No. 3 of 1968. Devinder Singh, appellant in the said Crimianal Appeal, was convicted for an offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, by Shri Rajinder Nath Aggarwal, Sessions Judge, Sirmur, Bilaspur and Simla Districts, and was sentenced to death, by his judgment, dated 27-3-1968. It is against that judgment that the Appeal has been preferred by Devinder Singh, and the learned Sessions Judge has made the Reference to this Court regarding the confirmation of the sentence passed by him. (2) The appellant, Devinder Singh, aged about 22/23 years was committed to the Court of Sessions to stand his trial on a charge under Section 302, Indian Code, by the Magistrate, I Class, Bilaspur, by an Order, dated 6-7-1967. The charge framed against Devinder Singh was as follows : 'THATyou, on or about 24th day of April, 1966 in the evening at Khameri forest, near Kosrian village, intentionally ...
Krishana Kumar and anr. Vs. Vimla Saigal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT671
I.D. Dua, J.(1) The controversy raised in this second appeal from order under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act 59 of 1958 has a very long and chequered history. It really highlights the frequent clashes between the landlords and tenants due to shortage of accommodation in Delhi and the consequential steep rise in rents. That educated and respectable landlords and tenants residing in different portions of the same building and expected as good citizens to possess a realistic sense of civil behavior, should, instead of being close friends and helpful neighbours, be parties to criminal and civil litigation, arrayed on opposite sides, can hardly be a ground for paying a tribute either to their practical and balanced sense of social behavior or to the conditions in our welfare set-up which breeds such situations This indeed is nto the first case of its kind which this Court has had to deal with in recent times. Parties in such situations can scarcely have the requisite peace of mind...
Union of India Vs. T.S. Malhotra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1969
Reported in: ILR1985Delhi495
Shanker, J.(1) The question for decision before the Full Bench is whether the notice dated 23/09/1966, issued by the Secretary to Government of India under Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental and Supplementary Rules is Valid when admittedly the appropriate authority to issue this notice in this case was the President and the notice is signed by the Secretary to the Government of India and does nto Indicate that the appropriate authority formed an opinion that it was in public interest to retire the Government servant concerned.(2) The petitioner joined service on 27/05/1929. On 13/06/1946, he was promoted to the post of Secretariat Superintendent Class Ii (Gazetted) and was later confirmed substantively on 24/04/1956 in the rank of Section Officer (Gazette). With effect from 22/01/1966, he was promoted and sent on deputation to a Senior Class I post as Administrative Officer,Central Mechanised Farm, Suratgarh. This appointment required the sanction of the President which was duly accorded an...
Ashish Vs. D.C. Tewari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi98; 1970CriLJ670
ORDER1. Shri D. R. Khanna, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, has forwarded this revision to this Court with a recommendation to increase the maintenance allowance to Ashish minor fixed at Rs. 20/- p.m. by Shri V. N. Chaturvedi, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hauz Qazi, Delhi, payable by his father Shri D.C. Tewari. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has recommended that the amount be increased to Rs. 50/- p.m.2. Shri Tewari was married to Smt. Mohini Tewari, mother of Ashish minor and the minor child was born on 26-11-1964, in Delhi, Shri D.C. Tewari is stated to be working as a Librarian in the Malviya Regional Engineering College at Jaipur. According to the averments in the application for maintenance, his monthly income is about Rs. 700/- and he has not cared to maintain his minor child. The prayer in the application which is based on total neglect and failure of his father to maintain the minor is for payment of Rs. 300/- p.m.3. The father after stating the story of his marriage wit...
ishwar Nath Topa and ors. Vs. Surender Singh Ahluwalia
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi289; 5(1969)DLT439
ORDER1. This objection-petition has been Bled by the successors-in-interest of Shri Surrinder Singh Ahluwalia, judgment debtor.2. A suit was filed against Shri Surrinder Singh Ahluwalia, Judgment-debtor, for the recovery of Rs.30,423.50paise on the basis of a mortgage. It was alleged that the judgment-debtor had mortgaged a house on the basis of a registered mortgaged deed dated the 14th March, 1947 for Rs.25,000 which amount had been received by him in cash and had agreed to pay back the amount with interest. It was further alleged that the judgment-debtor had paid only a sum of Rs.150 towards interest and had paid nothing towards the principal. The mortgages claimed to recover Rs. 30,423.50paise principal and interest, by the sale of the mortgaged property. The suit was contested by the judgment-debtor. He had raised various pleas.3. The learned Subordinate Judge, who was seized of the suit, passed a preliminary decree in favor of the mortgages for the recovery of Rs.30,423.50paise w...
Ram Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ635; 5(1969)DLT339
Inder Dev Dua, J. (1) In this revision, the petitioner challenges his conviction by Shri H. L. Sikka, Sub Divisional Magistrate, New Delhi, under section 126-P(2)(iv) of the defense of India Rules as amended in 1963 and sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200.00, affirmed on appeal by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, by.means of his order dated 23-12-1968. The circumstances leading to the initiation of this case are stated in the complaint dated 4-8-1965 (Exhibit P.A.) made by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Delhi. According to this complaint, on 24-3-1964, Inspector Police, in charge Kotwali Police Station, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, detained Ram Singh s/o Doonger Singh on suspicion that he was carrying contraband gold on his person. On being searched in the presence of the Central Excise Officers and independent witnesses, 13 gold Passas of 10 grammes each were recovered from him. The passas bore inscription of Manilal Chaman Lal & Co., Bo...
V.P. Singh Vs. Chairman, Metropolitan Council of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi295
S.K. Kapur, J.1. Membership of the petitioner of the Metropolitan Council of Delhi constituted under the Delhi Administration Act, 1966 (Act No. 19 of 1966), is at stake. The petition is being disposed of on admitted facts. On 2nd January, 1969, when the motion for issue of rule nisi was heard, the learned counsel agreed that the matter may be decided on the interpretation of Section 18 of the said Act, In the order dated 2nd January, 1969, while admitting the writ petition, this Court recorded:'The learned counsel agree that the entire matter turns on the interpretation of Section 18 (3). Mr. Daphtary says that in the circumstances no counter-affidavit is necessary, . . .'The said undisputed facts are that the petitioner is a member of the Metropolitan Council; that the petitioner contested the election as a Congress nominee and has all along been the Secretary of the Congress Party in the Council; that at present the party position in the Council is: Jan Sangh Party--35 seats; Congre...
Umed Ram Etc. Vs. Oevku
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-10-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi295
S.N. Andley, J.(1) This revision has been filed against the order dated October 24. 1968. of the Senior Subordinate Judge Simla, in case No. 1 of 1966. By this order the Senior Subordinate Judge has directed the delivery of the properties in question to the respondent and also to render accounts of the property up to the date of such delivery. (2) Badri datt was the minor son of Het Ram. Upon the death of Het Ram, one Gursaran was appointed a guardian of the properties of Badn Datt by an order dated July 13, 1953, of the Subordinate Judge first class, Kandaghat. The ward Badri Datt died on August 20, 1955. Upon the death of the ward, Gursaran the guardian made an application to the Subordinate Judge first class, Kandaghat for being discharged. This application was decided by the Subordinate Judge first class, Kanda 'BUTfor the present purpose, it will suffice if he is directed nto to submit any accounts in future. If Gursaran enjoys the usufruct of the property of the minor and subsequ...
Veer Finance Co. Vs. Ram Lachan Sharma Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-08-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi368
Jagjit Singh, J. (1) On a reference made privately and out of Court to Shri Chet Ram Mittal, Advocate, Delhi, regarding dispute between Messrs Veer Finance Co. on the one side and Shri Ram Lachan Sharma and Shri Shambhu Dayal Pachauri on the other, he made an award, on February 28, 1966. According to that award Shri Ram Lachan Sharma and Shri Shambhu Dayal Pachauri were liable to pay Rs. 36,517.27 p. to Messrs Veer Finance Co.(2) A petition under sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, hereinafter referred to as the Act, was made by Messrs Veer Finance Co., 9-E, Connaught Place, New Delhi, to be called for facility of reference as the petitioners. On being directed, the arbitrator filed the award in the Court. Notices regarding filing of the award were issued to the parties. Before the notices could be served the counsel for Shri Ram Lachan Sharma (respondent No. 1) appeared, on August 2, 1966, and accepted notice regarding filing of the award. Service of notice was affected o...
Reserve Bank of India Vs. Sudershan Kumar Khanna and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-07-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT121
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This judgment was, however, announced by Om Parkash, J.-Ed. This judgment will dispose of the two Civil Revision Petitions Nos. 35l and 353 of 1967 which were heard together, as the questions for determination in the two Revision Petitions were the same.(2) The Petitioner in Civil Revision No. 351 of 1967 is the Reserve Bank of India, Department of Banking Operations and Development, Parliament Street, New Delhi-1. Respondent No. 1 is Sudershan Kumar Khanna, and respondent No. 2 is the Punjab Co-operative Bank Limited, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Respondent No. 2 filed a suit No. 157 of 1965 in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Delhi, against respondent No.1 for recovery of Rs. 4,988.11 paise. Respondent No. 1 filed his written statement denying his liability and praying that the suit may be dismissed. (3) The petitioner in Civil Revision No. 353 of 1967 is the Reserve Bank of India, Department of Banking Operations and Development, Parliament Street, New De...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »