Skip to content

Delhi Court June 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.

Jun 27 1969

Roshan Lal Vs. State

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-27-1969

Reported in: 1971CriLJ554

H.R. Khanna, J.(1) Roshan Lal and Mela Ram, both aged 22. years, have been convicted by learned Sessions Judge, Kangra, under section 376 Indian Penal Code, and each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. Roshan Lal has filed appeal No. 34 of 1968 while Mela Ram has filed appeal No. 26 of 1968. This judgment would dispose of both the appeals. After discussing the evidence and holding that the offence of rape against the accused had been fully proved. His Lordship proceeded as follows : ARGUMENThas also been advanced on behalf of Mela Ram by Mr. Malhotra that as he was employed in the Army at the time of the present occurrence he could be only tried before a Court Martial. Reference in this connection has been made to Section 2 of the Army Act which provides inter alias that a person enrolled under the Act shall be subject to ...


Jun 25 1969

Ramesh Chandra Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-25-1969

Reported in: AIR1970Delhi129

H.R. Khanna, J.1. Romesh Chander petitioner by means of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus to revise the pay scale of the petitioner and bring it at par with the pay scale of teachers of the corresponding category in the Punjab. Prayer was also made in the petition for quashing the order contained in letter dated April 22, 1968, but the petition has been pressed in that respect. The respondents named in the petition are, the Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, respondent NO. 1, Himachal Pradesh Administration, respondent No. 2 and Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, Education Department, respondent No. 3. 2. The petitioner is serving as a Junior Basic Teacher at the Government High School Nagrota Surian, District Kangra. Till October 31, 1966 Kangra was a part of the Punjab and as such till that date the petitioner was serving under the Punjab Government. On the reorganization of the Punjab, Kan...


Jun 16 1969

Amar Nath Vs. Munnu and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-16-1969

Reported in: 6(1970)DLT73

I.D. Dna, C.J. (1) This is a plaintiffs' regular second appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned Senior Subordinate Judge (with enhanced Appellate Powers), Kangra District at Dharamsala, partly accepting the defendants' appeal and modifying the decree made by the trial Court which had decreed the suit instituted by the present plaintiff along with Shrimati Indri as his co-plaintiff for possession of the suit land. The suit was decreed by the trial Court only in favor of the appellant Amar Nath against defendants I to 6, but costs of the suit were directed to be borne only by defendants 1 to 3. The suit of Smt. Indri, plaintiff No 2, was dismissed. Now Smt. Indri has been imp leaded as a Respondent 1n this Court. (2) The facts giving rise to the controversy may now be stated. Gopala deceased, an agriculturist, alleged to be governed by customary law prevailing in Tehsil Hamirpur and by the general agricultural custom in matters of succession and alienation, was pleaded in the ...


Jun 16 1969

Dhani Ram Vs. Karam Chand

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-16-1969

Reported in: 6(1970)DLT59

H.R. Khanna, J.(1) This regular second appeal filed by Dhani Ram defendant is directed against the judgment and decree of learned Senior Subordinate Judge, Hoshiarpur, affirming on appeal the decision of the trial Court whereby a decree for possession of and measuring 42 Kanals 18 Marias was granted in favor of Karam Chand plaintilf. A decree for declaration was also granted in favor of the plaintiff that the gift deed dated May 3,1857 executed by Shrimati Udnai, defendant N0.2, in favor of Dhani Ram defendant No. 1, in respect of land measuring 21 Kanals 10 Marias, would nto affect the reversionary rights of the plaintiff after the death of Udmi.(2) Following pedigree table would be helpful in appreciating the point of controversy between the parties : Uatar Singh Sbyama Nihala Karam Chand Faqir Chand (plaintiff) (Defendant No. 4) Inder Singh Amar Singh (Widow (Widow Gian Devi Udmi Defendant Defendant No. 3) No. 2) Nihala owned about 85 Kanals 17' Marias of agricultural land. Nihala d...


Jun 13 1969

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Jetha Nand

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-13-1969

Reported in: 5(1969)DLT605

Rangarajan, J. (1) This is an appeal for which special leave under section 417(3) was granted against the acquittal of the respondent under sections 7 & 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act1954 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act).(2) The case of the prosecutions is that on 28th November, 1961 at 9.45 Am, two Food Inspectors of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi went to the Hotel Airlines where the accused-respondent was working as the Manager. One of the Inspectors purchased 12 ounces of Dhania powder for which he paid 00.75 Paise. The other Inspector took a sample of 12 ounces of Red Chillies against the payment of 00.94 P from the store-room of the Hotel where those commodities had been stored for preparation of eatables. Each sample of the commodity was divided in three parts and kept in three clean and dry bottles. The bottles were sealed in the presence of two witnesses; one sealed bottle was given to the accused and yet another set was sent to the Public Analyst on t...


Jun 10 1969

R.A. Goel Vs. Kartar Singh

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-10-1969

Reported in: 6(1970)DLT25

H.R.Khanna, J. (1) Kartar Singh filed a complaint on July 11, 1966 under Sections 452, 427, 506, 392, 147 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code against K.L. Kapur, Superintending Engineer, Ram Avtar Goyal, Executive Engineer, Tarsern Lal Sharma, Sub-Divisional Engineer, Lal Chand, Road Inspector, and four other employees of the Public Works Department, Buildings and Roads, Dharamsala. The trial Magistrate, as per order dated July 21, 1966 directed that the accused other than K.L. Kapur be summoned. It was also observed that a prima fade case had been made out against the accused other than K.L. Kapur. A revision was filed by Ram Avtar and Tarsern Lal Sharma in the Court of Session and it was argued on their behalf that they were public servants nto removable from office save by or with the sanction of the State Government and that the trial Court could nto take cognizance of the offence without the previous sanction of the State Government. The learned Sessions Judge, Kangra, dismissed the ...


Jun 09 1969

Brij Lal Vs. Tulsi and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-09-1969

Reported in: AIR1970Delhi116

I.D. Dua, C.J.1. Two gift-deeds dated 20-7-1962 and 4-2-1963 respectively were executed by Bhuroo and Kanhiya (defendants Nos. 5 and 5) in favor of defendants Nos. 1 to 4. The plaintiffs instituted a suit on the allegation that the land and the house, which are the subject-matter of the two gift-deeds, are their ancestral property and, thereforee, could not be validly gifted away. Of the donees, two of them are the adopted sons of the adoptors. In the suit, the plaintiffs have claimed a declaration that these gifts would not affect their reversionary rights after the death of defendants Nos. 5 and 6. The donees resisted the suit. The plaintiffs' relationship was denied and so was ancestral character of the property. It was further pleaded that the gifts had been made in their favor in lieu of services, with the result that even if the property were proved to be ancestral, the gifts were valid. The two donees who claim to have been adopted as sons are Bengali and Aflatu. It was pleaded ...


Jun 06 1969

Mahi Singh and ors. Vs. Chunko and ors.

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-06-1969

Reported in: AIR1970Delhi114

H.R. Khanna, J.1. This regular second appeal filed by Mahu Singh and other plaintiffs is directed against the Judge, Simla, reversing on appeal the decision of the trial Court whereby the suit of the plaintiff-appellants against Chaunku Ram and others defendant-respondents had been decreed. As a result of the decision in appeal, the plaintiff's suit stands dismissed.2. The plaintiffs are the residents of village Garog, while the defendants are the residents of village Falahi, Garog is at a lower level thatn village Falahi. There is a spring of water known as Chashma Falahi in the area of village Falahi and water from it, after flowing through the land in village Falahi, goes down-stream to village Garog. The plaintiffs case is that they have been using the water of the stream for irrigating their land situate in Khasra Nos. 10 and 11 since the days of their ancestors. It is stated that the defendants constructed a small cement tank (tanki) at the spring and took a pipe from this tank t...


Jun 03 1969

Kedar Nath Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Court: Delhi

Decided on: Jun-03-1969

Reported in: 1969CriLJ1571; 5(1969)DLT685

I.D. Dua, C.J.(1) The following report dated 28th January, 1969 was submitted to this Court by Shri H. L. Garg, Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Delhi :- 'THE petitioner is the owner of building bearing Municipal No. 1247 to 1253, situated in Mohalla Sangtrashan, Paharganj, New Delhi. The respondent Municipal Corporation of Delhi, levied water tax on the said building and sent a demand notice to the plaintiff'.There upon, the plaintiff brought a suit No. 16/1968 against the Corporation seeking permanent injunction against it restraining it from levying or charging any water tax in respect of aforesaid building till the Corporation provides water connection in the building. The said suit was decreed on 6th January, 1963. The plaintiff also sent a copy of that judgment to the Assessor and Collector Pahar Ganj, Zone. However in spite of that the respondent levied as sum of Rs 393/05 as property taxes, inclusive of water tax, for the period ending 31st March, 1966. The plaintiff represented th...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial