Delhi Court August 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.
The Union of India and ors. Vs. Hafiz Mohd. Said, Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-17-1973
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi77; 9(1973)DLT386
Sachar, J.1. This order will dispose of S. C. A. 229 and 235 of 1972.2. This is an application under Article 133 (1) (a) (b) and (c) of the Constitution of India against the judgment of Full Bench dated March 2, 1972.3. In a suit which was being tried by a learned Single Judge of this court under its ordinary original civil jurisdiction, it was held that the suit with respect to two khasra numbers out of four was maintainable. The defendant appellant filed an appeal against this order of the learned Single Judge. The question raised before the Bench was that as the order of the learned Single Judge was not one of those orders which were specified in Section 104 read with Order 43, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appeal was not maintainable. The appellant had, however, contended that the appeal was maintainable in view of Section 10(1) of the Delhi High Court Act (26 of 1966) (hereinafter called the Act) which provided that where a single Judge of the High Court of Delh...
State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-16-1973
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi58; [1974]94ITR496(Delhi)
P.N. Khanna, J.(1) The assessed, the State Trading Corporalion of India Limited, a Government Company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, was engaged during the assessment year 1962-63 for which the previous year ended on March 31, 1962, in amongst its other trading activities, the export of low grade iron ore. Supplies were procured from private mine owners. Some of these supplies were to be procured and shipped from the port of Redi in Maharashtra. The present controversy revolves round the assessed's claim for two of his expenditure items mentioned hereinafter, being allowed as revenue expense. The first item relate to the assessed's proposal to construct a building at Lodi Road, which, however, had to be abandoned as the land meant for the building was acquired by the Government. All the same, the assessed had to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 to Messrs Luc Durrant, Architects, for the preparation of the plan and construction of the building. The assessed claimed this to be re...
Baku Rao Patel Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-1973
Reported in: 1973RLR637
R.N. Aggarwal, J. (1) Babu Rao Patel, Editor and Publisher of a monthly magazine known as 'Mother India,' in his issue for April, 1968, issued an article under the caption 'Lingering Disgrace of History'. The article opens with a dialogue between a visiting American and an Indian. The visiting American expressed his surprise that in Delhi about a dozen roads had been named after Mughal emperors namely, Akbar, Humayun, Tughlak, Aurangzeb and Shahjehan who had slaughtered Hindu men and raped their women. The editor has in the article stated that right from the time of Mohammed Ion Qasim to Mohammed Ali Jinnah, Hindus had given millions of men, women and children as hostages to Islam to buy some peace and preserve their own religion and they were still doing so and that God alone knows how long this process of paying and appeasing Muslims will go on but it cannot go on for long if the family planning designs of the present secular government succeed. Because then pretty soon there would b...
New Data Bus Service (P) Ltd. Vs. Delhi Transport Carporation and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-14-1973
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi8
S.N. Shankar, J.(1) The appellant Messrs New Data Bus Service (P) Ltd., has appealed against the order of the learned single Judge accepting the writ petition filed by Delhi Transport Corporation (respondent No. 1 herein) and quashing the order passed in appeal by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (respondent No. 3 herein) and remanding the matter to be re-heard by the appellate Tribunal in the light of the observations made in the order. Respondent No. 2 in this appeal is Delhi State Transport Authority. (2) The appellant is a private transport operator and operated buses on the Inter-State Delhi-Bhiwani route. The number of stage carriage permits to be issued for this route as agreed to between the States of Haryana and Delhi, through which the route ran, was 16. Out of this, the appellant held 8 permits which were issued to it for three years. Before the expiry of this period, the appellant applied for renewal of the permits. Respondent No. 1, Delhi Transport Corporation...
M.A. Mistry Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1973
Reported in: ILR1973Delhi916
T.P.S. Chawla, J. (1) The sole issue in this is 'WHETHERthe disputes (between the Parties) are within the scope of the arbitration agreement ?'(2) It arises on an application under section 20 of the Arbitration Act 1940 which was agreed to be. tried on affidavits.(3) By a contract of 14th January 1970 the petitioner, M. A. Mistry undertook to supply to the Union of India, the respondent two varieties of canned mutton curried in specified quantities. Deliveries were to be completed by 18th March 1970. There is no dispute that the quantities contracted for were supplied within the time agreed, and that the petitioner was paid in full for the same. That is how the matter rested for a while.(4) Starting with a letter of 27th November 1970, the petitioner received a number of letters till February 1971, from the Assistant Chief Director of Purchase, stating that it had been reported by Q. M. G's Branch (ST7), Army Headquarters, New Delhi that certain quantities of the canned mutton curried ...
Kartar Singh Vs. Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1973
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi82; 1974RLR491
H.L. Anand, J.(1) This revision is directed against an order of the trial Court allowing the respondent's application for amendment of the plaint in the suit instituted by the respondent inter alia, for recovery of possession of the property in dispute from the petitioner. (2) The facts are not in dispute and may be briefly stated. The petitioner has been in occupation of the premises in dispute since September, 1963 on the basis of a letter issued by the respondent the owner of the property, and one of the questions in controversy between the parties is as to the true construction of the letter viz' whether the aforesaid letter can be construed as creating a lease in favor of the petitioner or a mere license in respect of the property in dispute. The suit out of which the revision has arisen was tiled by the respondent on October 29,' 1969 oddly enough for a 'mandatory injunction^ directing the petitioner to vacate the premises in dispute and for recovery of license fee on account of ...
M.S. Datta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-13-1973
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ376Del
Jagjit Singh, J.1. Six writ petitions (Nos. 1231, 1280, 1281, 1299, 1300 and 1301 of 1972) were instituted by certain Additional Commissioners of Income-tax for getting quashed the proceedings of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated September 10, 1971 and October 5, 1972, for selection of officers for officiating promotion to the grade of Commissioners of Income-tax. i Some incidental reliefs were also claimed.2. On April 3, 1973, Shri P.R. Abrol withdrew his petition (No. 1300) as his character roll was upgraded after selections by the Departmental Promotion Committee and a recommendation has been made to the Government for reviewing his case.3. The remaining five writ petitions are being disposed of by a single judgment as the main points involved therein are the same. The petitioners in these five cases have hereinafter, where necessary, been referred to as 'the petitioners'.4. Petition No. 1231 is on behalf of Shri M.S. Datta, Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Mysore, Ba...
Ram Lal Vs. the Competent Authority (Slums) and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-10-1973
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi530
S. Rangarajan, J.(1) This is a petition by the tenant (Ram Lal) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for quashing the order of the Competent Authority (Shri P. R. Varshaneya) dated 3-6-1970, granting permission to the landlord (respondent) under section 19(4) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956 to institute eviction proceedings under the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 against the tenant (petitioner). The petitioner paid during the hearing the arrears of rent and the same was accepted by the landlord in order to remove the impediment which otherwise existed in the matter of this petition being heard. A separate note concerning this has been made in the record and this was done without prejudice to the rights of either side. (2) The Competent Authority has rested his order on the ground that the tenant is possessed of a license for the sale of foodgrains and vegetable oils etc. and 'howsoever petty business in respect of the licensed articles that may be, his ...
B.D. Wadhwa and ors. Vs. Hardyal Devgun and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-1973
Reported in: ILR1973Delhi678
S.N. Andley, J. (1) These are three appeals (L.P.As. Nos. 110 to 112 of 1973) against the common judgment dated April 30, 1973 of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Writs Nos. 682 and 683 of 1972. (2) Civil Writ No. 682 of 1972 was filed by two members of the Governing Body of Maitereyi College, New Delhi, praying, inter alia, for quashing a resolution dated July 16, 1972 passed by the Executive Council of the Delhi University whereby a new Governing Body comprised of persons who are some of the respondents to the petition of the said College which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 was sought to be constituted as a result of which the petitioners and some of the respondents who were appointed as the Governing Body of the said College on November 21, 1970 for a period of three years were sought to be removed as such members. The petitioners also prayed that the new Governing Body and the University of Delhi Along with the Delhi Administration ...
Shish Chand and ors. Vs. Bhagwan Pershad
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-09-1973
Reported in: ILR1973Delhi698; 1973RLR688
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The question referred to this Division Bench is whether the Competent authority holding an inquiry under sub-section (3) of section 19 of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance Act, 1956 is a 'court' within the meaning of section 195(1) (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The question has an importance wider than the present case. For, the Competent authority acting under section 19(3) of the Slum Area (Improvement and Clearance) Act is a quasi-judicial authority. With the march of the statute law and the welfare state in India a large number of administrative authorities have been functioning in a quasi-judicial manner. They are, thereforee, subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution and of the Supreme Court under Article 32 as also to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136. The word 'court' is itself used either in a narrow sense of a civil, criminal or a revenu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »