Delhi Court February 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.
Darshan Singh Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1082
P.S. Safeer, J.1. The appellant has come up against his conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for which he has been sentenced to 314 years rigorous imprisonment by the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi.2. The allegations by the prosecution were that on the 9th of July, 1971, the appellant had brought his mother-in-law Kaushilya Devi from Hansi to Delhi. She was taken to the shop of P.W. 9 Mahinder Lal where she sat for a while. The appellant is then alleged to have come with a cycle and he took her away on that cycle. It was alleged that at a lonely spot to which she was taken the appellant inflicted injuries with an iron rod which on medical examination were found serious. The appellant then decamped. After regaining consciousness the lady who appeared at the trial as P.W. 10, was seen by P.W. 6, with blood oozing out from her head and one of her eyes bulging out. She was saying that she had been brought from Hansi by her son-in-law. According to the prosecution P.W. 10...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Shanti Prakash
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1086
Jagjit Singh, J.1. Shri Shanti Prakash, who has a grocery shop at No. 91, Sammon Bazar, Jangpura Bhogal, Delhi, was tried by Miss S. Saini, Judicial Magistrate First Class, for an offence under Section 7 read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954. On April 23, 1971, the learned trial Magistrate acquitted the accused. Against the order of acquittal the present appeal was filed, with special leave obtained under provisions of Section 417 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. On August 22, 1969, at about 6 p. m., Shri O. P. Khurana, a Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, after observing the necessary formalities, purchased 450 grams of chilies powder from the accused-respondent, for purposes of analysis. The sample thus taken was divided into three parts and on the next day one of the parts was delivered for analysis to the Public Analyst. The Public Analyst caused that part of the sample to be analysed on September 6, 1969 and in his report ...
Tara Chand Rampal Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1346
P.S. Safeer, J.1. This appeal has beer preferred against the judgment made by Shri O. P. Singla. Special Judge, Delhi on the 31st of May, 1972, in terms where the appellant was convicted under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and was held guilty of criminal misconduct within the meaning of Section 5 (1) (c) and (d) read with Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. hereinafter called 'the Act.' In respect of his conviction under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code the appellant was sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rupee 500/- in default of payment whereof he was to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. Identical sentence and fine were imposed in respect of his conviction under Section 5 (2) of the Act. The sentences were to run concurrently.2. The prosecution alleged that at the time of the commission of the offences the appellant was working as second-in-command (2/IC) in the 39th Battalion of the Central Reserve Police at Silchar as be...
Rajinder Kumar JaIn Vs. H.C. Arora and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-14-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Delhi221
ORDER1. In this writ petition, the order of the Competent Authority Passed under Section 19(4) of the Slum Areas (Improvement and Clearance) Act, 1956, granting permission to the respondent landlord to file a petition for the eviction of the petitioner-tenant has been challenged under the following circumstances. In the petition filed before the Competent Authority, the landlord sought the Permission 'to file a petition for eviction against the tenant and averred that the tenant possessed means to secure alter native accommodation if he were to be evicted.The tenant denied the allegations of the landlord and averred that his income was only Rs. 300/- to Rs. 350/ Per month and he could not find alter native accommodation if he were to be evicted. The facts established were as follows. The tenant had a license to manufacture drugs and cosmetics. The tenant said that he was manufacturing Jexona Lacto-Calamine but a Bombay firm filed a suit against him and in that litigation his manufactur...
Surinder Kumar Vs. the State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-13-1974
Reported in: 11(1975)DLT44
P.S. Safeer, J. (1) The petitioner was tried Along with three others for having allegedly committed the offence under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereafter called 'the Act' While aceused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 were acquitted the petitioner .was convicted under the afore mentioned provisions and sentenced to 9 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3000.00 in default of payment whereof he was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months. Against his conviction in terms of the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Delhi on the 16th of February, 1971, the petitioner went up in appeal. Before the Appellate Court on the 4th of May, 1972, the petitioner being personally preseat he made the following statement which was taken down on the record and signed :- 'STATEMENT of the appellant: I do not challenge my conviction under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. I pray for leniency. R.O. an...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Mohan Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1974
Reported in: 11(1975)DLT191
M.R.A. Ansari, J. (1) The Municipal Corpora corporation Delhi filed a complaint against the petitioner for an offence under sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with the allegation that on 8th December, 1966, the. petitioner had sold Ladoo to the Food Inspector of the Corporation which on analysis was found to beadulterated due to the use of unpermitted colour. The petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge framed against him and prayed for a lenient sentence on the ground that he was a patient. His plea was supported by. a medical certificate. The learned Magistrate also found from the appearance of the petitioner that his condition was deteriorating. In view of the special circumstances, the learned Magistrate while convicting the petitioner under sections 7/16 of the Act passed a sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. l,200.00 . (2) The Municipal Corporation filed a revision i.i the Court of...
Davinder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-11-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi400
Prithvi Raj, J. (1) This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeals No. 165 of 1971 (in re : Davinder Singh v. State) 171 of 1971 (in rc : Suraj Mal v. State) and 48 of 1972 (in re : State- Delhi Administration v. Ram Narain) as these three appeals arise out of the judgment dated December 8, 1971, of Shri Muni Lal Jain, Special Judge, Delhi.(2) Davinder Singh appellant in Cr. A. 165/71 who was working in August, 1969 as S.H.O. Police Station Sadar, Panipat, Suraj Mal appellant in Cr. A. 171/71, who was posted as constable in August, 1969, in Police Station Sadar, Panipat, and Ram Narain, respondent in Cr. A. 48 of 1972 who was working as Prosecuting Sub-Inspector in District Karnal, were tried by Shri Muni Lal Jain, Special Judge, Delhi, under section 5(l)(d) read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and under section 161 Indian Penal Code read with section 34 Indian Penal Code on the allegation that Davinder Singh had accepted Rs. 150.00 and Suraj Mal and Ram Nar...
Hari Shankar Gupta Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi771; 1974RLR335
H. L. Anand, J.(1) The question that arises in this appeal under Section 39 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 (hereinafter called 'the High Court Act') is as to its maintainability either under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act or under Section 10 of the High Court Act or under clause 10 of the letters Patent. The appeal has been filed in the following circumstances : (2) The appellant had entered into a contract with the Regional Director (Food), Northern Region, New Delhi for handling/transporting work at Central Storage Depot, Shahjahanpur. The contract contained an arbitration clause and pursuant to certain disputes that arose between the parties, the same were referred to an Arbitrator in terms of the contract who, by an Award made on December 6, 1966 awarded a sum of Rs. 78.212.20 in favor of the appellant. On the same day, the Arbitrator issued a notice to the appellant and the Union of India, resp...
Kulwant Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR195
Pritam Singh Safeer, J. (1) This petition is directed against the judgment made by Shri M.K. Chawla, Additional Session Judge, Delhi on the 2nd of September, 1972 by which he affirmed the petitioner's conviction under section 61 (1) (c) of the Punjab Excise Act and declined to interfere with the sentence imposed by the trial- Court. I have gone through the record and I find that there was no competent appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who could have dismissed the appeal on the ground that so competent appeal has been preferred. (2) The petitioner was invicted by Shri P.P. Sharma, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Delhi in terms of his judgment made on the 15th of May, 1972. The 'allegation against the pettioner was that on the 9th of January, 1968 a raiding party formed by Shri A.L. Chadha, Inspector, Crime Branch, Delhi Police had found the petitioner working a still in his premises i.e. ihuggi No. B/641 J.J. Colony, New Delhi. After discussing the evidence produced by...
Delhi Flour Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-08-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi749; [1974]95ITR151(Delhi)
M.R.A. Ansari, J. (1) The following two questions have been referred to this Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act:- 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the loss of Rs. 66,417.00 was allowable under section 10(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 or could be set off against the company's profits of the business under proviso (a) to Explanationn 2 of section 24(1) of the said Act? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Rs. 52,633.00 claimed as business expenditure for assessment year 1957-58 and Rs. ll,578.00 claimed as such for assessment year 1958-59 under section 10(2) (xv) of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1922, have rightly been disallowe ?(2) The facts relevant to the first question may now be stated. M/s. Delhi Flour Mills Co. Ltd., New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the assessed) ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »