Delhi Court June 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.
S.L. Verma Vs. the Delhi Flour Mills Company Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: [1975]45CompCas33(Delhi); 11(1975)DLT226
D.K. Kapur, J. (1) This is a petition under Section 237 of the Companies Act, 1956, (hereinafter called the Act) instituted by a shareholder of M/s Delhi Flour Mills Company Limited, which prays for an order by the Court directing that the affairs of the said company, M/s. Delhi Flour Mills Company Limited, be investigated by an Inspector appointed by the Central Government. Five other persons have been joined as repondents to the petition. They are the Managing Director of the company, two other Directors of the company. Shri R. P. Jain (Chief Executive of the Company) and the Secretary of the Company law Board. Notice of this petition was given to the first five respondents as well as the Registrar of Companies. Later, notice was also given to the Central Government on whose behalf Shri H. S. Bhatia, Assistant Registrar of Companies, appeared. He also appeared on behalf of the Registrar of Companies. Shri H.S. Bhatia stayed that the Central Government was not making any representatio...
Balbir Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR563
Yogeshwar Dayal, J. (1) Appellant is running a 'dhaba' at Gandhi Nagar. A sample of 'Haldi' was taken from him which on analysis was found to be adulterated. After trial he was convicted which was maintained by the Sessions Court and the filed revision in the High Court. Para 7 onwards the judgment is : (2) The submission of Mr. Soni, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the standard of Haldi powder is in two parts. The first part relates to the purity of standard and the second part relates to the quality of standard and thus the offence, if any, is covered by section 2(i)(1). This submission is fallacious for more than one reason. Firstly, as will be noticed, the heading of Appending B shows that what has been prescribed is not only the standard of quality but also the definition of the article. The first part of the standard is. the definition part and the second part is explicitly the standard of the powder. Secondly, the case cannot possibly fall under clause (1). It relates...
Dunlop (India) Ltd. Vs. B.D. Gupta and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: ILR1974Delhi596; 1975LabIC702
Rajindar Sachar, J.(1) The question that arises in this writ petition is whether it is open to the union to agree and settle Industrial Dispute pending before a Labour Court regarding termination, of the services of an individual employee even when he is not agreeable to such settlement and is in fact opposed to it. (2) This writ petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the order of the Presiding Officer, Additional Labour Court respondent No. 1 by which it rejected the application of the petitioner management and held that the settlement dated 23-10-1971 made between the petitioner company and respondent No. 3, the Dunlop Rubber Company (India) Ltd. Delhi Branch Employees Union through the Secretary is not binding on respondent No. 2, Khushi Ram Aggarwal, employee and accordingly a 'No dispute Award' cannot be passed. (3) By its letter dated 30-6-1970 the petitioner company informed respondent No. 2 that his services are terminated with immediate effect and that he ...
Janak Kumari and anr. Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: 11(1975)DLT215
Rajindar Sachar, J. (1) This petition under Arh'cle 226 of the Constitution of India raises a question of the interpretation of the Passports Act, 1967 (herein called the Act). (2) Petitioner No. 1 married respondent No. 3 somotirnes in February, 1962. After marriage the husband respondent No. 3 went toUSA. Petitioner No. 1 also went and statyed with her husband for about six months there Subsequently petitioner No. 1 came back to India and adaughter (petitioner No.2)was born to her in 1963 Respondent No. 3, husband continued to live in USA.. till 1970 when he came to India, (3) On 15th February, 1971 petitioner No. 1 obtained order under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be called the code) wherein she was awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500p.m being Rs. 350.00 for petitioner No. 1 and Rs 150.00 for the petitioner No. 2 This order, was confirmed by the magistrate on 23rd October, 1971. (4) Respondent No 3 holds passport. Section 10(3)(e) and (h) of t...
Balraj Madhok and ors. Vs. Registrar of Co-operative Societies and ors ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: 11(1975)DLT238
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) Can a person who has a house or land for building a house in Delhi continue to remain a member of a house building co-operative society in Delhi This question which may affect many persons besides the petitioners arises for decision in this writ petition.(2) The petitioners became members of the Shakti Co-operative House Building Society (Respondent 3), a body registered under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925 as applied to Delhi, prior to 1968. Under section 71(2)(c) and (d) of the said Act, the Chief Commissioner could make rules prescribing the matters in respect of which a society may make bye-laws and also prescribing the conditions to be complied with by persons applying for admission or admitted as members. The admission and the continuance of the petitioners as members of the society was governed by the bye-laws of the society framed in 1959. Those bye-laws did not prohabit a person who had a house or land on which a house could be built in Delh...
O.L., Acme Finance P. Ltd. Vs. Krishan Gopal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR170
D.K. Kapur, J.(1) [M/S Acme Finance P. Ltd. was ordered to be wound up on 7.2.69. Its directors were required to submit statement of affairs within 21 days which they failed to do in spite of notice. Complaint was filed against them. As respondent no. 5 was not being served she was given up. Respondents no. 1 to 3 pleaded that they had ceased to be Directors long before and hence were unable to file statement of affairs. Respondents 4 and 6 were given repeated opportunities to file the statement but they failed to do so. They were held guilty.] (2) It appears to me that there are, as reproduced above and discussed earlier numerous orders consisting of directions by this Court to the accused to file the statement of affairs. No statement of affairs has been filed inspire of these directions. I, thereforee, find that there is no reason to hold that the accused are not guilty of an offence under Section 454(5) of the Act. (3) Section 454 of the Act consists of two parts. Under Section 454...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. VipIn Kumar Jaggi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-07-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ846
ORDERJagjit Singh, J.1. By his order dated May 18, 1974, the Sessions Judge, Delhi, admitted Vipin Kumar Jaggi to bail on his furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rupees 10,000/- each and executing personal bonds for the like amount. For getting the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Shri F. S. Gill, set aside the present petition was filed on behalf of State.2. On September 28, 1973, F. I. R. No. 571 was registered in Police Station, Kamla Market, Delhi. That was on the report lodged by Inder Singh Rana, Cashier of the Union Bank of India,. Chandni Chowk, Branch, After investigation a police report or Challan was submitted on April 25, 1974. Earlier to that date an incomplete report had also been. submitted.3. According to the police report: or the challan five persons, namely, Shawar Khan, Boby alias Sunil Batra, Ravi Kapur, Hariit Singh and Vipin Kumar Jaggi had entered into a criminal conspiracy and were responsible for dacoity committed on September 28, 1973, when-, after murde...
Union of India Vs. India Hard Metals Private Limited Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-06-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi737
Avadh Behari, J.(1) In 1965 the Director General, Ordnance Factories, Calcutta was in need of Tungsten Carbide Core. Tungsten Carbide Core is used in shells which arc fired from anti-tank guns. The shell core pierces the armour of the tank and explodes inside. (2) Tungsten is a hard, heavy, steel grey, ductile, very infusible metal. The metal Tungsten is obtained from Wolfram. Wolfram or Wolframite is a brownish or blackish monoclinic mineral. It is the principal ore of Tungsten. (3) Tungsten Carbide is a compound of Tungsten and Carbon. It is used in modern warfare in anti-tank guns to attack the enemy tanks. It has also peaceful uses. It is used for cutting tools, abrasives and dies. (4) The Director General on behalf of the petitioner. Union of India, invited tenders for Tungsten Carbide Core for their defense stores. India Hard Metals submitted their tender which was accepted on December 27, 1965. By this contract India Hard Metals Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Hard ...
Union of India Vs. Sir Sal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jun-05-1974
Reported in: 1974RLR532
Pritam Singh Safeer (1) The application has been preferred under section 5 of the Limitation Act of 1973. It is stated in paragraph 2 of the application that the last day for filing the appeal was the 14th of December, 1973, and that the certified copy of the judgment got mixed up with other papers, for which reason the appeal could not be filed in time. Paragraph 3 of the application states that the judgment dated the 30th of August, 1973, against which the appeal was being filed was found mixed up with other papers. (2) In the course of hearing of the application it was brought to my notice that after an award was made by the court below in terms of it judgment dated the 30th of August, 1973, on accepting a. review application the same court altered the award by its order made on 14th December, 1973. No appeal has been filed against the award which emerges out of the modifications made by the order dated the 14th of the December, 1973, and which award at prevent prevails between the ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›