Delhi Court September 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.
Shri Krishan Dev Vs. Lal Chand and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi783
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) This criminal revision is directed against an order made by Shri C. G. Suri the then District Judge, Delhi, (now Hon'ble Mr. Justice C. G. Suri of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana) whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on a preliminary objection raised by the respondents that no such appeal was competent under section 476-B of the Criminal Procedure Code.(2) The facts are nto in dispute. Respondent No. 1 is the landlord while the petitioner is his tenant in respect of a portion of the building in East Patel Nagar, New Delhi. Respondent No. 2 is also a tenant of respondent No. 1 in respect of another portion of the property. There was a dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 1 aut the petitioner's tenancy in respect of a barsati on the terrace of the building. Respondent No. I who challenged the right of the petitioner to use and occupy the said barsati instituted a suit for grant of a permanent injunction against the petitioner in ...
Madho Lal Vs. Roop Chand and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-1969
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi230
Tatachari, J.(1) These three second appeals arise out of three applications filed for the fixation of standard rent by the respective respondents in the second appeals who are tenants of the common appellant, Madho Lal, in all the three second appeals in respect of certain shops belonging to the appellant and situated in Ward No. Xv West Patel Nagar, New Delhi. As similar questions arise for determination in the three second appeals, they were heard together, and they can be disposed of by a common judgment. (2) The three tenants, Roop Chand, Ram Dass and Rawel Singh, filed three petitions on November 23, 1960, in the Court of Shri B. K. Agnihotri, Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, under Section 9 of the Delhi Rent Control Act No. 59 of 1958. The said applications were numbered as Suits Nos. 492, 489 and 491 of 1960, respectively. At the time of the filing of the said applications, the tenants were paying rents at the rates of Rs.40.00 Rs. 50.00 and Rs. 55.00 respectively, per month. ...
Narainu Vs. Deputy Commissioner Mahasu
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-29-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT15
V.D. Misra, J.(1) This writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 20th December, 1967 by which the respondent cancelled the grant made in the favor of the petitioner. (2) The petitioner applied for a grant of Nau turn for horticulture purpose in village Ruhalti, pargana Karoli, Tehsil Kasumpti. This land measured 16 bighas and bore Khasra Nos.651, 355/1 in Hadbast No. 192. After following the procedure laid down in the Himachal Pradesh Nautor Rules 1954, the petition was sanctioned the said land vide order dated 17th October, 1961, by the respondent on payment of Rs. 160.00 as price of the land and Rs. 608.64 as compensation for the trees standing on the said land. The respondent had taken about two years before the land was sanctioned. The Lt. Governor of Himachal Pradesh executed a Patta on 21st February. 1962, in favor of the petitioner according to the Nautor Rules and thereafter a mutation of transfer of ownership No. 121 ...
Hira Singh Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-29-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT402; 1970LabIC593
S. Rangarajan, J.(1) The petitioner, who has acquired considerable proficiency in social science, was originally appointed as a Superintendent of the District Jail in Uttar Pradesh by that State Government. Prior to his appointment, in the year 1962 he had taken a Doctorate in social work. In 1963 he was selected for attending the Philadelphia International Programmed for Youth Leaders and Social Workers; at Philadelphia he also acquired professional experience in the prisons there. On his return to India he was confirmed in the post of whole time Superintendent of District Jail with effect from 1-3-1965. (2) In October 1964 the Department of Social Security, Government of India, requested the State Governments to suggest of suitable officers having experience in the field of prison administration, juvenile delinquency control and other correctional procedures for consideration for one post of Director and two Assistant Directors in the Central Bureau of Correctional Services. The peti...
Habib-ul-rehman Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1006
Tatachari, J. (1) This writ petition was filed by Habib-ul-Rehman praying (1) for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing a show cause notice (Annexure-B) dated December 8, 1959, issued by the Chief Settlement Commissioner, New Delhi, an order (Annexure- E), dated February 19, 1960, passed by the Chief Settlement Commissioner, New Delhi, and an order (Annexure-G), dated March 14, 1960, passed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Rehabilitation, New Delhi, (2) for a direction that the petitioner be set at liberty, and (3) for a direction or order prohibiting the respondents from recovering certain alleged arrears of rent from the petitioner. Respondent No. 1 in the writ petition is the Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Rehabilitation. Respondent No. 2 is the Chief Settlement Commissioner, New Delhi. Respondent No. 3 is the Superintendent, District Jail, Tihar, New Delhi. Respondent No. 4 is Shri Ram Prashad, Assistant Collector (Special)...
Behari Lal Vs. Ajudhia Das
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-26-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT109
V.D. Misra, J.(1) This revision under section 15(5) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949, has been filed against the Judgment of Appellate Authority, Kangra at Dharamsala, upholding the judgment of Rent Controller, Kangra and dismissing the application for ejectment filed by Behari Lal. (2) Briefly stated, the facts are that Behari Lal is the landlord and Ajudhia Das is a tenant under him on the ground floor of his double storeyed shop No. 231, Dehra Gopipur, District Kangra. The landlord filed an application for ejectment of the tenant under sections 13 (2) (i), 13 (2) (ii), and 13 (2) (iii) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, (1949) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), The allegations were that the tenant had nto paid the rent since 28tii May, 1958, and thus owed the landlord a sum of Rs. 1620-00 as arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 20.00 per month. It was also alleged that the tenant had partitioned the shop without the written consent of the landlord. ...
Prem Kumar Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-1969
Reported in: ILR1969Delhi1214
Deshpande, J.(1) The formation of a Joint Cadre exclusively for the Union Territories in the Indian Administrative Service (hereinafter referred to as 'the IAS') by the Union of India (Respondent No. 1) and the appointment of respondents 2 to 37 to it have been challenged as unconstitutional and illegal in this batch of writ petitions. It is necessary to know, thereforee, the Constitutional and legal provisions under which the Cadre was formed and the appointments to it were made. (2) As decided in 1946 by the Conference of the Premiers' of the Provinces and the Central Home Minister, the Indian Administrative Service (and the Indian Police Serice) were constituted as All India Services common to the States and Union. For the creation of other All India Services common to the Union and the States, the consent of the states was similarly required by Article 312(1) in the form of a resolution of the Counsil of States supported by nto less than 2/3rd of the members present and voting in t...
Rajendra Sareen Vs. the State of Haryana and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi132
1. The petitioner's challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is to an order dated 31st October, 1968 whereby his services were terminated with effect from the date of receipt of the communication bearing the same date addressed to him by the Under Secretary Protocol and Publicity, Government of Haryana, on behalf of the Chief Secretary to the said Gvoernment. The communication further stated that one month's salary in lieu of the period of notice was being allowed to the petitioner.2. The grounds on which the validity of the above orderis challengedby the petitioner are (1) that he being a permanent Government servant, the order terminating his services amounts to dismissal and thereforee contravenes the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution, (2) that even if he is held to be a temporary Government servant his appointment being conterminous with the post held by him, the termination of his service while the post is still in existence would contravene Art...
T.N. Behal Vs. Hari Kishan and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-1969
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT151
V.D. Misra, J. (1) This revision has been filed against the order of Sessions Judge, Mandi, whereby he allowed the petitioner to withdraw his complaint against the respondents.(2) T.N. Bahl, petitioner, had filed a complaint under sections 406/420, 506/5 I of the Indian Penal Code against the respondents in the Court of Shri Hem Chand, Magistrate 1st Class, Mandi. After holding a preliminary enquiry as provided under Chapter Xvi of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Magistrate was satisfied that a prima-facie case under section 406/420 read with section 109 of the Indian Penal Code was established against the respondents. Accordingly, he issued summons against the respondents. Hari Kishan Joshi, one of the accused persons, filed an application for revision before the Sessions Judge, placing for quashing the proceedings initiated by the Magistrate. During the pendency of this revision the Sessions Judge recorded the statement of T.N. Bahl in which he stated that he was taking back his ...
Labh Singh Atma Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi171
ORDER1. The petitioner and respondent No. 4 are occupants of acquired evacuee property being House No. 324/20, Suman Bazar, Bhogal, New Delhi. The petitioner is a non-claimant, while respondent No. 4. Was a claimant. The petitioner's application for the division of the property was rejected by Shri K. K. Mittal, Managing Officer, who ordered in June 1959, as per annexure 'B' to the writ petition, that the Assistant Settlement Commissioner be asked to adjust the amount out of the claim of respondent No. 4 (by transferring the property to him). The appeal of the petitioner against the order of Shri K. K. Mittal was accepted by Shri I. D. Chaudhry, Assistant Settlement Commissioner, on 11-1-1960, as per annexure 'C' whereby the order of Shri Mittal was set aside and the case was remanded for the determination of the eligibility of the property for division by the Settlement Commissioner under the then existing Rule 30 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955....
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »