Delhi Court March 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.
Siri Kishan and anr. Vs. Mahabir Sing and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Delhi196
ORDER1. The interesting question that arises for decision in this writ petition is whether a sub-tenant is also included within the meaning of the expression 'tenant' under Section 19(4) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Section 19(4) of the Act reads as follows:-'In granting or refusing to grant the permission under sub-section (3), the Competent Authority shall take into account the following factors, namely:- (a) whether alternative accommodation within the means of the tenant would be available to him if he was evicted: (b)whether the eviction is in the interest of improvement and clearance of the slum areas: (c) Such other factors, if any, as may be prescribed.' 2. The expression 'tenant', or even ' landlord', has not been defined by the said Act. Section 2(f) of the Act defines 'occupier' as including:'(a) any person who for the time being is paying or is liable to pay to the owner the rent or any portion of the rent of t...
Roshan Lal Vs. Gian Chand
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-31-1971
Reported in: 7(1971)DLT274
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The plaintiff petitioner had brought the suit on the basis of two pronotes executed in his favor by the defendant respondent each for Rs. 200. He also admitted payment to the extent of Rs 117. The defense was that the real consideration of each of the pronotes was Rs. 100 only and that the defendant had made repayment in excess of Rs. 117. Each party examined itself. While in the witness-box the defendant offerred to be bound by a special oath to be taken by the plaintiff on Ganga Jali. The plaintiff however declined to take the special oath because he has to file many such suits being a professional money-lender and he saw no reason to take special oath.(2) The trial Court on discussion of evidence found that the defendant had failed to prove that the real consideration of the pronotes was not Rs. 200 but only Rs. 100 and also that he had made repayment in excess of Rs. 117. The trial Court however observed that there was hardly any reason on the part of the pla...
Om Parkash and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: ILR1971Delhi780
S.N. Shankar, J. (1) By this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed that the orders dated August 9, 1961 and December 6, 1961, passed by the Deputy Cus(2) The dispute related to a property situated in Aligarh. Sometimes in April, 1908 it was purchased by one Shri Ram and two other persons, Mohammad Ahmad and Sayaid Hussain (hereafter referred as 'the Muslim owners). Shri Ram had one-half share and the other half belonged jointly to Mohammad Ahmad and Sayaid Hussain. Shri Ram died leaving a son Balram. On January 6, 1925, the property was partitioned between Balram and the Muslim owners. After the partition, the Muslim owners constituted a Wakf-ul-Aulad in respect of the portion of the property that fell to their share by a deed of Wakf dated. May 6, 1925 registered on May 7, 1925. The Wakf property has been referred to in the petition and in the various orders of the Department as 'Jamaji-ka-pech' and this property alone is the subject matter of this p...
Premier Irrigation Equipment (P) Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer,
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: ILR1971Delhi489
S. Rangarajan, J. (1) This is a petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, by the Management, which is aggrieved by the Award of the Labour Court, Delhi, dated 28th August 1970, ordering the reinstatement of the third respondent (Shri Mohinder Pal Singh). The third respondent was appointed as a Technical Representative' The post had been advertised, as that of a Sales Representative. According to Annexure A the third respondent was to be 'primarily concerned with sales' being responsible to the General Manager of the Premier Irrigation Equipment Private Limited for promoting and developing sales of the company's irrigation equipment and industrial pipes. (2) The appointee had to make contacts with customers and potential customers and promote sales in a specific region by giving demonstrations. etc. A training was also contemplated, both in theory and in the field. He was offered an initial salary of Rs. 650.00 gross per month inclusive of all allowances. There ...
Hazari Lal and ors. Vs. Giasi Ram and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-30-1971
Reported in: 8(1972)DLT85
S.N. Andley, J. (1) This second appeal under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, hereinafter referred to as 'the. Rent Act', has come before us upon a reference by one of us (Tatachari J.) to determine the exact scope of the expression 'otherwise parted with the possession' used in clause (b) to the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Rent Act. The question has arisen in the circumstances set out hercinafte'.. (2) The appellants are the landlords of House No. 946, Ward No. 8. Gali Nai Basti, Kucha Pati Ram, Delhi, wherein respondent No. 1 was a tenant of three rooms and two Kothries on the ground floor at a rental of Rs. 16.97 per month. The appellants filed a petition for the eviction of respondent No. 1 from the aforesaid tenancy premises on the ground that respondent No. 1 had not paid the arrears of rent from December 1, 1959, till the end of March, 1961; that respondent No. 1 'is suitably accommodated in Vinay Nagar, New Delhi, where he is residing permanently from more ...
ishar Das Vs. the Punjab National Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Delhi252
1. This is an appeal by Ishar Dass (now deceased and represented by his legal representative) against the Punjab National Bank. The appellant was the petitioner in an application under Section 13 of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951., In that application he claimed the recovery of Rs. 85,155/9/5 with interest against the Punjab National Bank. According to the application, the petitioner was a guarantee broker of the Bank with respect of various branches which are now in Pakistan. There was an agreement between the parties on 24th January, 1942, setting out the terms of the contract. The petitioner alleges that in furtherance of the said guarantee he gave a cash security of Rs.1,08,155/9/6 as well as the security of immovable property a life insurance policy and also some other securities. The Bank advanced loans to a number of debtors introduced by the petitioner on the security of moveable and other securities approved by it as well as against goods pledged by those d...
Sheorattanlal Gulabchand Agrawal Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: ILR1971Delhi104
H.R. Khanna, C.J.(1) This judgment would dispose of four Letters Patent Appeal Nos. 2 and 3 of 1966 and Nos. 2 and 3 of 1967. Appeal Nos. 2 and 3 of 1966 have been. filed by Messrs Sheorattanlal Gulabchand Agarwal against the judgment of S. K. Kapur, J., dated September 13, 1966, dismissing their two civil writ petitions. Appeals Nos. 2 and 3 of 1967 are by Messrs Lacchilal & Co., against the judgment of S. K. Kapur, J. pronounced on the same day, i.e., September 13, 1966, whereby two writ petitions filed by the appellants in these two appeals were dismissed. All the four writ petitions, out of which the appeals arise, related to the grant of mining lease for ochre's in Kulkaria and Amua Hills, District Satna (Madhya Pradesh), and were directed against the orders of the Central Government dated November 30 1962. (2) In 1951-52 some applications for grant of mining lease for ochre's in Kulkaria and Amua Hills were received by the then State of Vindhya Pradesh. Two of those applications ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ganga Sugar Corporation
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-29-1971
Reported in: ILR1971Delhi496; [1973]92ITR173(Delhi)
H.R. Khanna, C.J.(1) This judgment would dispose of two Income-tax References Nos. I and 17 of 1967 in each of which the following identical question has been referred to this Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at the instance of the Revenue :- 'WHETHER,on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessed company is entitled to exemption from tax on the profits or gains derived from the plant and machinery installed by it at a cost of Rs. l,10,00,000.00 under section 15C of the Income-tax Act, 1922?'(2) Reference No. 1 relates to assessment year 1959-60 whereas Reference No. 17 pertains to assessment years 1960-61, 1961-62 and 1957-58 The assessed in these References is Ganga Sugar Corporation Ltd. and the learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the decision in Reference No. 1 of 1967 would also cover the question which is the subject matter of the other Reference. In...
R. Damlia Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-27-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR616(Delhi)
The judgment of the court was delivered bySHANKAR J. - This order will dispose of C. Ws. 316-D of 1965 and 318-D of 1965. In these petitions, under articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioner, R. Dalmia, has prayed that notices dated March 20, 1965, issued by the Income-tax Officer, Special Investigation Circle B, New Delhi, under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), to him personally and also to him and J. Dalmia and S. P. Jain as members of an association of persons be quashed.The petitioner was assessed by the Income-tax Officer, Special Circle, Charge IV, Patna, by assessment order dated March 27, 1950, in respect of his individual income for the year ending September 30, 1947, relevant to the year 1948-49. Notices under section 34(1) (a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, for the assessment years 1940-41 to 1949-50 were also issued to him as also to J. Dalmia, Hindu undivided family and S. P. Jain (in his individual capacity). In th...
Chander Bhalla and ors. Vs. Lakshmam Swarup Bhatnagar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Mar-26-1971
Reported in: ILR1971Delhi504
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) Two important but independent questions arise in this appeal, one being of substance and the other of procedure. (2) The landlords who consist of respondents and one Ram Swarup deceased had filed a suit for eviction against the tenants who consist of the appellants under section 13 of the Delhi and Ajmer Rent Control Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act) on three grounds, namely : (I)subletting (ii) non-payment of rent, and (iii) the personal requirement of the landlords for the occupation of the premises. After the parties had closed their evidence, the statement of the counsel for the tenants was recorded by the Court as follows :- (1) Decree for eviction and for arrears of rent he passed against the tenants in favor of the landlords. (2) The personal requirement of the landlords was admitted by the tenants. and (3) The tenants were to be granted time to vacate the premises till 31-3-1964.The Court thereupon passed a decree in accordance with the statements of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »