Delhi Court May 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.
P.C. Aggarwal Vs. K.N. Khosia Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-22-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi54; 1974RLR596
T.V.R. Tatachari and V.S. Deshpande, JJ. (1) [APPELLANT carried on forward transactions in stock and shares through respondent No. 1 who was a member of Delhi Stock Exchange Association. Contract note between them contained arbitration clause that disputes would be settled a :cording to Rules of the Association. Respondent No. 1 appointed his arbitrator and on appellant's, failure, President of Association appointed his Arbitrator. Appellant challenged the award given by them as unilateral. Single Judge held against the appellant and he filed appeal against the same. The D.B. observed that definitions of 'agreement' and 'reference' in S. 2(2) and (e) of the Act of 1940 are not without significance Para 9 onwards the judgment is ; (2) It is to be noted, however, that the definition of 'arbitration agreement' in the Act of 1949 is precisely the same as the definition of 'submission' in the Act of 1899. How is it then that the definition of 'arbitration agreement' in the Act of '940 is th...
Lala Ram Vs. Kalawati
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-21-1974
Reported in: 10(1974)DLT349
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.(1) This is a tenant's appeal against the concurrent judgments of the Additional Rent Controller and the Tribunal ordering ejectment of the appellant under Proviso (e) to section 14(1) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1938 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), (2) The facts of the case are that the respondent landlady filed the prevent petition for eviction of the appellant from the premises in dispute on the ground that the premises in dispute were let out to the tenant-appellant for residence and that now the premises are bona- fide required for herself and for her only daughter who is married and is residing with the respondent depending on her. It. was pleaded by the respondent that she has only one room, one Kotha, one kitchen on the first floor of the building which is also occupied by the appellant and besides herself her daughter Along with three children and her husband was also residing with the respondent and that the respondent does not have any reasonabl...
The Bullion Merchants Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: 11(1975)DLT136
R. Sachar, J.(1) This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenges provisions of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, being Parliament Act 45 of 1968 (hereinafter called the Act). (2) Petitioner No. 1is a registered Association and its members are dealers in bullions. The Petitioner No. 2 claims to be the President of the Association. Subesquently, other members of the Association have also been imp leaded as petitioners to the present petition. (3) The petitioners are traders who deal in gold and silver bullion. Though in the writ petition challenage was made on a number of grounds and to many provisions of the Act. Mr. Aggarwal, appearing for the petitioners has confined his challenge to the following sections, namely. Section 10, Section 16(7), Section 27(7)(a);(8)(b). Section 28, Section 30, Section 35, Section 89. This was done advisedly, because subsequent to the filing of this writ petition, the Supreme Court had occasion to consider the validity of the A...
Glamour Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-17-1974
Reported in: (1975)ILLJ514Del
B.C. Misra, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Central Government dated 26th August, 1966, by which it has rejected the reference of the petitioner under Section 19A of the Employees' Provident Fund Act as well as the order of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner dated 2nd March, 1966, calling upon the petitioner to enroll the employees in dispute and to pay all arrears of provident fund dues in their respect.2. The Materials facts of the case are that the 'petitioner (which is owned by a private limited company), deals in sales of sarees under its name and style 'Glamour' at Connaught Place New Delhi. There is scarcely any dispute with regard to its being covered under the scheme of Employees' Provident Fund, and Family Pension Fund Act, 1952, and its own employees appear to have been enrolled under the scheme. The main dispute between the parties briefly stated, however, is that there is one V.S. Kartar Chand, respondent No. 3, who, at the material time,...
Municipal Corporation Vs. Bhagwan Dass
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR588
Yogeshwar Dayal (1) [PLAINTIFF'S shop is in Bapa Nagar. He was served with notice U/S 317 that hs shop is an encroachment on the street and he should remove the same. He filed suit for injunction that he built the shop in 949 when Bapa Nagar was an unapproved colony and there were no roads or streets and hence he had not caused any encroachment, Trial court dismissed the suit but senior sub-judge in appeal decreed the suit. Corporation appealed to High Court. Its plea that senior sub-judge had no jurisdiction to hear appeal was not entertained as no objection was taken to that effect before the S.S.J.] Para 5 onwards, judgment is:- (2) Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the plaintiff respondent submitted that the burden of proving that there was a street where upon some encroachment has been made which was the basis for giving the notice in question under section 317 of the Act was on the Corporation. It was also submitted that the Corporation has all the best evidence in its possession to...
Shiv Ram Das Vs. State and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-15-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR380
P.S. Safeer, J. (1) This petition is directed against the order made by Shri R. Narayan, S. D. M., Sadar Bazar, Delhi, on 15th Oct., 1973. The order was passed in exercise of jurisdiction provided by S. 145 of the code of Criminal Procedure. S. 145(1) of the code is :-(......) (2) In order to exercise the jurisdiction the Magistrate in the first instance has to be satisfied that there is immediate apprehension of breach of peace in respect of any immovable property. If he is not satisfied, he may yet pass any order under the provision. If, on the other hand, he is satisfied that there is apprehension of breach of peace, he is to pass an order in writing and in that event the order is to contain a statement of the grounds on. which the satisfaction of the Magistrate is based. The requirement is imperative. Howsoever brief the grounds have to be stated. Apart from all case law concerned with the interpretation of section 145(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I have come across a star...
Ram Lal Anand Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas307(Delhi); ILR1974Delhi588; 1974RLR534
P.N. Khanna, J. (1) This is an appeal under section 483 of the Companies Act No. 1, of 1956, herein called 'the Act', directed against the judgment of the learned company Judge, who, while disposing of an application of Bank of Baroda, respondent No. 1 herein, under section 392 of the Act, directed the official Liquidator to sell the property in dispute by public auction and further directed Mr. R. L. Anand, the appellant, to execute all the necessary documents including the conveyance deed, as may be required to complete the sale.(2) The property in dispute is No. 88, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi, which Mr. R. L. Anand, the appellant claims as his, white Messrs Anand Finance Private Limited, herein referred to as 'the company' claims as belonging to it. 'The company had been enjoying certain cash credit facilities from the respondent Bank since 1959. In January, 1966 an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds of the property was created in favor of the Bank by way of additional securi...
H.K. Agnihotri Vs. Delhi High Court and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-14-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi450
H.L. Anand, J.(1) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, a permanent Assistant Superintendent ] to the District and Sessions Judge, Delhi who, on the date of the presentation of the petition was posted as Head Copyist. in charge Copying Agency (Sessions) Delhi, challenges an order made by the then Chief Justice of this Court, appointing respondents Nos. 3 and 4 as Superintendents to the District and Sessions Judge on the ground that the then Chief Justice of this Court was not competent to make the appointments and that the appointment was made in disregard of the material provisions of the Rules framed in that behalf and the questions that this petition raises is as to the correct interpretation of the term 'Hon'ble Judges of the High Court' and the true effect and import of the system of enrolment of candidates and constitution of a panel provided for by the said Rules.(2) The facts and circumstances leading to the present petition are not in...
Vijay Kumar Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-09-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR223
R.N. Aggarwal, J. (1) Vijay Kumar Bindra, appellant herein, was tried in the court of Shri O.P. Singla, Addl. Sessions Judge, on the charge under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code, The Addl. Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence charged with and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and a fine to undergo R.I. for six months. (2) Broadly the case for the prosecution is this : On May 1, 1969, Dsp Daryao Singh (PW 6) received information that a person trafficking in foreign currency is likely to visit Chandni Chowk area, Public Witness 6 organized a raiding party consisting of Dr. Jai Kishan Sod (PW 3) and Dwarka Das (PW 11), witnesses from the public, besides some Police officials. At about 8 30 P.M., on the pointing out of the informer, Vijay Kumar was accosted and apprehended by Public Witness 6. Vijay Kumar was carrying a ladies' rexine bag. The bag was slung on the shoulder. On search of the bag, 88 Pakistan currency notes (Ex, P1 to P 88), five or s...
R.B. Suraj Bhan Vs. Dewan Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-08-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi581
Prakash Narain, J.(1) This first appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated September 30, 1963 of the Commercial Sub Judge 1st Class, Delhi, whereby the suit of the respondent/plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 53,000.00with costs was decreed against the appellant/defendant. (2) The suit was filed by the respondent under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure on the basis of a promissory note (Exhibit P. 2) for a sum of Rs. 50,000.00 carrying interest at 6 per cent per annum payable to the respondent on demand, executed by the appellant on May 25, 1961. The amount of Rs. 50,000.00 is said to have been paid to the appellant by the respondent by means of a cheque for Rs. 50,000.00 (Exhibit P.I/I). In token of receipt of the said amount the appellant is stated to have executed a receipt (Exhibit P. 3). The appellant applied fct and was granted leave to appear and defend the suit conditional on famishing security. This has been done. The pleas taken up by the appellant in defense...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »