Delhi Court January 1975 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Union of India Vs. Vishkarma Sffllpi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-28-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi788
S.N. Shankar, J. (1) This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dismissing the objections of the appellant, Union of India, under section 30 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and refusing to set aside the award.(2) In pursuance of an arbitration clause in the contract dated February 6, 1963 entered into by Union of India with the respondent firm (hereafter called ''the Contractor') in regard to the scheme for development of land east of Kailsh for residential purposes- levelling and dressing, the dispute between the parties was referred to arbitration of Shri V. V. Vaze, arbitrator, in the Ministry of Works and Housing. On June 24, 1972 the arbitrator made an award awarding a total sum of Rs. 45.-194.CO to the contractor for wrongful termination of the contract by Union of India. On the same date, the arbitrator issued notices to the parties informing them of the making and signing of the award. On July 3, 1972 the respondent contractor requested the arbitrator to...
iron Works Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-27-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi613
Avadh Behari, J. (1) In our short history of industrial law and relations references made under the provisions of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act 14 of 1947) have time and again been attacked. This is another vigorous attack. This time an imposing argument has been sought to be built on a constitutional edifice. Section 2(a) defines the term 'appropriate Government and is in these terms:'2.Definitions.-In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,- (a) 'appropriate Government' means- (I)in, relation to any industrial dispute concerning any industry carried on by or under the authority of the central Government, or by a railway company or concerning any such controlled industry as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government or in relation to an industrial dispute concerning the Employees' State Insurance Corporation established under section 3 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, or the 'Indian Airlines' and 'Air In...
Ajudhia Nath Dhingra Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi82
Prakash Narain, J.1. This judgment will dispose of C. W. 1395 of 1970 and C. W. 557 of 1971, referred to a larger bench by our brothers, S. N. Shankar and H. L. Anand, JJ.2. Before proceeding to dilate on the contentions raised in the two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the facts of each case may be stated. Briefly, they are as under:-C. W. 1395/70.3. The petitioner in this case entered Government service by being employed as Naib Nazir in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Abbottabad in the North West Frontier Province (now in Pakistan). He was appointed with effect from May 20, 1937 on probation for a period of three months, evidenced by copy of telegram dated May 18, 1937 (Annexure Iii to the petition) and copy of office order dated May 18, 1937, (Annexure I to the petition). In the service book of the petitioner, however, there is an entry that he was 'substantive (on probation).' The petitioner was selected for appointment after being successful in a test/exa...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Sri Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1071; ILR1975Delhi764; 1975RLR256
M.S. Joshi, J.(1) This appeal arises from the judgment of Shri C. D. Sharma, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Delhi dated 29-10-69 whereby Shri Ram respondent was acquitted of the charge under Section 7/16 of prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 framed against him on account of the complaint filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.(2) Sri Ram had a shop where milk and curd were sold in Gali Bahuji, Pahari Dhiraj, Delhi. Shri V. N. Sharma, a Food Inspector visited that shop at 7.00 A.M. on 19th April, 1969 and purchased from Sri Ram 660 MI. of Cow's milk for purposes of analysis against payment of 90 P., the price of the said quantity of milk. The sample of milk so purchased was divided into three equal parts and put in three clean and dry bottles which were properly sealed after addition of the requisite 18 drops of formalin per bottle. One of the three sealed bottles was given to Siri Ram and another was delivered to the Public Analyst for test. The milk sold by the shopkeeper ...
Ramesh Chander JaIn Vs. Manohar Lal Jain
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi713
S.S. Chadha, J. (1) These four excution petitions, namely. Ex. No. 53 of 1972 (Ramesh Chander Jain v. Manohar Lal Jain) Ex. No. 54 of 1972 {Smt. Manju Jain v. Manohar Lal Jain) Ext. No. 63 of 1971 (Sita Ram Sharma v. Manohar Lal lain) and Ext. No. 34 of 1973 (Yogesh Sharma and others v. Devi Dayal Jain and. others) arc of four rival decree-holders claiming execution of their decrees against the assets of Manohar Lal Jain (since deceased) by payment of the surplus of the amount realised in execution of the mortgage decree in suit No. 157 of 1968.(2) In the suit, being suit No. 157 of 1968 (Kishan Mohan Kapoor and others v. Manohar Lal Jam) a decree was granted by this Court on 22-1-1969, for Realizing the loan amount by the sale of the mortgaged property bearing No. 89 to 94/4, Dariba Kalan, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the mortgaged property). The final mortgage decree by sale of the mortgaged property for recovery of Rs. 53.791.67 and interest on Rs. 50.000.00 at the rate of 7 pe...
A.N. Dhingra Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-24-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi850
Prakash Narain, J. (1) This judgment will dispose of C.W. 1395 of 1970 and C.W. 557 of 1971, referred to a larger benchby our brothers, S. N. Shankar and H. L. Anand, JJ.(2) Before proceeding to dilate on the contentions raised in the two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the facts of each case may be stated. Briefly, they are as under:- C.W. 1395 of 1970:(3) The petitioner in this case entered Government service by being employed as Naib Nazir in the Court of Senior Sub Judge, Abbottabad in the North West Frontier Province (now in Pakistan). Fie was appointed with effect from May 29. 1937 on probation for a period of three months, evidenced by copy of telegram dated May 18, 1937 (Anncxure Iii to the petition) and copy of office order dated May 18, 1937 (Annexlire Iv to the petition). In the service book of the petitioner, however, there is an entry that he was 'substantive (on probation)'. The petitioner was selected for appointment after being successful in a t...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Altaf
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-17-1975
Reported in: 1975CriLJ1073; ILR1975Delhi650; 1975RLR252
Jagjit Singh, J.(1) On July 3, 1969 Shri 0. P. Gupta, a Food Inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, found in Kucha Dakhni Rai, Darya Ganj, Delhi, one Altaf carrying on a cycle two cans of milk. The milk was for sale and was indicated to be cow-milk. The Food Inspector purchased 660 miligrams of the milk for purposes of analysis.(2) On one of the parts of the milk being analysed by the Public Analyst it was found to contain 5.9 per cent of milk fat and 7.42 per cent of milk solids not fat. As the milk solids not fat were below the prescribed standard by 1.08 per cent the sample was reported to be adulterated and on its basis prosecution was instituted against the vendor of the milk.(3) During the trial of the case the sale of milk by the respondent to the Food Inspector was not disputed. The only contention raised was that the total solids found in the sample of milk were more than the prescribed minimum of 12 per cent and that the fat content was also in excess of the prescri...
Raj Rani BhasIn and ors. Vs. S. Kartar Singh Mehta
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-16-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi137
Deshpande, J.1. The decision of this appeal turns on the determination of the question whether the plaintiff-respondent was ready and willing to purchase the property from the defendants-appellants from the date of the contract between the parties till the date of the filing suit for specific Performance by the plaintiff respondent against the defendants appellants.2. The suit for specific performance filed by the plaintiff-respondent against the defendants-appellants has been decreed by the trial Court. Hence this appeal by the defendants-appellants. The facts and circumstances on which the decision in the appeal would, be arrived at may be shortly stated.3. The ground floor portion of the building in suit was leased by the defendants-appellants to the plaintiff-respondent in 1958. On 21-9-1961, the defendants appellants agreed to sell the building in suit to the plaintiff respondent. The conveyance of the Property, however did not take place and a fresh agreement to sell was executed...
B.R. Kundra, Delhi Vs. Motion Pictures Association, Delhi and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1975
Reported in: [1976]46CompCas339(Delhi); ILR1975Delhi692; 1975RLR320
S. Rangarajan, J. (1) This order passed in C.P. 106 of 1974,which has been filed by B. R. Kundra, will also dispose of C.P. 102. of 1974, which has been filed by J.S.Sood.(2) The Motion Pictures Association (hereinafter known as the Company ) with whose affairs I had dealt previously in C.A. 565 of 1972 (1974) comp cas 298 is again said to require Court's interventation in the circumstances which will be noted presently. This petition raises an interesting question of Company Law concerning the interpretation of section 255 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter known as the Act), a question which was merely discussed by me in yet another case, but left open (Smt. fain v. Delhi Flour Mills Co. Ltd. and others 44 (1974) Comp Cas 228 as one of difficulty bui not being necessary for decision of that case.(3) The Company was formed under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1913 with no share capital and prohibiting the payment of dividend to its members. It had for its object the promotion o...
Shakuntla Mehra Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-13-1975
Reported in: [1976]102ITR301(Delhi)
Prakash Narain, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Smt. Shakuntla Mehra, challenges the order dated November 8, 1971, passed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Delhi, under Section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. She further prays that along with the quashing of the said order all proceedings that may arise as a consequence of it may also be quashed and the Wealth-tax Officer, District III, Ward VII, New Delhi, be restrained from imposing any penalty. It is also prayed by the petitioner that a direction be issued to the Commissioner of Wealth-tax to reconsider the petitioner's application under Section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act and pass a considered order on it in accordance with law.2. The petitioner is the widow of one late Shri Mohan Lal Mehra, who died on April 4, 1964. The said Mohan Lal Mehra was an assessed under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The petitioner was not an assessed during the lifetime...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »