Delhi Court May 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.
The Official Liquidator, Peoples Insurance Company Ltd., (In Liquidati ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi58; ILR1969Delhi522
S.K. Kapur, J.(1) This is an application for execution filed by the Official Liquidator, Peoples Insurance Company limited(in liquidation) and the decree-holder claims a sum of Rs. 31.400.00against the estate of late S. Sardul Singh Caveeshar, now represented by his son Major K. S. Caveeshar, on the basis of the order dated 30/08/1965, passed by the Punjab High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 114 of 1962, whereby S. Sardul Singh Caveeshar was settled on the list of contributories of Peoples Insurance Company Limited (in liquidation) (hereinafter referred to as 'the company' and a sum of Rs. 31,400.00 determined as payable by the contributory. The company made an application for attachment before judgment under Order 38,rule 5, Civil Procedure Code (Petition L.M. No. 66 of 1957) on or about 14/05/1967, and an order was made attaching the compensation payable to S. Sardul Singh Caveeshar under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954.On 16/08/1967, Jagjit Sing...
Rajeshwar Prashad Vs. the Collector of Customs and Central Excise and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT289
H.R. Khanna, J. (1) Rajeshwar Prashad by means of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, and the Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, has prayed for the issuance of a writ to quash the orders dated September 9, 1968 and January 2, 1969, and for a direction to the respondents to return car No. Dlj 2916 to the petitioner.(2) The petitioner is one of the two partners in firm New India Watch Company, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Ambassador car . No. Dlj 2916 was purchased by that firm in 1965. On April 5, 1968 the petitioner and one Madan Lal were apprehended by the Customs Preventive Staff, New Delhi, in car No. Dlj 2916 after they had been noticed by the said staff coming out of a house in Safdarjang Extension occupied by B. K. Jain, Flight Engineer of the Indian Airlines Corporation. The raid party found a brief case in the car and on opening the same recovered 60 bars of gold weighing 10 Tola...
Gurcharan Singh Vs. Hans Raj
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-13-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT539
S.K. Kapur, J.(1) The question in this appeal turns mainly on the interpretation of section 12 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The tenant filed a petition for the fixation of standard rent of the premises in question. The premises were let out to the tenant on 2nd March, 1963, and the petition was filed on 19th July, 1966, that is, after the expiry of more than two years from the date of letting. The landlord objected to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that it had been beyond the time prescribed by section 12 of the said Act. The tenant then made an application for condensation of delay under the proviso to section 12. Two grounds were set up in the said application- (1) The tenant met with an accident on 31-8-1964 and he was advised complete physical and mental rest for two years : and (2) he was under a bona fide impression that application for the fixation of standard rent could be filed within two years after the completion of five years from the date of the ...
Ratti Ram Tobacco Dealer Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-12-1969
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT505(Del)
S. Rangarajan, J.1. The only question for decision in the Civil Writ petition is covered by the authority of the Supreme Court in Collector of Customs and Excise, Cochin and Ors. v. A.S. Bava 1978 E.L.T. J 333 to the following effect :-'Under Section 36 of the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944, a person aggrieved by any decision or order has an unfettered right to appeal. Section 129 of the Customs Act, 1962, which is made applicable to duties imposed under the Central Excises and Salt Act by notification under Section 12 of the Act requires the appellant to deposit the duty or penalty pending an appeal. Section 129 thus whittles down the substantive right of appeal under Section 35 and accordingly it cannto be regarded as 'procedure relating to appeal' within Section 12 of the Central Excises and Salt Act. The notification, dated 4-5-1963 applying Section 129 of the Customs Act is, thereforee, invalid.'2. The petitioner's appeal in this case was rejected for non-deposit of excise duty...
Jagdish Chander Dhawan Vs. R.S. Amar Nath Mehra
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-09-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi816
Rangarajan, J. (1) The petitioner in both the revision petitions (Civil Revisions No. 476-D of 1963 and 492-D of 1960) was the second defendant in Civil Suit No. 179/200, filed in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Delhi. It was a suit for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts alleging that a partnership-deed had been entered into on 5-9-1949 by the plaintiff (respondent No. 1 in Civil Revision No. 492-D of 1960 and respondent No. 2 in Civil Revision No. 476-D of 1962) with reference to the construction of 100 Miners Quarters at Bhuli Township (Dhanbad), the purpose mentioned in the partnership-deed, and also (as per the plaintiff's allegations and the case of R. S. Amar Nath Mehra, respondent No. I in Civil Revisions No. 476-D of 1962 and respondent No. 2 in Civil Revision No. 492-D of 1960) for the construction of two more items of work mentioned in paragraph 3 of the plaint. While the first defendant supported the plaintiff, the second defendant disputed that ...
Riaz Ahmed Vs. Habeeb-ur-rehman
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-09-1969
Reported in: 5(1969)DLT630
Inder Dev Dua, J. (1) This revision challenges the order of a learned Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Delhi, dated 6-10-1965 dismissing the petitioner Riaz Ahmed's application for review of an earlier order of the learned Subordinate Judge dated 29-7-1965. (2) The controversy out of which the impugned order of the learned Subordinate Judge and the present revision have arisen may briefly be stated. The petitioner Riaz Ahmad instituted a suit for dissolution of partnership and rendition of accounts against Habeeb-ur-Rehman in June, 1962. A preliminary decree was granted in March, 1963 and Miss Surinder Bhatia, Advocate, was appointed Local Commissioner for going into the accounts of partnership. She was directed to submit her report on 1-6-1963. Thereafter an application was made by Riaz Ahmed for withdrawing the suit, but this application was disallowed in September, 1963. In November, 1963, Riaz Ahmad Jnade another application for withdrawing the suit, but this application was also disal...
Deep Chand Gupta Vs. the Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-09-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT154
H.R. Khanna, J. (1) This judgment would dispose of Civil Writs Nos. 250 and 251 of 1969 wherein the petitioners have impugned the constitutional validity of the Delhi, Meerut and Buland shahr Milk and Milk Products Control Order, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as the order). The respondents named in the petitions are the Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Community Development, Co-operation and Panchayat Raj (Department of Agriculture), and the Delhi Administration through the Under Secretary (Civil Supplies).(2) The impunged Order was issued by the Central Government on February 27, 1969. The preamble of the order reads as under :- 'Whereas the Central Government is of opinion that it is necessary so to do for maintaining and increasing supplies of milk and for securing its equitable distribution in the areas comprising the Union Territory of Delhi and the Districts of Meerut and Bulandshahar in the State of Uttar Pradesh: 'NOW, thereforee, in exercise...
Delhi Administration Vs. Ram Nath Aggarwal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-08-1969
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1279; 6(1970)DLT212
Jagjit Singh, J.(1) By his judgment, dated January 17, 1964, Shri Amba Prakash, Magistrate First Class, Delhi, acquitted Ram Nath Aggarwal and two others who had been tried by him on various charges. An appeal against the acquittal of Ram Nath Aggarwal was filed by State, under provisions of section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). The acquittal of the other two accused was nto challenged.(2) Six charges were framed against Ram Nath Aggarwal. The first charge was for criminal conspiracy. The third and the fourth charges were for cheating and the fifth and the sixth charges were under section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The second charge was also under section 471 and specifically mentioned three documents which, on or about July 19, 1954, were alleged to have been fraudulently used as genuine, before the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Delhi, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged. Out of those documents one was men...
Faqir Chand Vs. the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-06-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi581
Inder Dev Dua, J. (1) In these proceedings, this Court is asked under Article 227 of the Constitution to quash and set aside the order of the learned District Judge dated 2-11-1968 dismissing petitioner Faqir Chand's appeal under section 343(2) of the Municipal Corporation Act from the order of the Zonal Engineer (Buildings) of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi dated 27-2-1965 calling upon the petitioner to demolish one room on the first district Judge took the view that from the plans it was clear that only roofs of some rooms had been replaced at the existing height on the first floor. No action could, thereforee, be taken for the demolition of the structure on the first floor. In so far as Chhaja on the second floor is concerned, it appeared the learned District Judge that it was a later addition and improvement which was nto in existence in 1959-60. The production of affidavits of some persons deposing that there was no fresh construction did nto impress the learned District Judge...
Mohan Singh Vs. Roshan Lal and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-01-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi88
I.D. Dua, C.J.1. The decree-holder has approached this Court under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code. His application so far as material may be reproduced in extenso:- 'The respondent decree-holder respectfully prays as under:- 1. That in the aforesaid R.F.A. No. 21 of 1967 this Hon'ble Court consisting of Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. N. Shankar and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jagjit Singh in its judgment dated 30th August, 1968 was pleased to hold that the respondent decree-holder was entitled to recover the amount of Rs. 5,08,333-5-6 plus interest up to 7th April, 1961. Costs awarded by the Pakistan Court, Costs awarded by the Trial Court at Simla and Interest on principal amount from 8th April, 1961 till realization amounting to a total of Rs. 10,92,318-37 calculated up to 8-9-1968. It was further directed in the judgment and decree that the respondent/Decree-Holder is entitled to take out immediate execution for the recovery fo the decretal amount as mentioned above less, deposit amount of Rupee...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›