Delhi Court December 1970 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.
Shiv Kumar Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-29-1970
Reported in: 7(1971)DLT270
S. Rangarajan, J. (1) The petitioner seeks a direction quashing the order of the Lieutenant-Governor dated 7th July, 1970 appointing Shri Bhagwan Singh (fourth respondent) as the President of the Municipal Committee, Paonta, under proviso to section 19(1) of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act (19 of 1968), which was passed in the following circumstances.(2) Under the Punjab Small Towns Act, 1921 a Small Town Committee for Paonta Sahib was formed, five persons including the petitioner and the fourth 'respondent having been elected to the said committee on 28th February, 1968 On 3rd February, 1989 the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Act of 1968, which will hereafter be referred to as 'the Act', came into force By virtue of section 285 (1) (a) of the Act all the small towns declared as such under the Punjab Small Towns Act, 1921 were deemed to be municipal of the second class within the meaning of the Act.(3) On 6th May, 1970 the Himachal Pradesh Administration, acting under section 13 and 21 ...
Sukhdev Sahai and ors. Vs. District Magistrate, Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi237
M.R.A. Ansari, J.1. The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the order dated 11-5-1970 of the District Magistrate, Delhi, respondent No. 1, herein, passed under Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 as extended to Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Act), prohibiting the plying and parking of trucks on certain roads except during a specified period.2. The petitioners, who are 37 in number, are carrying on business of transport of goods by trucks. They have their offices as well as their godowns in the following streets, namely:-(i) The street at the back of Cloth Market up to Tilak Bazar (ii) The street Nahar Saadat Khan from Pili Kothi to Cloth Market (iii) Naya Bans up to Katra Bariyan. The customers bring their goods to the godown of the petitioners situtated in the streets mentioned above, book them at the offices of the petitioners for transport to various destinations and the goods are kept in the godowns of the petit...
Narisingh Dass Sharma Vs. Delhi Administration, Union Territory of Del ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi198
ORDER1. This order will dispose of Civil Writ No. 951/70 and Civil Writ No. 710/70.2. The Collector of Excise, Delhi Administration , Respondent No. 2 in both the petitioners conducted auction of the license to vend country liquor at three country liquor shops styled as 'Bhuli Bhjatiari, Link Road, New Delhi', 'Shahdara Delhi' and 'Mehrauli'. The highest bidder at the auction in the case of the first two shops was the firm Messrs. Nanak Singh and Company and the highest bid was Rs.175900/- and Rs.146997/- respectively. The highest bidder in respect of the third Mehrauli shop was the firm Bishamber Lal and Company with the highest bid of Rupees Rs. 114760/-. The bids of these auction purchasers were concluded in their favor. According to the allegations in the petition the partners of the firm Nanak Singh and Company, the approved licenses of Bhuli Bhatiari shop were different from the partners of the firm of the same name who were the approved licensees for the Shahdara Shop. Likewise ...
J.N. Banerjee Vs. Sohan Lal Bhargava
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi243
1. This is a landlord's second appeal directed against the judgment dated December 29, 1967 of the Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi, dismissing his appeal and confirming the Additional Controller's judgment dismissing his eviction petition under Clause (e) of S. 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, claiming the respondent's eviction on the ground that the premises in dispute were required bona fide by him for his own residence and the residence of the members of his family dependent on him, as being the owner thereof he had no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation.2. The premises in dispute were let out to the respondent in November, 1960. A deed of lease marked `C' was duly executed and admittedly signed by the parties, Clause 8 of which reads as follows:-'That the said premises shall be used for residential and clinic purpose and the tenant in no way will sublet, assign or part with possession of the same or a part thereof'.The appellant alleged that due to certain fa...
Khacheroo Mal Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: 7(1971)DLT138
V.D. Misra, J.(1) This revision is directed against the order of Additional Sessions Judge upholding the conviction of the petitioner under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter called the Act) and the sentence of 6 months rigorous impronment and a line of Rs, 1,000.00 in default of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. B.R. Kochhar, Food Inspector. on 8th January, 1969 purchased 600 grams of Kaiu tukras as sample for analysis from the petitioner on payment of its price. The Food Inspector prepared the inventory and various other documents in respect of the sample taken by him. He divided the sample into three equal parts and put them in three dry bottles which were duly sealed. One of these bottles was sent to the Public analyst who reported that the sample was adulterated due to its being insect infested. On receipt of this report a complaint was filed against the petitioner. The trial Court found the petitioner guilty and convict...
Hari Ram Vs. Ganga Saran
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: 1971RLR67
D.K. Kapur, J. (1) [THERE was previous litigation between the parties which was compromised and it was settled that the plaintiffs would keep 6 cots on the roof and a cot in the tin barsati during the rainy season. The barsati got demolished and the landlord got built 3 rooms, 2 kolkies and a store on the roof. The plaintffs sued the landlord for a mandatory injunction that he should demolish the new construction to permit the plaintiffs user of the roof claiming the same as part of their tenancy. The defendant contended that the permission to use the roof and barsati was a revocable license and the same stood revoked by blowing off the barsati and by the construction of rooms. Trial Court held in favor of the landlord while the Senior Sub-Judge held it to be an adjunct of tenancy and allowed the appeal but modified the relief that defendant should permit keeping 2 cots in a room and permit enough space for sleeping purpose. The landlord appealed to the High Court.] Paras 8 to 12 of th...
Hari NaraIn and ors. Vs. Gopal Sahai and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: 8(1972)DLT24
V.D. Misra, J. (1) This is landlord's second appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act against the order of Rent Control Tribunal up-holding the order of the Addition Rent Controller dismissing the appellants petition for eviction. (2) The appellants are the owners of the property in dispute and bad let out H. NO' 2737, Nal Sarak, Delhi to respondents, who happen to be their near relations, for residential purposes. The appellants filed an application for eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent and for bonafide personal requirements of the appellants under Sections 14(l)(a) and (e) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. (3) The respondents opposed the application on the ground that the accommodation with the appellants was sufficient for their needs and the application was made malafide. The arrears of rent, however, were duly deposited. The Additional Rent Controller found that even if the portion of the ground-floor in possession of the appellants be discarded as being unfi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-24-1970
Reported in: [1971]41CompCas596(Delhi); [1971]81ITR303(Delhi)
Hardayal Hardy, J.1. The following question of law arising out of the order of March 30, 1965, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench B, has been referred to us for opinion :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the income from dividend fell to be assessed during the assessment year 1958-59?'2. The respondent which is a general re-insurance company, whom we shall describe in this case as an assessed, is a joint stock public limited company.3. The assessment year is 1958-59 for which the relevant previous year is the calendar year ending on December 31, 1957. The assessed held shares in M/s. Raza Sugar Company Ltd. and M/s. Buland Sugar Company Ltd. These two sugar companies were under the common management of M/s. Govan Brothers (Rampur) Ltd. For their accounting year ended the 31st October, 1951, the said two sugar companies declared dividend on 16th January, 1952. Under the resolution passed by each of the aforesaid two sugar companies at the...
S. Jabir Singh and ors. Vs. the Chief Commissioner, Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi246
ORDER1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the purported acquisition of certain garden land in Village Manakpur Chawani in which the petitioners claim an interest. The contentions are that the acquisition is illegal and should be set aside inasmuch as vis-a-vis the petitioners there has been non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Sections 5-A and 9 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.2. Three acres out of a garden known as Mojiwala Bagh in village Malakpur in all measuring 21 bighas and 19 bids was comprised in Khasra No. 383 was temporarily allotted to one Ishar Singh by the Assistant Custodian of Evacuee Property (Rural), Delhi on 7-5-1953, It was be pertinent to read the terms of this allotment letter produced by the petitioners and relied upon by them. It reads as under:-'From The Assistant Custodian of E.P. Rural, Delhi. To Shri Ishar Singh, House No. XV/8934, Multani Dhandha, Pahar Ganj, Delhi. Memorandum: Subject : Allotment o...
Mandir Thakur Raghunath Vs. Land Acqutsition Collector
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-23-1970
Reported in: 7(1971)DLT266
S. Rangarajan, J.(1) The appellant, Mandir Thakur Shri Raghunath Ji, is aggrieved by the order of the learned District Judge Mahasu, who fixed the value of the two items of properties belonging to the said Mandir for the purpose of a road in the following manner:- (I)5 bids was of land in Rohru village at the rat of Rs. 3,000.00 per Bigha (ii) 3 bids was of land in Khasra No. 1442/57-1 adjoining the above said property at Rs. 500.00 per Biswa.A further question, which is comparatively minor, is also raised concerning the District Judge not having awarded interest at six per cent per annum on the amount of compensation fixed but only at four per cent per annum This is an error apparent on the face of the record which has to be corrected, in any case. (2) The appellant claims that the value of 8 bids was of land has, to be determined at not less than Rs.5.000.00 per Bigha but the appeal has been confined due to paucity of funds, to only an extra Rs. 1,000.00 than what has been awarded by...