Delhi Court February 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.
Surrinder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1970
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi258
H.R. Khanna, C.J.(1) This is an appeal by Surrinder Singh, aged 35, who has been convicted, by learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, for causing the death, of Joginder Kaur and Jagjit Kaur, and has(2) herself. place that to go volunteered and Niketan Nari going from Singh Jaswant dissuaded Kaur Jagjit Singh. Surrinder life her danger apprehended she as release of time the at present be requested then Joginder made. was order above when Court in also were Kaur, wife, his liked whomsoever? with free released ordered Magistrate The 1968. 27, July on before produced bail. 1968, 26, Niketan. sent Procedure. Criminal Code 151 Section read 107, under arrested he peace, breach Singh, Raj Shiv Si officer, duty As accused. prepared not stated wife. enticed had accused p.m. 4.25 about Paharganj police-station went ) Witness (Public along 25, On 17, by lodged report A left again thereafter, days Ten persons.. some help him took house 1968 July, begining In places....
Shakuntala Negi Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1970
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT469; ILR1970Delhi442
S. Rangarajan, J. (1) This revision petition is directed against the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Delhi (Shri Ramesh Chander) dated 24th October 1969, where by he took cognizance of the dispute between the petitioner and Smt. Chander K.anta Randev regarding a portion of property bearing No. J. 12/32, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi, initiated under section 145 Criminal Procedure Code . by the Punjabi Bagh Police.(2) The petitioner (Shrimati Shakuntala Negi) is the owner of Bungalow No. J.I 2/32 who let out the front portion to Shrimati Chander Kanta for running a school called the Angels School. Since some disputes arose between the parties the tenant filed a suit against the owner for a mandatory injunction which was dismissed by the trial court on 19th February 1969 but, decreed in appeal, on 16th September 1969.(3) On 24th October 1969 Shri Jagdish Pershad, husband of Shrimati Chanderkanta complained at the Punjabi Bagh Police Station that on the preceding night the landlady ha...
Union of India Vs. Gian Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi185; 6(1970)DLT293; 1970LabIC1264
S.N. Andley, J.(1) One of the interesting questions that has been raised in this appeal is whether a temporary Government servant under suspension whose services are terminated by notice under rule 5 of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1949, without any order of reinstatement, can claim full salary for the period of suspension (2) The respondent filed the suit out of which this appeal arises for recovery of Rs. 8,950.00 against the appellant. He was an Assistant in the office of the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports and worked as such till November 19, 1953, when he was suspended on account of his arrest in a criminal case. Nothing was done in the criminal case which appears to have been dropped. On January 21, 1958, the appellant issued a notice under rule 5 of the said Rules to the Respondent 1ntimating that the services of the latter were no longer required and that the respondent would be paid one month's salary including allowances in lieu of notice. It ...
Neelma Stationery Manufacturers and anr. Vs. the National Small Indust ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-26-1970
Reported in: 6(1970)DLT240
Om Parkash, J. (1) This appeal against, an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, 1st Class, has arisen out of an application made by the appellant, under section 34 of the Arbitration Act for the stay of proceedings in a suit, filed by the respondent for the recovery of Rs. 10489. 33 as arrears of hire rent etc. in respect of the machines delivered to the appellant on the basis of a hire purchase agreement. The learned Subordinate Judge, who was trying the suit, has dismissed the application on the 'round that the application did not even contain the allegation that the appellant was ready and willing to do all things necessary for the conduct of the arbitration, which was a condition precedent for the exercise of the discretion of the Court to stay proceedings. (2) The learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the order of the learned Subordinate Judge was erroneous inasmuch as it was not necessary for the appellant to make an allegation in the application that he was rea...
Krishna Obroi Vs. Vijay Kumar Obroi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-1970
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi301
V. S. Deshpande, J.(1) What is a Hindu marriage A contract or a sacrament How is this question answered by section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955? These are some of the questions of great public importance arising in this appeal. The respondent is Vijay Kumar Obroi (hereinafter called Obroi) while the appellant is Miss Krishna Godwani (hereinafter called Miss Godwani) who was described as Mrs. Krishna Obroi in the suit filed by Obroi against her and this description has stuck to her in this appeal. (2) Obroi knew Miss Godwani who was a working girl. On the 17th March 1965, Obroi made an application to the President. Arya Samaj, Kalkaji, New Delhi, that he wished to bemarried' to Miss Godwani according to Vedic rites and that the Purohit should be permitted to perform the marriage ceremony in the Arya Samaj temple. Miss Godwani countersigned the application and also endorsed thereon that the facts were correct and that she was going to marry Obroi of her own free-will and that she wa...
ishwar Dutt Vs. Ram Piarey
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-1970
Reported in: 1974RLR302
Om Perkash, J. (1) Respondent sued appellant for eviction on the ground of second default. An order U/S 15(1) was passed which was complied with. His eviction was ordered and he filed first appeal and then second appeal claiming that he was not liable to eviction.] Paras 6 & 7 of order are :- (2) The admitted facts are that, an application had been filed by the respondent for eviction of the appellant on the the 2nd April, 1962 on the ground of non payment of rent. An order for the deposit of the arrears of rent was made in that application by the Additional Controller The appellant had complied with that order and had deposited the arrears of rent. As a result, the application of the respondent was dismissed. The respondent had filed the second application, out of which the present appeal has arisen, on 30-3-66. The Additional Controller had, on the 21-2-67 passed an order directing the appellant to deposit the arrears of rent. The appellant had filed an appeal against that order. The...
Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Shambhu Nath Mukherjee and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-20-1970
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi392
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) This is an appeal under clause 10 ofthe Letters Patent from the judgment of S. Rangarajan J. dated 30/05/1969 dismissing the appellant's petition under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against an award made by theLabour Court.(2) The material facts are not in dispute. The appellant is apublic limited company. It owns an industrial unit called theSwatantra Bharat Mills at Delhi. Shambhu Math Mukherjiwho will hereafter be referred to as respondent was a work-manemployed in the said mills. He joined as a Store Coolie in 1951,became Fitter Helper after six months and was promoted afterabout a year as a Motion Setter. In October 1964, the appellant-company introduced a scheme for re-organisation of the WeavingSection of the mills whereby in pursuance of an alleged agreementbetween the work-men and the management, provision wasmade for the appointment of a new category of work-men calledAssistant Line Fixers (Assistants Grade 1) and for the abolitionof the post...
Gangadhar N. Agrawal Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-20-1970
Reported in: ILR1970Delhi452
T.V.R. Tatachari, J.(1) This writ petition has been filed by Gangadhar N. Agarwal, mine owner and exporter of mineral ore and importer, Margaon, Goa. The respondents are : (1) the Union of India through the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Steel, Mines and Metals; (2) the Directorate of Industries and Mines, Government of Goa, Daman and Diu; and (3) Vinod Kumar Shantilal Cosalia, mine owner and exporter, Margaon, Goa.(2) According to the petitioner, he has been carrying on the business of mining for several years at Margaon, Goa, under the laws applicable thereto both before and after Goa, Daman and Diu were liberated from foreign rule. Prior to the liberation of Goa, Daman and Diu on the 19th of December, 1961, the said territories were governed by the Portguese Constitution. Under that Consitution, as pointed out in Xec Ayub v. Government of Goa, Daman & Diu, A. I. R. 1967 Goa, Dam & Diu 106, the Government formed by the Prime Minister was empowered to promulgate dec...
Wire Netting Stores Vs. Regional Provident Funds Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi143
ORDER1. The petitioners have been running a factory from 1947 onwards for the manufacture of wire-betting rolls, wire netting, wire gauge, wire cloth and jaali made from G. I. Wires of different sizes largely imparted from abroad. Respondent No. 1 is the Regional Provident Funds Commission (hereinafter called the Commissioner) who is to implement the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) and of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 framed by the Government under the Act (hereinafter called the Scheme). Section 1(3)(a) of the Act makes it applicable to every establishment which is a factory engaged in any industr specified in Schedule I to the Act in which twenty or more persons are employed. Section 4 of the Act empowered the Central Government to add other industries to Schedule I. The importance of Schedule I lies in the fact that the application of the Act depends entirely on the particular industry being covered by an entry in the...
iqbal Singh Vs. Inspector-general of Police and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-16-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Delhi240; 6(1970)DLT350
P.S. Safeer, J. 1. This petition challenges the order dated 15-11-1968 by which the petitioner was dismissed from service.2. The petitioner was appointed as a Constable by the Commandant, Delhi Armed Police on 6-4-1953. He was promoted as Head Constable on 27-2-1957 by the Senior Superintendent of Police and was confirmed as such on 7-3-1963 by the Assistant Inspector-General of Police 3. The petitioner's case is that in August 1966, he had gone on leave to his village where the occurrence which resulted in his trial under Sections 336/337 of the Indian Penal Code took place. He was convicted only under Section 337 of the Indian Penal Code on 28-2-1967 but was given the benefit of the provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'). While releasing him on probation, the petitioner was ordered to pay the amount of Rs. 500/- to the injured persons by way of compensation. The payment of the amount was to be made within a month from the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »