Delhi Court September 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.
Umrao Singh Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-30-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi188; ILR1975Delhi406
B.C. Misra, J. (1) This revision petition raise's a short but important question of law. It is this : whether a person, whose property has been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, is entitled to interest under section 28 of the Act on the amount of compensation awarded to him from the date of the dispossession, in case the authorities have taken only symbolic possession and not actual physical possession of the property from him.(2) The material facts of the case lie in a small compass. Some land including two fields in dispute were acquired by the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Collector determined the compensation payable for the land including the two fields in dispute. On a reference made under section 18 of the Act, compensation of the land was enhanced from Rs. 800.00 per bigha to Rs. 4250.00 per bigha and interest was awarded according to law. This was also payable in respect of the aforesaid two field's. Cons...
Mazda theatres Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. New Bank of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi1
(1) By its very definition in section 4(1) of the Companies Act, 1956, a holding company controls the management of its subsidiary. The distinction between the Board of Directors and members of these companies holds good in law but becomes unreal when the members are a small group of closely knit persons. When the management of a holding company comes to be controlled by the Court in the interests of its creditors, the Court controlled management would try to control the management of the subsidiary controlled by the members. A conflict of interests may then develop between the two. It is this conflict which explains the present litigation. (2) The holding company is Anand Finance Private Limited with its registered office in Delhi while the subsidiary company is Mazda Theatres Private Limited with its registered office in Bombay. The holding company was floated in 1953 with a paid up equity capital of Rs. 15 lakhs only. Its shareholders were and are the members of a single family cons...
Boucher Pierre Audre Vs. Superintendent, Central Jail, New Delhi and a ... Overruled
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi124
Jagjit Singh, J. (1) On behalf of Mr. Boucher Pierre Audre this petition was filed, under article 226 of the Constitution of India, for. issuing to the superintendent Central Jail Tihar and the Delhi Administration a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for the petitioner being set at liberty forthwith.(2) The petitioner, who is a. national of France, along with one Monucher Gherimani alias Irani, a national of Iran, were tried by Shri M.K. Chawla, Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi. They along with one Charles Sobraj, who could not be arrested, were alleged to have entered into a criminal conspiracy leading to the committing of theft, on the evening of October 31, 1971, in the Rajasthan Emporium in Ashoka Hotel. By a clever dodge the Manager of the Emporium and another person who used to assist the Manager in his work were called to a suite in the hotel in occupation of one Miss Gloria and thereafter trying their hands and feet and administering some stupifying drug to them the keys of t...
R.C. Abrol Vs. Official Liquidator R.C. Abrol and Co. Pvt. Ltd. and or ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-25-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi202
S. Rangarajan, J. (1) The judgment in this Company Application will dispose of C. As 61/72 and 80/72 also. The applicant in C.A. 61/72 (R. C. Abrol) is the husband of the applicant (Smt. Swaran Lata) in C.A. 80/72. C.A. 12 of 1972 was filed by the Office Liquidator (hereafter referred to in the abbreviated form as O.L.) on 23-12-1971 in the General Section and made over to the Company Section where it was registered on 3-1-1972. The O.L. had filed the report dated 21-12-71. Among other particulars which are required to be, furnished under section 455(1) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereafter called the Act), he had also expressed his 'clear opinion' that 'the directors and certain officers have committed fraud on a big scale in conduct of the business of the company and it is for the aforesaid reasons that title company had failed and further a detailed enquiry is desirable'. He had also stated, inter alia, that Mrs. Swaran Lata was 'only a signing authority' and was illegally being pai...
Moti Rafn and ors. Vs. Secretary, Ministry of Education and Social Wel ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-23-1974
Reported in: 1983(4)DRJ284; 1983RLR187; 1983(2)SLJ277(Delhi)
M.L. Jain, J. (1) - The petitioners were skilled helpers and helper tailors in the Directorate of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation, Department of Social Welfare, Ministry of Education & Social Welfare, New Delhi. Their Recruitment Rules of 1972 provided that the scale of pay of the psrsons like the petitioners will be Rs. 95-115. Their minimum qualification was certificate in the trade. Junior Instructors were also placed in the same scale but their qualifications were diploma in tailoring, embroidery, cutting or weaving with three years experience in the trade.(2) With effect from 1-1-1973 the pay scale of Junior Instructors was revised to Rs. 260-350 by the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Twenty- fourth Amendment Rules, 1974. The revision of the pay scale of the helpers was made first by an order of 22-10-1975 and later on by the Civil Services (Revised Pay) Eleventh Amendment Rules, 1975 albiet with effect from 1-1-1973, see the Gazette of India Extraordinary Part If. sec. 3, ...
Globe Motors (W) Ltd. Vs. Sanghi Motors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-1974
Reported in: 1975RLR241
D.K. Kapur, J.(1) The is an application under order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Procedure and also these provisions have to be read with Rules 6 and 9 of the Company Court - Rules, 1959. The facts of the case are that a. winding up petition was moved by M/s Sanghi Motors and two others in respect of M/s Globe Motors Workshop Limited. This winding up petition was C. P. 35/71. During the course of the hearing of this winding up petition the counsel for the respondent - company withdrew at one stage and then subsequently a seconds counsel who appeared, also withdrew. A notice was thereon sent to the Company sought to be wound up, which did not put in any further appearance. At that stage an ex parte winding up order was passed by myself, after considering the evidence led by the petitioner It was noted in the order that an attempt had been made to serve the respondent-company after counsel had withdrawn, but it was not possible to serve the Company, that is how the ex p...
S.S. Goyal and ors. Vs. the University of Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi134
Prakash Narain, J.(1) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners, who claim themselves to be 'teachers of the University,' seek to challenge the validity of, (a) the election of 10 teachers of the University of Delhi to the Academic Council of the Delhi University, (b) the rules under which the said 10 teachers of the University were elected to the Academic Council and (c) the constitution of the Academic Council.(2) The Delhi University has been constituted under and by virtue of the provisions of the Delhi University Act, 1922, hereinafter referred to as the Act. By virtue of the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 3 the University shall have perpetual succession and a common seal and shall sue and be sued by the said name, namely, University of Delhi. This statutory body is to have officers mentioned in Section 8 and certain statutory authorities set out in Section 17. One of the authorities of the University is the Academic Council and yet ...
Mohd. Shafi and anr. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-20-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1309; ILR1975Delhi74
M.R.A.Ansari, J. (1) As the points for determination in both these cases are identical, they are hereby disposed of by a common judgment.(2) The petitioners in Cr.M.(M) No. 131/74 are Mohd. Shafi and Mohd. Rarnzan. Mohd. Shafi was arrested on 16-4-1974 and Ramzan was arrested on I S-4-1974 in pursuance of F.I.R. No. 365 dated 16-4-1974 of Police Station Sadar Bazar under sections 302/34 IPC. The petitioners in Cr.M.(M) No. 141/74, namely, Sabir Ali, Raunaq Ali and Zubed Ali, were arrested on 13-5-1974 in pursuance of F.I.R. No. 422/74 of the same Police Station under sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 336, 353, 436, 307 and 302 IPC. When no challan was filed against them within 60 days after the date of their arrest, they applied for bail invoking the provisions of section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code). The learned Magistrate, however, refused to grant bail to the petitioners on the ground that there appeared to be reasonable grounds for...
N.B. Films Vs. Daya Shanker
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-1974
Reported in: [1975]98ITR676(Delhi); 1975RLR47
H.L. Anand, J.(1) The short point that this petition raises is as to the power of the Court to issue process in execution of a decree against the property of a defaulter against whom a notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been issued in respect of payment of outstanding tax. (2) The respondent obtained a decree against the petitioner from the Additional Judge, Small Causes Court, Delhi on June 2, 1961. Before the execution could be taken out, the petitioner had received a notice from the income tax authorities under Rule 2 of the said Schedule followed by another claiming a total sum of about Rs. 4,000.00 from the defaulter on account of arrears of income tax. The petitioner filed objections to the execution procedings on the ground that by virtue of the aforesaid notice, no process could be issued by the executing Court pursuant to the decree against any property of the petitioner by virtue of the bar created for the issue of such a process by Rul...
State (Delhi Administration) Vs. Harish Kumar Etc.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-18-1974
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi182
V.D. Misra, J. (1) This is an appeal- against the acquittal of Harish Kumar of offences under sections 302 and 316, Indian Penal Code, for committing the murder of Sharda Devi who was carrying a quick unborn child.(2) The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that Sharda Devi deceased was married to Krishan Gopal. They were living with Madan Gopal, brother of Krishan Gopal, at house No. 2052, Gali Mahavir, Teliwara, Delhi. Krishan Gopal's grand-mother Kailash Wati was also living in the house and so were Shakuntia wife of Madan Gopal and their son Harish Kumar respondent. Madan Gopal and Krishan Gopal were not on good terms since they wanted their business to be partitioned. Shakuntia and Harish Kumar used to quarrel with Sharda Devi and they were not on speaking terms.(3) Sharda Devi had pregnancy of about 28 weeks in June, 1969. On June 3, 1969, at about I p.m. Dr. Jagan Nath Public Witness 4, who is a resident of the same locality, was approached by Madan Gopal who told him that Shar...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »