Delhi Court December 1969 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
The Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd., Birla Mills Ltd. Vs. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi167; 1970LabIC1108
V.S. Deshpande, J.1. Birla Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills, Limited (hereinafter called the Company) is engaged in the manufacture of cotton textiles. As shown by the plan filed in the Court below, the premises of the Company are enclosed by a compound wall, Inside this compound, there is the main factory building shown inside the red border. Separated from the main factory building by open spaces or roads are other buildings such as godowns, officers, etc. The Company applied to the Employee Insurance Court under Section 75(1)(a) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter called the Act) for the determination of the question, whether the employees enumerated in the statement at the end of the record of this appeal are covered by the definition of an 'employee' in Section 2(9) of the Act. The Company had pleaded that these persons were not working in the factory nor were they doing work connected with the work of the factory and, thereforee, they were not 'employees' und...
Jai Dev and ors. Vs. the Land Acquisition Collector, Mandi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi35; 7(1971)DLT223
Pritam Singh Safeer, J.(1) Part Iii of the Constiution of India enshrines in itself the fundamental rights which all citizens enjoy in this democratic re-public. The right with which we are directly concerned in this petition is one which arises in terms of clause (f) of Article 19 of the Constitution of India. Article 19 is imperative in its opening part and is to the effect that all citizens shall have the rights enumerated therein. There are then limitations placed-inside Article 19 in respect of the rights enumerated in the clauses contained in sub- article (I). Clause (f) is to the following effect: - '(F)to acquire, hold and dispose of property;'Sub-article (5) of Article 19 is directly' concerned with clause (f) thereof. That sub-article subjects the conferment contained in clause (f) to the restriction of any existing law imposing any reasonable restrictions on the exercise thereof and also declares that the State shall nto be prevented from enacting in the future any fresh law...
Krishan Kumar Chopra Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi45
V.D. Misra, J. (1) These Letters Patent Appeals are directed against the judgment of Tatachari J., dismissing two writ petitions, filed by the appellant and Shrimati Maya Devi Chopra. This judgment will govern both the appeals. (2) Fact giving rise to the writ petitions may be briefly noted : Land comprising khasra No. 207 measuring two bighas and seven biswas, khasra No. 569/297 measuring four bighas ten bids was and khasra No. 570/297 measuring one bigha twelve biswas, situated in Kharera, District Delhi, was evacuee property. The Central Government issued a notification under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act No. 44 of 1954. It was duly auctioned by the Managing Officer on 4-7-1960 and 22-2-1961. Krishna Kumar Chopra and Shrimati Maya Devi Chopra, who were displaced persons, succeeded in buying the land. Krishan Kumar Chopra bought the land comprising khasra Nos. 207 and 569/297 while Maya Devi Chopra bought land comprising khasra No. 570/297....
Union of India and ors. Vs. Sardar Anant Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-22-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi35
Jagjit Singh, J. (1) The following questions were referred to the Full Bench :-- (i) Whether the Press Note, annexure G, had the status of law and conferred a legal right on the respondent to get his unauthorised occupation of the flat regularised (ii) If it be held that the Press note had nto the status of law but was merely an administrative or executive direction, could the respondent still invoke the jurisdiction of this Court and claim that his unauthorised possession should on the basis of the Press Note be regularised (2) Detailed facts reading to the case giving rise to the above questions are given in the order of reference. In order, however, that the implications involved in the two questions may be appreciated it would be necessary to very briefly mention some of the facts. (3) Admittedly Anant Singh Respondent 1s an ex-service man and a displaced person from West Pakistan. On this migration to India he was at first given tent accommodation and on January 9, 1952, shop No. ...
Vishwa Nath Vs. Nemo
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT226
Pritam Singh Safeer, J. (1) This is anapplication under Section 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed precise reliance on clause (e) of sub-section (1) of the said Section. That provision is an enabling one and is to the effect that whenever it is made to appear to the High Court that an order of transfer is expedient for the ends of justice or is required to be made by any provision of the Criminal Procedure Code then a case may by ordered to betransferred from the Court trying it to another Court. Clause (e) which has been referred to above runs into two parts The first part indicates that the High Court may be pursuaded on good reasoning that it would be expedient for the ends of justice to transfer the case. The second part of the foregoing clause contains a kind of compulsion which is to the effect that if any provision contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure indicates that a transfer is merited then the case may be o...
The Commissioner of Income-tax Delhi and Rajasthan, New Delhi Vs. the ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi144
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench A has referred to this Court the following questions of law :- (I) Whether in the facts 'and circumstances of the case the sum of Rs. 14,517.00 was a capital receipt in the hands of the assessed (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessed is entitled to the deduction of Rs. 19.000.00 being the sum embezzled by Mani Ram?(2) According to the stated case, the 'assessed company which is a limited liability company had been running an exchange at Delhi for forward dealings in oil and oil seeds, At the relevant time it was dealing only in groundnut oil and mustard seeds. There was another Exchange known as Om Exchange Limited which was also doing similar business. Under the Forward Markets (Regulations) Act, 1952, the Forward Markets Commission had declared a policy that they would recognise only one Exchange for doing forward business in a particul...
Gammon India Limited Vs. R.K. Baweja and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-05-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi701
S.N. Shankar, J. (1) In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, Gammon India Ltd., a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913, has prayed for a writ of prohibition restraining respondent No. 2 from enforcing the award dated 25th February, 1969 given in his favor by the presiding officer of the Industrial Tribunal, Delhi. Respondent No. 1 to the petition is the presiding officer of the Tribunal and respondent No. 2 is the workman in whose favor the award has been made. (2) Brief facts according to the petition are that the petitioner- company carried on business as Civil Engineers & Contractors in India and obtained contracts for construction from various Governmental and semi-Governmental authorities. Corporations, etc. For the purpose of executing these contracts, the Company set up offices at the sites of the constructions. Every such office at the site worked under the control of site Engineer, who engaged staff for purposes of execution of the...
Labh Chand and anr. Vs. Controller of Estate Duty, New Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1130; [1972]83ITR538(Delhi)
S.N. Andley, J. (1) The main question for consideration is whether the compensation payable under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, hereinafter referred to as "the 1954 Act", is property passing on the death of the deceased under the Estate Duty Act. (2) Estate Duty Reference No. 1 of 1967 has been referred to this Bench by a Division Bench of this Court and Estate Duty Reference No. 2 of 1963 has been heard along with it. Both these references are being disposed of by this common judgment. Both these cases have come up before this Court on statements of case submitted in one case by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, New Delhi, and in the other by the Central Board of Revenue, New Delhi. (3) In 1947 there had been large scale displacement of persons who were residents in territories which are known as West Pakistan and these persons, leaving their properties behind, had migrated to this country. In 1950 the Displaced Persons (Claims) Act was enacted. T...
Raj Pal Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1099
H.R. Khanna, J. (1) Raj Pal petitioner by means of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the proceedings which have been initiated against him in the Court of Additional District Magistrate, (Central District), Delhi, and for holding the provisions of the Bombay Police Act to be ultra vires. The respondents imp leaded in the petition are Union of India through Lieutenant Governor, Delhi, and Shri V. K. Kapoor, Additional District Magistrate, Delhi.(2) The petitioner is a resident of Delhi. Following notice under Section 59 of the Bombay Police Act, as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi, was served upon the petitioner calling upon him to show cause why he should nto be externed from the Union Territory of Delhi for a period of two years :- 'UNDER Section 59 of the Bombay Police Act, as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi, you are hereby informed that the following allegations are ...
The Controller of Estate Duty, Delhi Vs. Late A.T. Sahani Through L.A. ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1115; [1970]78ITR508(Delhi)
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) This case raises an interesting but difficult point under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter called the Act). The facts are nto many and are also nto in dispute.(2) The deceased A. T. Sahani who was an employee of the Indian Airlines Corporation died on 11th September, 1963 in an air crash while on duty. Under Rule 159 of the Indian Airlines Corporation (Flying Crew) Services Rules, a member of the flying crew was entitled to certain compensation at specified rates in the event of his death or an injury caused by an accident during or as a result of air journey performed as such in the Corporation's service. The rule as it stood at the material time reads as under :- 'THECorporation shall pay compensation in the undermentioned circumstances and at the rates indicated below. Such compensation is payable only when the death or an injury is caused by an accident during or as a result of air journey performed as a member of the flying crew in the Corporation's se...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »