Delhi Court December 1971 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.
Raj Kishan JaIn Vs. Municipal Corporation, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1971
Reported in: 1972RLR66
M.R.A. Ansari (1) Petitioner owns certain property in Daryagani, Delhi which is let out to tenants. For 1959-60, its rateable value was Rs. 14,500.00. For 1960-61, value was assessed at Rs. 26,061.00. Petitioner appealed against it U/S 169 but the same as dismissed. He moved High Court where it was held that although the standard rent of the property had been fixed under the Rent Control Act of 1947, it was the standard rent fixed under the Act of 1952 or of 1958 which would govern the proviso to S. 116(1) about the rateable valuation. After discussing Supreme Court decisions in Corp. of Calcutta Vs . Padma Debi : [1962]3SCR49 ; Corp. of Calcutta Vs . L.I.C. of India : [1971]1SCR249 .(2) Guntur Municipal Council v. Guntur Tax Payers Association 1970 Rcj 989 it was observed in para 5 of the judgment on wards, thus :- The principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the above three cases were applied by a Single Bench of this Court in Mrs. Sham Kapoor v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi e...
Harbans Singh Vs. J.D. JaIn and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-17-1971
Reported in: 8(1971)DLT329
M.R.A. Ansari, J. 1. This order will dispose of C. M. (M) Nos 148, 151, 152 and 156 of 1971.2. These petitions are filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. In C. M (M) No. 148/71, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the judgment dated 8th June, 1971 of the Additional District Judge, Delhi in R C. A. No 95 of 1969. A certified but unstamped copy of the judgment of the additional District Judge has been filed along with this petition as Annexure 'G'. The petitioner has also filed Annexures 'A', 'B', 'C' and 'F' which are copies of the orders and judgments of various courts. One of them, namely, Annexure 'C', is a certified copy and the others annexures are copies which have been attested by the petitioner's advocate as true copies. Annexure 'D' is a copy of the cross-objections filed in R.C A. No. 121/69 and Annexure 'E' is a copy of the brief notes of arguments on behalf of the petitioner herein who was respondent No. 2 before the Additional District Judge, Delhi....
Sant Lal Kashmiri Lal, Delhi Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-15-1971
Reported in: ILR1972Delhi277; [1972]86ITR76(Delhi)
Hardayal Hardy, C.J.(1) This judgment will dispose of two references viz. I.T.R. No. 13 of 1968 and I.T.R. No. 21 of 1968 The assessed in either reference is a partnership frm. In Income-tax Reference No.13 of 1968, the assessed is a firm named Sant Lal Kashmiri Lal which was constituted under an instrument of partnership dated 20th December 1952 with the following partners and their respective spares :- Kaslimiri Lal ..... - /1/6 pies Lahori Mal ...... -/1.00 anna Kanhiya Lal ...... -/1/6 pies Prahlad Rai ...... -/4.00 annas Saraswati Kumar ...... -/4.00 annas Gyani Ram ...... -/4.00 annas. The firm as constituted was granted registration for the assessment year 1953-54 and thereafter renewal of registration up to and including the assessment year 1961-62. Kashmiri Lal one of the partners, died on 21-10-1961 within the previous year, relevant to the assessment year 1962-63. On 30-11-1962 a return of income for the firm showing the total income during the previous year ended on 8-11-19...
Balkishan Vs. Pannalal Sud and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-14-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Delhi108; 8(1972)DLT129
Rajinder Sachar, J.(1) The main question that arises for determination in the present petition is whether the arbitrator to whom private reference is made by a written agreement is amenable to the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution. (2) The petitioner and respondents 3 and 4 are real brothers, Respondent No. 1 is cousin brother of the petitioner and Respondent No. 2 is son-in-law of Atma Ram who is petitioner's uncle. (3) The petitioner and his brothers, respondents 3 & 4 were doing business in partnership with respondent No. 2 under the name and style of 'Bags and Cartons'. The petitioner and respondent No. 2 were also carrying on business of Pioneer Paper Projects. Disputes having arisen between the petitioner and respondents 2, 3 and 4, they entered into two agreements to refer the disputes to the sole arbitration of respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 gave one award dated 15th November, 1968, in respect of and in connection with both the arbitration agr...
Lala Devi Singh and ors. Vs. Bhagwan Dass Badlu and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Delhi175
1. This second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the defendants against the appellate judgment and decree of the Senior Subordinate Judge dated the 15th of November, 1965 by which the learned Judge has allowed the appeal and reserved the decree of the trial court dated the 5th of February, 1965 and finally decreed the suit of the plaintiffs restraining the defendant-appellants from disturbing the possession of the plaintiffs and third defendant who were the owners of the property in dispute except by due process of law.2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that Ram Kalan father of Padam Singh along with his relation Lala, appellant, son of Devi Singh was the owner of the land in dispute. According to Jamabandi (Ex.P.3) for the year 1940-41 Bhagwan Dass, respondent was as found by the lower appellate court shown as the tenant in possession of the land in dispute. Later on Ram Kalan mortgaged the property in dispute in favor of one Ram Saru...
Raj Rani Vs. Amar Nath and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Delhi206
1. This judgment will dispose of Civil Miscellaneous (Main) Nos.103 and 104 of 1971 since similar questions of law have arisen for decision.2. The petitioner, who is common in both the petitions, has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the orders of the Financial Commissioner and the Competent Authority (Slums), dated May, 17, 1971, and March 18, 1971, respectively. She is the landlady of house No.XII-5720, Street No.3, Nai Chandhrawal Kolhapur Road, Subzi Mandi, Delhi, which is situated in a slum area.3. Civil Miscellaneous (Main) No.103 of 1971 relates to Amar Nath, respondent who is a tenant in a part of the said premises. The rent was originally Rs.6/- per month, but later on standard rent at the rate of Rs.30.48 np. per month was fixed with effect from April 7, 1965. The petitioner instituted eviction proceedings and one of the grounds was non-payment of rent. She succeeded before the Rent Control Tribunal in getting an order for evict...
Dhoomi Mal Ram Chand Vs. the Collector of Stamps
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Delhi146; ILR1972Delhi755
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) In this reference under section 57(2) at the Indian Stamp Act, we have to consider the true nature of the mortgage deed dated 24-6-1968 to opine whether :- (1)it is a mortgage deed by which 'possession of the property or any part of the property comprised m such deed is given by the mortgagor or agreed to be given' in the meaning of Article 40(a) of Schedule I-A (Delhi) of the Stamp Act; AND(2) the duty on transfer of property livable under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 in the form of a surcharge on stamp duty can, be recovered as deficiency along with penalty under section 40 of the Stamp Act. (2) Question NO. 1 :- it is common ground that the deed in question is a 'mortgage deed' within the meaning of section 2(17) of the Stamp Act. The question is whether it is a mortgage with possession or a simple mortgage. The distinction between these two types of mortgage has to be gathered from the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1...
Raj Rani Vs. Dwaraka Das and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Delhi208
ORDER1. The Petitioner has approached this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the orders of the Financial Commissioner and the Competent Authority (Slums) dated May 17, 1971 and March 18, 1971, respectively.2. The petitioner is the landlady of house No.XII-5720, Street No.3, Nai Chandrawal, Kolhapur Road, Subzi Mandi, Delhi, Dwarka Dass is a tenant in a part of the premises. The petitioners instituted eviction proceedings against the tenant and succeeded in getting the eviction order from the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi. Tenant's appeal to the High Court was dismissed and, at the request of his counsel, he was allowed to months' time to vacate the premises and deliver vacant possession. Since the tenant refused to vacate the premises, the petitioner approached the Competent Authority (Slums) under Section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It was averred that the tenant was living at Na...
Assistant Controller of Customs, New Delhi Vs. Kedar Nath
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: ILR1972Delhi775
Hardayal Hardy, C.J.(1) This appeal has been brought on leave granted by this Court under Section 417(3) Criminal Procedure Code. The appellant is Assistant Collector of Customs, New Delhi while the respondent is Kedar Nath, a bullion broker of Delhi.(2) On a complaint filed by the appellant for an offence under Section 135(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rule 126P(ii) of the defense of India Rules, 1962 the respondent was convicted by a Sub-Divisional Magistrate and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00, or in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under each count with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. (3) The respondent filed an appeal against the judgment of the trial court in the Court of Session and by an order made by Shri M. L. Jain, Addl. Sessions Judge Delhi on 13-8-1968 the appeal was accepted and the judgment of the trial court was reversed.(4) The app...
Raj Rani Vs. Amar Nath Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1971
Reported in: 1972RLR47
(1) This judgment will dispose of civil Miscellaneous (Main) Nos and 104 of 1971 since similar questions of law have arisen for decision. The petitioner, who is common in both the petitions, has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the orders of the Financial Commissioner and the competent Authority (Slums), dated May, 17,1971, and March 18, 1971, respectively. She is the landlady of house No. Xi 1-5720, Street No. 3, Nai Chandhrawal Kolhapur Road, Subzi Mandi, Delhi, which is situated in a slum area. (2) Civil Miscellaneous (Main) No. 103 of 1971 relates to Amar Nath, respondent who is a tenant in a part of the said premises. The rent was originally Rs. 6 per month, but later on the standard rent at the rate of Rs. 30.48 np. per month was fixed with effect from April 7, 1965. The petitioner instituted eviction proceedings and one of the grounds was non-payment of rent. She succeeded before the Rent Control Tribunal in getting an order for e...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »