Delhi Court March 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.
Tulsi Bai Vs. J.R. Parshad
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-25-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Delhi322; 5(1969)DLT421
1. The appellant in this case Smt. Tulsi Bai obtained an order of eviction against the respondent Shri J.R. Pershad, from her house situated in Nawabganj, Delhi, on the ground of non-pavment of rent. The property was situated in slum area and so the appellant made an application to the Competent Authority under the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 to get necessary permission for execution of the eviction order. On that application the order that was passed was that a sum of Rs. 325 was outstanding against the tenant by way of rent who shall pay Rs. 50 to the 'landlady' on or before 15th of each month on account of arrears of rent as well as future rent; in case of any default the tenant shall be liable to eviction; no formal permission will be required in case of default and the permission as contemplated by Section 19 of the Act shall be deemed to have been granted in case the tenant committed any default in payment of the Installments as aforesaid and the first paymen...
Chiranji Lal Vs. the Income-tax Officer and ors., New Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1167
H.R. Khanna, J. (1) PETITIONER-FIRM Chiranji Lal Ramji Dass by means of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the issuance of a writ quashing notice dated March 21, 1966 under Section 148 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referrd to as the Act of 1961). (2) The petitioner-firm was carrying on business as a Commission Agent in the status of a Hindu undivided family during the accounting period (Dewali year 1947-48) pertaining to the assessment year 1949-50. The Hindu Undivided family remained joint in status and business up to November 13, 1955, thereafter the profits arising from the business were assessed in the status of a registered firm. Previously the head office was at Bhiwani with branch offices at Narnaul, Bikaner, Loharu and Jaipur. After 1955, the business is carried on with head office at Bhiwani and branches at Jaipur, Bikaner, Delhi and Narnaul. On March 21, 1966 Income-tax Officer, Central Circle Iii, Delhi issued the...
Ram Singh Vs. Lila Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT619
P.N. Khanna, J. (1) Smt. Lila Devi, the respondent (mother of the minor child) filed an application under Section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890 (hereinaftar referred to as the Act), in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Mandi, (exercising the power of District Judge, under the Act) praying for the restoration to her of the coustody of the minor child, who was and is in the custody of the father, the appellant. The allegations in her application are that she is a divorced wife of the appellant. Pinki a daughter of the parties born during the wed-lock was more then three years old on the date of the filing of the said application. She is more than five years old now at the time of the hearing of this appeal According to the applicant the child was removed by the appellant, father, from her custody. She further alleged that the child was likely to die on account of the cruel attitude of the father. She, thereforee, prayed that the custody of the child be restored to her. ...
Lalit Kumar Vs. Saroj Kumari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-24-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT408
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) This is a tenant's appeal against the concurrent orders of the Controller and the Rent Tribunal ordering his eviction from the premises on the ground that they are required by the respondent-landlord bona fide for her own residence and that she has no other reasonable suitable residential accommodation within the meaning of proviso (e) to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). (2) The facts are nto really in dispute. The respondent-landlord is a deserted wife and a midwife by profession. She acquired the premises in 1962 when she was occupying rented accommodation paying rent of Rs. 35.00 per month. She nevertheless let out the premises to the appellant in 1963 on a monthly rent of Rs. 60.00 The relations between the parties later became strained. The appellant applied to the Rent Controller for fixation of standard rent and the respondent filed a petition before the Controller for the eviction of the app...
Charanji Lal Vs. Sushil Chander Bharal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi26; 6(1970)DLT43
ORDER1. S.A. O. 435 of 1968 was dismissed in default on 2-1-1969. Neither party was represented in this Court on that day. The appellant has applied for setting aside the dismissal in default and for restoring the appeal to its original number and for its hearing on the merits. This application has been presented under Order 41, Rule 19, read with Section 151, Code of Civil Procedure. The averments made in this application are as under:-'1. That the above-mentioned appeal was fixed for hearing in the Court of the Hon'ble Chid Justice on 2-1-1969. It was No. 10 in the list. This appeal was on the cause list since 5th December 1968. 2. That the appellant-petitioner had been attending the Court diligently throughout. Even on 2-1-1969, he attended the Court. At 12 A.M., the petitioner enquired from the Reader attached to the Hon'ble Chief Justice as to whether there was any possibility of his case being taken up and he was told that there were very many big cases above him and there was ab...
Gurbachan Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi102; 1970CriLJ674; 6(1970)DLT361
1. The appellant in this case was charged with offences under Sections 161, 162, and 163. I.P.C. for attempting to obtain for himself and other persons illegal gratification from two postal employees from Jullundur and Kapurthala, namely Kewal Krishan and P.L. Sachdeva, for getting their names included in the merit list which was to be prepared as a result of the postal examination held in September 1962 by exercising his influence with some other public servants dealing with the matter. He was also charged with conspiracy with some other unknown person or persons and also for attempting to cheat the afore-mentioned Kewal Krishan and P.L. Sachdeva by trying to obtain Rs. 500 from each of them by falsely holding out that he would get their names included in the merit list as aforesaid.2. Learned Special Judge who tried the case found the appellant guilty of an offence under Section 120-B, I.P.C. and Section 161, I.P.C. only by his order dated 3rd February, 1967 and sentenced him to two ...
S. Sundarajan Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-17-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi29; 1970CriLJ213; 6(1970)DLT1
Hardayal Hardy, J. 1. The petitioner S. Sundarajan who is under going a term of imprisonment in Central Jail Kanpur as a result of his conviction by a General Court-martial on charges of criminal misappropriation of monies belonging to the Air Force Public Fund Accounts moved this petition for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 149 Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 through his wife Shrimati Saraswati on the gorund that his detention and conviction are illegal. 2. When Rule nisi was issued by the Motion Bench the petitioner's counsel had cited an unreported decision of the Supreme Court in Som Datt Datta v. Union of India (Writ Petn. No. 118 of 1968, D/- 20-9-1968) = (Since reported in : 1969CriLJ663 ). The case was thereforee, ordered to be heard by a Full Bench of three judges. That is how the case was laid before us. 3. The petitioner's allegations broadly are that he was working as Senior Accounts Officer at No. 4 Base Repair Depot Air Force, Kanpu...
Lala Ram Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT622
P.N. Khanna, J.(1) Shri Lala Ram who was holding a post of a Superintendent in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Simla, has filed this writ petition challenging the orders of the Under Secretary (Revenue), Himachal Pradesh Government. Simla, respondent No. 3 directing his retirement with effect from 13th August, 1968, on his completing 58 years of age. (2) The allegations of the petitioner are that on September 19, 1935 he was officiating as Field Kanungo and holding a substantive post of Patwari on that day. On July 20. 1937 he was confirmed as a 2nd class Field Kanungo against a permanent 'vacancy Alter serving in various capacities as Kanungo, Field Kanungo, Sadar Kanungo, Naib Tehsildar, Head Vernacular Clerk, Assistant Superintendent and eventually as Superintendent in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner at Simla, he was confirmed as such (Superintendent in the office of the Deputy Commissioner) with effect from January 19. 1963. On March 31, 1938 the petitioner held a lien...
The Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd., Lakshmiganj, Uttar Pradesh V ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-06-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi122
ORDER1. The petitioners in this case, the Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills, Private Limited, carry on tbusiness of manufacture and sale of sugar. They have applied under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ or order for quashing the directions issued by the Directorate of Sugar, Ministry of Food, Government of India, requiring them to deliver their stocks of reprocessed sugar in the year 1967-68 at the rates fixed by the Central Government for delivery of sugar produced in the season 1966-67 and for prohibiting the respondents from compelling them to reprocess the 3,000 bags of damaged sugar lying with them and to permit the same being sold in free market. The petition was admitted to be heard by a Division Bench but in view of the important question involved, it was referred to a Full Bench for decision and that is how the case is now before us.2. The occasion for filing this petition arose because of an accidental fire that took place on May 30, 1967, during the sugar season of the y...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›