Delhi Court January 1973 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.
Pearey Lal Sethi Vs. State Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1973
Reported in: ILR1973Delhi789; 1973RLR161
Safeer, J.(1) This petition has come up in consequence of an order made by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi on the 17th November, 1972 in exercise of the jurisdiction given by section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, hereafter called 'the Code'. (2) The circumstances out of which it arises may be noticed. The petitioner and respondent No. 2 Amar Nath Gupta are residing in adjoining properties. On the 21st of June, 1971 a report was submitted by the police that there was a dispute between the petitioner and respondent Amar Nath Gupta in respect of a door pertaining to house No. 1980 in possession of the petitioner which opens towards Bhagirath Palace and that there was imminent apprehension of breach of peace. There was a recommendation in the police report that the door be sealed. On receiving the report, the concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate was to act in accordance with section 145 of the Code. The relevant provisions are sub-sections (1) and (4) of section 145 of the Code, which...
Krishan Chander Vs. Chhail Sehan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-30-1973
Reported in: 1973RLR271
P.N. Khanna, J. (1) The only point involved in this appeal is whether the appellant-tenant's application for fixation of standard rent is within time. In May, 1941, the premises consisting of four rooms, verandah and a garage, were let out by the respondent landlord to the appellant of Rs. 536 per month. The landlord filed a suit for eviction, which was decreed on February 7, 1957 Subsequently, the tenant surrendered two rooms and the garage to the landlord. On March, 31, 1962, the respondent landlord gave back to the appellant one room and a new tenancy in respect of three rooms commenced with effect form 1st April, 1962, at Rs. 70 per month as rent. On April 23, 1962, the landlord filed an application for execution of this eviction decree, dated February 7, 1957, which was dismissed, the court holding that a fresh tenancy had been created after the eviction decree. On July 27, 1965, the landlord's appeal against the said order was also dismissed. (2) The appellant-tenant then filed a...
Sada Ram Vs. Delhi Development Authority
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi35; 1973RLR295
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) Inherent powers u/s 151 are similar to an order as court thinks fit u/0.7 R 10, Civil Procedure Code . (2) Plaintiff filed a suit against the D.D.A. on l7.5.71 for injunction against demolition of his shops. Defendant appeared on 3.6.71 and did not file written statement and did not do so for several hearings and ultimately Court refused further opportunity on 13.1.72 and fixed case for plaintiff's evidence for 29.1.72. Some witnesses were examined on that day and case was adjourned for rest of witnesses to 3 3.72. On this day, defendant applied for permission to file written statement pleading that office file had been misplaced and that caused the delay. Defendant was allowed to do so oal4.11.72on payment of Rs. 50 as costs. The plaintiff challenged this order by revision U/S 115, Civil Procedure Code High Court examined the scope of S. 115 and dismissed the petition. Para 3 onwards the judgment is :- (3) The word 'case' does not refer necessaarily to the case a...
The Industrial Finance Corporation of India Vs. Delhi Administration a ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-29-1973
Reported in: [1973(27)FLR207]; ILR1973Delhi29; 1974LabIC223
T.V.R. Tatachari, J. (1) This Letters Patent Appeal filed against the judgment of a learned single Judge (V.S. Deshpande, J.) of this Court, dated March 21, 1972, dismissing Civil Writ Petition No. 1060 of 1971, came up before S.N. Andley, C.J., and T.P.S. Chawla, J. in the first instance. Two connected questions viz., (1) whether the appellant, the Industrial Finance Corporation of India, which was established under the Industrial Finance Corporation Act, 1948, is an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and (2) whether promotion of an employee of the appellant Corporation is a managerial function and is not, thereforee, covered by the definition of 'industrial dispute' under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, are involved in the appeal. The Division Bench considered that there was some conflict in the various decisions cited before them on the first question, and that the second question also was of sufficient importance to be dealt with by a larg...
Kuldip Singh Vs. Krishan Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-25-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi111; 9(1973)DLT250; 1973RLR288
1. On 11th October, 1972, when S. A. O. 192 of 1972 was taken up for arguments, a contention was raised by Shri Gopal Narain Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 that, the said appeal was barred by limitation. That being so, the learned counsel for the Petitioner after obtaining time, filed an application (C. M. 1128-J of 1972) under Section 38(2) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (herein to be called 'the Act') read with Rule 23 of the Rules framed under the Act and Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condensation of delay in filing the certified copy of the order of the Additional Rent Controller (herein to be called 'the Controller').2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11th April, 1972, passed by Shri Gian Chand Jain. Rent Control Tribunal, Delhi. Along with the appeal an application under Order 42, Rule 2 read with Section 151, Civil P.C. was filed seeking exemption from filing the certified copy of the order dated 30th October. 1969, Passed by the Con...
Kuldip Singh Vs. Krishna Kumar and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-25-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi145
1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these two appeals, it would be convenient to dispose them of by a single judgment.2. The brief facts relevant for deciding these appeals are that Smt. Abnash Kaur and two others, appellants in S. A. O. No. 194 of 1972 and against Krishan Kumar, who is respondent in both these appeals, in respect of premises shop No. Ii in building No. 16-A/20, Western Extension Area, Karol Bagh, New Delhi on the ground that Kuldip Singh had sub-let the premises in question to Krishan Kumar without obtaining consent in writing from the landladies. An ex parte eviction order was passed to the said petition by Shri P. K. Bahri. Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, on 15th February, 1968. Krishan Kumar filed and application for setting aside the said ex parte order. The ex parte order was set aside by the Additional Rent Controller by his order dated the 22nd October, 1989. From the record it appears that the landladies had in the meantime taken out ...
National Metal Craft Co. Vs. Ratan Steel Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1973
Reported in: 1973RLR403
H.L. Anand, J. (1) This is a petition under section 8, 9, 10, 11 and 20 of the Arbitration Act. (2) The facts are not in dispute and may be briefly stated. On or about August 25, 1970, defendant No. 1 entered into an agreement of lease with the petitioner and its partners who are cited as respondents 3 to 5 in respect of the factory premises known as 'Rattan Steel Ltd.' situated in village Lohta Dehat Amanat in the District of Varanasi consisting of lands and plants, machineries and other equipments in working and running condition as detailed in schedule annexed to the lease deed, which was duly registered with the Sub Registrar at Varanasi. The lease was for a period of three years with effect from July 1, 1970, with, a renewal option on the same terms and conditions. The lease deed contained an arbitration clause. (3) It appears that some disputes arose between the parties touching the various questions with regard to the rights and obligations of the parties flowing from the lease ...
inderpal Singh Hassanwalia Vs. Bir Tibbtan Woollen Mills, Chowgan and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi95
Avadh Behari, J. (1) This is an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. The material facts as stated in the application are these.(2) The petitioner is the sole proprietor of Wool World (India). The respondents I and 2 entered into an agreement dated 10th of March, 1969 with the petitioner. By this agreement the petitioner was appointed the sole selling agent of blankets and other wollen textiles produced by respondent No. 1 for a period of five years. Copy of this agreement is set out as annexure ' A ' to the petition. According to the terms of this agreement the mills agreed to produce various kinds of blankets, tweeds, yarn and other textiles excluding mufflers as per instructions and requirements of the petitioner. The minimum production of the mills was to he of the order of Rs. .15 lakhs a commission of 5% was to be paid to the petitioner ower the difference between the actual value of the produced material and the agreed minimum value of Rs. 15 lakhs. It is not nece...
Indian Mutual General Insurance Society Ltd. Vs. Himalaya Finance and ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-22-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi114; 1973RLR430
ORDER1. This Judgment will dispose of nine Civil Revisions (Nos. 376. 382. 440. 443, 444, 489, 649 and 650 of 1968 and 34 of 1969), raising common question of law. Two parties in all the revisions are the same while the third party is different. Messrs Indian Mutual General Insurance Society Limited is the petitioner in all these cases and is hereinafter referred to as the insurer or the Insurance company. Messrs Himalaya Finance and Construction Company is the contesting respondent and is hereinafter referred to as the owners or as the finance company. The other respondents in the cases are various hirers.2. The material facts of the case are that the finance company owned a number of motor vehicles which it let out on hire to hirers under hire-purchase agreements. These vehicles were insured by the hirers with the insurance company and an endorsement No. 10 relating to the payment of the insurance money to the owners was effected in all the cases and the construction and legal effect...
Partap Chand JaIn (Decd.) and ors. Vs. Bibbo Devi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-22-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi129
1. This defendant's second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Delhi, dated 20th July, 1966 by which he has dismissed the appeal and maintained the decree of the Court of first instance dated 13th August, 1965 decreeing against the defendant appellant the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of rent/damages for use and occupation for the period from 1st September, 1958 to 8th November, 1958 at the rate of Rs. 16/- per month and for the period from 9th November, 1958 to 31 st July 1961 at the rate of Rs. 31/- per month.2. The facts giving rise to the dispute are that the appellant was a tenant in respect of the, premises in dispute situated in Kucha Lattu Shah, Dariba Kalan, Delhi on a contract rent of Rupees 22.50 per month. Lachhoo Mal, the previous owner of the property, on 30th August, 1954, instituted a suit against the appellant herein for eviction and recovery of rent at the rate of Rs. 22.50 per month from 1st January, 1952 to 31...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »