Delhi Court January 1974 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.
Official Liquidator of Security and Finance P. Ltd. Vs. B.K. Bedi, Etc ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR694; [1991]71CompCas101
Sachar, J.(1) M/S. Security and Finance Private Limited registered under the Companies Act was ordered to be wound up by this Court and on 20-3-1969 an Official Liquidator was appointed its provisional liquidator. The Official Liquidator filed a complaint on 16-7-1969 under Sections 454(5) and (5A) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the Act) on the allegation that though he had issued notice dated 21-4-1969, calling upon respondent No. 1 to submit before him the statement of affairs of the company but they have neither appeared before him nor have they complied with the notice nor the statement of affairs has been filed nor any reasonable excuse for the non-filing has been given. Accordingly it was prayed that this Court be pleased to summon the accused and punish them according to law. During the -pendency of this complaint before the learned Single Judge question arose as to on whom the burden lies to show that there was no reasonable excuse for the respondent for not fil...
Parkash Wanti Vs. Gian Singh Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR293
Rajindar Sachar, J.(1) This is an appeal under Section Hod of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 against the order of the Tribunal by which he has allowed the application and granted a sum of Rs. 19,440.00 to the appellant respondents 1 and 2, but has dismissed it against respondent No. 3. (2) An application was moved by the present appellant No. 1, Smt. Prakash Wati widow of deceased Ram Lal on her behalf and on behalf of the minor children with the allegations that on 20-1-1964 the deceased while going on a cycle met with an accident with a motor scooter bearing registration No. Dlr 2595 and thereafter succumbed to the injury on the same day. It was alleged that the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving on the part of Gian Singh who was driving the scooter. Respondent No. (3) Was alleged to be the owner of the scooter and Respondent No. 3 was M/S Northern India Transporters Insurance Co. with which scooter was claimed to be insured. Respondent No. 3 took objection that the ...
R.M.L. Bhatnagar Vs. Inder Parkash Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR409
P.N. Khanna, J. (1) Shri Inder Parkash, respondent No. 1, was the owner of property No. A-14, Green Park, New Delhi. He applied to the Controller under section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1955, herein called 'the Act' for obtaining permission to let out the entire ground floor of the said house for a limited period of 11 months. On permission being granted on, June 4, 1970, the ground floor was let out to Lt.Col R.M.L. Bhatnagar, the appellant, as a residence for the period expiring, on May 3 1971. Before the said period expired Shri Inder Parkash entered into an agreement dated April 15, 1971 for the sale of the said property, with Bengal Suppliers and Health Builders Private Limited, respondent No. 2. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are the directors of respondent No. 2. (2) While there were still some days for the limited period to expire, a second application under section 21 of the Act was filed by Shri Inder Parkash, jointly with the appellant tenant for permission to let out the ...
NaraIn Das Etc Vs. Day a Narain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR264
B.C. Misra, J. (1) Respondent sued the appellants for eviction. Additional Rent Controller granted eviction order. Appeal was filed without certified copy on 31.1.66. Before this on 28.1.66, copy was ready but appellants were not aware of the same. They obtained copy on 3.266, but did not file the same for about a month as first their counsel and then the counsel's clerk were out of station. They applied for condensation of delay which was declined and they appealed to the High Court and urged two grounds that the delay could have been condoned and that the Tribunal while admitting the appeal should be deemed to have exempted the appellant from filing the certified copy. High court rejected these contentions.] Paras 7 & 8 of the judgment are :- (2) With regard to the second contention, I find that no orders had been obtained from the Tribunal on the application for exemption from filing a certified copy of the order of the Court below. At all events, the appellants prayed that exemptio...
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs. Thakur Shipping Co. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi650
Avadh Behari, J.(1) This case is of contemporary retevance. It is of topical interest. The world oil crisis is the backdrop for this intensely fought case. Against, that background the facts assumed an added significance and immediacy.(2) On February 5, 1973, the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter called the characters) entered into a charterparty agreement with Thakur Shipping Company Limited (hereinafter called the shipowners) for the carriage of oil from Iraq to India. The ship which was hired is known as Varuna Kanchan. It is an oil tanker. 'The charterparty was for a period of 24 months, two weeks more or less at the charterers' option. The period of the charterparty commenced on November 1, 1972, and on that date the vessel was delivered by the shipowners to the charterers. The charterparty provides that the , monthly hire shall be at the rate of Rs. 24 per ton of 20 C.W.T. cm the vessel's total dead weight tonage of 22,994 tons. At this rate the monthly hire comes to Rs...
Kanwal Shamsher Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi429; [1974]95ITR80(Delhi)
S.N. Shankar, J. (1) On February 2, 1973 an officer of the Income-Tax Department duly authorised by the Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi (Central) under section 132(1) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act)' carried out search of the residence of the petitioner. He sealed a steel almirah in the premises. A list of articles found in the almirah was prepared and they were put in two packets and sealed. During the search he also found keys of two lockers of the Delhi Safe Deposite Company. One of these lockers No. 2046 stood in the name of the petitioner and the other, bearing No. 1799, was in the joint names of the petitioner and her daughter Mrs. Mala Singh. Both these lockers were scaled. On February 7, 1973 the lockers were opened in the presence of the petitioner and inventories of their contents were prepared and orders under sub-section (3) of section 132 were issued to the Bank restraining it from parting with or allowing the contents to be removed. Sub-section ...
Dev Raj Malhotra Etc. Vs. D.D. Bhargava
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-14-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR107
P.S. Safeer, J.(1) This petition is directed by an order made by Shri Lokeshwar Prasad. Judicial Magistrate, Delhi on 26.2.1973 U/S 213 of the Criminal Procedure Code hereafter called the 'Code'. (2) A complaint had been instituted before the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Madras on 12.12.1962 against 8 parsons and the three petitioners before me were amongst them. Supreme Court transferred the complaint to Delhi and the District Magistrate directed in the first instance Shri Amba Prakash Magistrate, Delhi to deal with it. Thereafter various Magistrates dealt with the proceedings. The Prosecution produced 61 witnesses for the purpose of establishing a prima facie case in order to persuade that the accused be committed for trial by the Higher Court. Two of the accused persons K. E. Naido and Jagat Singh died during the course of the proceedings before the Court below. (3) I have perused the impugned order. As from paragraph 2 onwards the case set up against the accused is noticed and it i...
Madan Lal Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR104
P.S. Safeer, J. (1) This judgment will dispose of Cr. R. No. 304 and 308 of 1973 which present an identical aspect. The petitioner in both the petitions is Madan Lal. One of these petitions arises out of the allegation that on 22-3-1973 while driving mini bus No.DLP 4848 Madan Lal was stopped at about 2-30 p.m. and the challenging officer submitted to Shri M R. Gupta, the averments contained in a printed form being No. 3604. He alleged that he had found Madan Lal driving the vehicle with 24 passengers in it while only 18 passengers could have been carried by the mini bus. The alleged offence mentioned in the printed form submitted to the Magistrate, was; 4.38 (7) 112'. It was not stated in ink that 4.38 (7) 112, were the provisions contained in any particular enactment. In the printed portion I find :- 'AND request that action be taken under the provisions of sections/rules M.V.A / D.M.V. Rules 1940 against him.'(2) The other petition arises out of the allegation that Madan Lal was sto...
Jagatjit Industrial Corporation Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR286
Prakash Narain, J. (1) M/S. Jagatjit Industrial Corporation describing itself in the heading of the plaint as a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, and carrying on business as Re-Rollers, Founders & Fabricators, at Kapurthala filed a suit against Union of India and two others for recovery of Rs. 29,000.00. In the body of the plaint no further particulars of the partnership were given. It seems that the suit was filed in the name of the partnership firm by virtue of the provisions of Order 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (2) I.A. 113 of 1973 has now been move & under Order 22 rule 3 Civil Procedure Code for bringing on record as plaintiffs the legal representatives of Ved Prakash, one of the partners. In this application it is stated that the plaintiff-firm was constituted by three persons as partners, namely, Jagat Prakash, Jai Prakash and Ved Prakash. Jagat Prakash and Jai Prakash are stated to have died earlier and Ved Prakash is stated to have died on October 20, 19...
State Vs. Surindar Mohan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-11-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR109
P.S. Safeer, J.(1) This petition preferred by the State which raises the grievance that Surinder Mohan respondent should also have been charged U/S. 224 of the I. P. C. discloses an exceptional aspect and I am exercising the powers suo motu provided by section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, hereafter called the 'Code'. (2) The allegations against Surinder Mohan, respondent Sudhir Kumar and Rajeev Kumar were that while Surinder Mohan was in hand-cuffs on the 13th of September, 1971 Sudhir Kumar and Rajeev Kumar approached the constable in whose custody Surinder Mohan was and interfered in order to rescue him. It was alleged that Surinder Mohan also attempted to escape. In order to decide whether the charge was to be framed or not, the learned Magistrate was to act in accordance with section 251-A of the Code He passed an order on the 22nd of August, 1972 by which he discharged Surinder Mohan and decided that charges be framed against Sudhir Kumar and Rajeev Kumar under sections 332...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »