Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi176
Hardayal Hardy, C.J.(1) The following question of law has been referred to a Full Bench. 'WHETHERin view of Rule 5 of the Investigation of Industrial Undertakings (Procedure) Rules 1967 providing for an opportunity of hearing before the investigator and the absence of any specific provision either in the Act or in the Rules for supplying a copy of the investigator's report to the managernent, the taking over of the industrial undertaking without supplying a copy of the investigator's report is vitiated ?'(2) The question relates to a textile mill owned by Keshav Mills Company Limited, Petlad. The company was incorporated in the year 1935 and has over the years been yielding rich dividends and has been paying large sums of money by way of capital refund and bonus payment.(3) The petitioners claim that the years 1966, 1967 and 1968 were years of grave crisis for the Textile Industry in India as a whole and out of 500 and odd textile mills nearly 80 of them closed down during those years....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 8(1972)DLT470
S. Rangarajan, J.1. The interesting question that falls for decision in this application is whether a liquidator appointed in the course of voluntary winding-up whose remuneration was fixed (at Rs. 3,000) could apply for revising the said remuneration on the ground that the voluntary winding-up, without supervision of the court, has since come under the supervision of the court.2. The Registrar of Companies has pleaded in bar of the application Section 490 of the Companies Act, which reads as follows :490. Power of company to appoint and fix remuneration of liquidators.--(1) The company in general meeting shall- (a) appoint one or more liquidators for the purpose of winding up the affairs and distributing the assets of the company ; and (b) fix the remuneration, if any, to be paid to the liquidator or liquidators. (2) Any remuneration so fixed shall not be increased in any circumstances whatever, whether with or without the sanction of the court. (3) Before the remuneration of the li...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1972Delhi102; 8(1972)DLT151
Sachar, J.(1) The question for decision before us is whether an appeal by the University of Delhi, defendant, lies under Section 10(1) of the Delhi High Court Act (No. 26/66) of 1966 (here in after to be called the Act) against the order of learned single judge of this court holding that the suit for partition of plaintiff's interest in respect of two khasra numbers out of four, was maintainable; the plaintiff has not filed an appeal in respect of other two khasra numbers in respect of which the suit was heldto be not maintainable, in view of the evacuee having interest inthe property.(2) It was not disputed that if an appeal lay only against thoseorders specified in Section 104 read with Order 43 Rule I of theCode of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter to be called the Codethe present appeal would not be maintainable as the impugnedorder is not one of those mentioned in these two provisions.(3) By an Act of the Governor General of India in Council (ActNo. Xxiii of 1865) the Chief Court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1972Delhi108; 8(1972)DLT174
Sachar, J.(1) Certain disputes having arisen between Shri A. S. Dhupia, respondent No. 1, and the Union of India, the appellant, the same were referred to the Arbitration under clause 25 of the Contract Agreement. Before the Arbitrator, respondento. 1 filed his claim. The appellant also filed its counter claim which, however, was rejected by respondent No. 2 on the ground that the counter claim was not maintainable as it was outside the scope of reference. The arbitrator accepted the objection and ordered that he would proceed with the claim of respondent No. 1. Thereafter the appellant filed an application under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter called the Act) in this court. This application was decided by a learned single judge of this court by his order dated 16-1-1970. The Union of India aggrieved against the order filed the present appeal. When this matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench, objection was taken that the appeal was not competent as th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1973Delhi97; 8(1972)DLT267
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) By way of exceptions to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Delhi. Rent Control Act. 1938 (hereinafter called the Act) protecting the tenant against eviction, clauses (a) to (1) of the proviso thereto set out the various grounds on which the landlord would be able to evict a tenant. As pointed out in paragraphs 30 and 31 of Batoo Mal v. Rameshwar Nath, sons of these grounds of eviction arise because of wrongful acts done by the tenant. Clauses (a) to (d),(h) and (j) are such grounds forming class (1). Some other grounds exist for the benefit of the landlord even though the tenant has not done anything wrong. Clauses (e), (g) and (i) are such grounds which form class (II). Under clauses (k) and (1) the landlord is required to act in respect of the premises not at his own instance but at the instance of a public authority and in public interest. These grounds, thereforee, form class (III) as they do not fall into class (1) or class (II). Clause (f) may be covered ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1973Delhi67; 8(1972)DLT199
1. Manmohan Kumar, aged about 28 years, is said to have been knocked down by a D.T.U. Bus No. Dlp 720 on 27-1-1962 on the Pusa Road near Telephone Exchange New Delhi. He sustained severe injuries and dies on the spot. An application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter refereed to as the Act) was filed in the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) by his father and his three brothers claiming compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- for the death of the deceased in the motor accident. According to the averments in this applications, the deceased was traveling on the pillion seat of his scooter No. Dln 3772, driven by one Mohan Lal. The scooter was stopped opposite to Subzimandi on the Pusa Road and both the deceased as well as the scooter drier got down form the scooter and while the deceased was standing on the right side of the scooter, a D.T.U. bus bearing No. Dlp 720 came at a fast speed and knocked down the deceased...
Tag this Judgment!