Delhi Court December 1974 Judgments
Home Cases Delhi 1974 Page 2 of about 17 results (0.010 seconds)Nirlon Synthetic Fibres and Chemicals Ltd. and anr. Vs. R.D. Saxena, D ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-13-1974
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas419(Delhi)
1. On September 30, 1973, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (hereafter called 'the Commission'), issued notice, annexure B, under Regulation 7 of the Restrictive Trade Practices (Inquiry) Regulations, 1970, stating that the Commission had reasons to believe that the companies mentioned in the notice including the petitioners had entered into an agreement on September 9, 1973, and were indulging in restrictive trade practices of the nature specified in the notice. In response, the petitioners filed applications contesting the validity of the notice and, amongst others, urged that the agreement referred to in the notice already had the approval of the Central Government within the meaning of Section 33(3) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (hereafter called 'the Act'), and, thereforee, it was outside the purview of Sections 20 and 37 of the Act. It was further urged that on the face of it the agreement did not operate to result in restrict...
Tag this Judgment!Vashist Bhargava Vs. Income-tax Officer, Salary Circle
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-10-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi634; [1975]99ITR148(Delhi)
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) Two questions are raised by this writ petition. The first relates to the true meaning of the word 'information' in section 147(b) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act' in short). This has received enough attention in judicial decisions to produce a conflict between them. The resulting uncertainty makes further discussion necessary. The second is so fundamental as to require careful consideration to reach a definitive conclusion. It is this :-Can the writ Court refuse to grant the relief to a petitioner on such grounds as (a) his conduct, or (b) he has not suffered any injustice, or (c) that the grant of the relief to him would result in injustice.(2) The petition raising these questions is filed by the petitioner who belonged to the former Indian Civil Service was a former Chief Justice of a High Court and is now a retired Judge of the Supreme Court on the following facts :- The petitioner took a loan of Rs. 65,000 from his Provident Fund as a...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-08-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi817
M.R.A. Ansari, J.(1) The S.H.O., Haus Qazi, Delhi sent a report dated 12-3-1974 to the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kamla Market to the effect that on 11-3-1974 , about 1.00 P.M. the petitioner and some other persons were found standing in batches of two near Farash Khana in which locality a communal riot had occurred some days previously and that they were blaming the members of the opposite community for pausing the riot and were also threatening to use force A against them and to indulge in further rioting. It was also stated in the report that they did not disperse even when asked to do so by the police and that, thereforee, in order to avoid an imminent breach of the peace they were arrested by the police and were being produced before the le,arned Magistrate. It was also stated in the report that proceedings may be instituted against them under section 107 Cr.P.C.(2) On receipt of this report, the learned Magistrate passed orders under section 112 Criminal Procedure Code . read wit...
Tag this Judgment!Azizur Rehman Vs. AminuddIn Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-04-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR199
P.S. Safeer, J.(1) This appeal was admitted to hearing on the 17th of October, 1969, and when the process was issued for being served on respondent No. 4 Ahsanul Rehman, according to the averments in Civil Miscellaneous 1279 of 1970, it came back unserved with the note that he had died. The said application was kent pending by me in terms of the order made on the llth of December, 1972. It is stated in paragraph 3 of the said application that Ahsanul Rehman had died on 11th of July, 1968 and his death was registered five days later in the Corporation on the 16th of July, 1968. The application states that in view of the death of Ahsanul Rehman before the passing of the decree by the court of first appeal the appeal before that court had abated. The application was filed in this court on the 31st of August, 1970. (2) I have heard Bawa Shivcharan Singh in support of the appeal and at my instance he has taken me through the relevant portions of the amended plaint out of which the litigatio...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation Vs. Bhagwan Das
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-03-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR184
Jagjit Singh, J.(1) In a case under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 Bhagwan Dass, son of Chuni La), was acquitted on October 29, 1969. Against the acquittal order the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, with special leave, filed th's appeal. (2) The relevant facts of the case are that on April 9, 1969 Bhagwan Dass was selling curd of cow's milk at shop No. 4219, Jogiwara (Delhi). Food Inspector Soaan Lal Mehra went to the shop, at 8.35 a.m , and purchased 600 grams of curd for puroses of analysis. On one of the parts of the sample curd being analysed by the Public analyst it was reported to be adulterated. The result of the analysis was that fat was 2.21% and non-fatty solids were 11.31% and thus ther; was ''1 22 de- ficiency in fatpercentage which is equivalent to 34.8 percentage deficiency in fat'. (3) During the trial of the complaint against Bhagwan Dass he applied, under section 13(2) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, to the tr...
Tag this Judgment!Asa Nand Vs. Gulab Rai
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-02-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR175
P.S. Safeer, J.(1) This appeal arises out of an application made under section 21 of the Delhi Rent Control Act (Act 59 of 1958) hereinafter called the Act. (2) The application states in paragraph 1 that the applicant who is appellant before me had obtained permission of the Additional Rent Controller Shri S. R. Goel, for letting out the premises comprised in No. 28. Block L. Kirti Nagar, New Delhi and that he had rented out the ground floor to the respondent Gulab Rai for a period of six years beginning with the first of December, 1968 and ending with the 30th Nov., 1974. The monthly rent was fixed at Rs. 350.00. In paragraph 2 the applicant stated that the respondent took the ground floor for the residence and had agreed that he would not sublet the same to any person. The averment is that subject to the said condition and with the permission of the Additional Rent Controller, the present appellant had put the respondent to this appeal in possession of the premises. In paragraph 3 th...
Tag this Judgment!Praveena Bhardwaj Vs. State and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi151
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) The petitioner has made an application for grant of Proliate under S. 276 of the Indian Succession Act. The question which arises for consideration is: what is the point of time or stage when he should be directed to pay court-fee? There is a divergence of judicial opinion. Before noticing the conflict I will first set out the relevant statutory provisions.(2) A petition for the grant of a probate or Letters of Administration is made imdcr Ss. 276 and 278 of the Indian Succession Act. After the petition is made ihe question of court-fee immediately suprings rip. S. 19-1 of the Court Fees Act is the provision around which the controversy centres and it is as follows: '19-1.Payment of Court-fees in respect of probates and letters of administration.-- (1) No order entitling the petitioner to the grant of probate or letters of administration shai! be made upon an application for such grant until the petitioner has filed in the Court a valuation of the property i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›