Delhi Court May 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.
Kangra Valley Slate Company Ltd., India Vs. the Union of ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi51
S.N. Shankar, J. 1. The petitioner-Company by this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has prayed that the order dated October 1, 1974 passed by the Central Government in revision under Rule 54 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960 be quashed and directions be issued to the State Government to desist from carrying into effect, itself or through any of its agencies, any scheme or operation in the mining area referred to in the petition and to grant the mining lease in respect of this area to the petitioner. 2. The petitioner Company is incorporated under the Companies Act as a public Limited Company with its registered office at New Delhi. It is engaged in the business of quarrying slates and shale (major minerals) and marketing the same. The dispute relates to the right to obtain lease of land, situated in villages Ma.1ra and, Manethi, Telisil Rewari, District Gurgaon. On February 9, 1962, the then State of Punjab invited a0plications for grant. of mining lease...
M.N. Soi Vs. New Delhi Municipal Committee and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1975
Reported in: AIR1975Delhi236
T.V.R. Tatachari, J.(1) This Civil Writ Petition came up initially for hearing before B. C. Misra J. who considered that it should be heard by a larger Bench. The Civil Writ Petition then came up before a Division Bench consisting of V. S. Deshpande and H B. C. Misra JJ. who referred it to a Full Bench. Although the Division Bench framed certain questions, which will be referred to later, for consideration by the Full Bench, the counsel arc agreed that the entire Writ Petition has been referred for being heard and decided by the Full Bench. (2) The Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner. M. v. Soi, praying that certain orders passed by the New Delhi Municipal Committee assessing the annual value of the petitioner's house for purposes of house-tax for the year 1963-64. 1964.65 ?'J 1965-66 be quashed. The respondents to the Writ Petition are (1) The New Delhi Municipal Committee, and (2) Shri S. C. Vaish, Additional District Magistrate, Delhi. (3) It is necessary at this st...
Rattan Lal Vs. Vardesh Chander and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi628
H.L. Anand, J.(1) This Second Appeal under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act' which came up before us on a reference by the learned Single Judge of this Court, raises certain questions with regard to the extent to which the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act would govern the relationship of landlord and tenant in the Union Territory of Delhi before the latter Act was extended to the said territory and the further question whether even after its extension, its operation is excluded by the provisions of the Act in relation to tenancies, whether contractual or statutory, which are covered by the Act.(2) The facts and circumstances leading to the appeal may be briefly stated. The premises in dispute were let out with effect from May 1, 1954 by a rent note, Ex. AW3/1, of May 19, 1954 by the first respondent the owner thereof, to the appellant. According to the rent note 'the tenancy was for a period of 'less than one year,' there ...
Kheivl Singh Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-30-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi291
Yogeshwar Dayal, J.(1) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being placed before the Full Bench in view of the order of reference, dated 22-2-1972 passed by Deshpande and B.C. Misra JJ. The main question for consideration in this petition is whether the selection of 174 upper division clerks for temporary promotion us head clerks, grade Ii in the Army Ordnance Corps Record Offices made in February, 1970, could be validly suspended by the Government in May, 1970, and cancelled in August 1970 reverting these upper division clerks from the posts of head clerks, grade Ii, to their original posts of upper division clerks.(2) Initially, the petition was filed by Khem Singh, petitioner alone against three respondents. Shri Krishan Lal, respondent No. 4. was on his application allowed to intervene. In the meantime in pursuance of the orders of respondents I and 2, fresh selection had been made. In the fresh selection, 116 upper division clerks were promoted as head ...
Balkrishan Somani Vs. Ram Krishan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-29-1975
Reported in: 1975RLR456
H.L. Anand, J. (1) This judgment would dispose of two preliminary issues with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, and objection regarding to misguide of causes of action and parties, the objection of the defendant No. 7 as to the defendant's right to raise the objection with regard to misguide and 1.A 700/73 by the plaintiff under section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure for leave too sue non-resident defendants. (2) It appears that by a deed of partnership made on October 31, 1955, the plaintiff, his deceased father and defendants 1 to 6, being the brothers and nephews of the plaintiff, entered into a partnership at Delhi to carry on, inter alia, business of running a factory in Kanpur which was hitherto being carried on by the plaintiff, his two brothers, defendants 1 and 2 and their late father. According to the plaintiff, the business was to be looked after by defendants No. 1, 2, 3 and 6, who were also to maintain accounts and defendant No. 6 was to give his who...
Ram NaraIn Kher Vs. Ambassador Industries New Delhi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi87
ORDER1. The Plaintiff claiming to be the registered proprietor and grantee of Indian Patent No. 1133W dated 29th November, 1967. Pertaining to air cooler by this application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 and Section 151, Civil Procedure Code seeks an ad interim injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents and representatives from adapting the method and Process for manufacturing, selling or offering for sale air coolers in infringement of the plaintiff's aforesaid patent with further relief for rendition of accounts. 2. The case of the Plaintiff is that he has legal right to the aforementioned patent for the period ending 29th November 1983, and to refrain others from exploiting the said patent rights without permission from him. According to the Plaintiff the air cooler of the subject patent has distinct advantages ever the air cooler presently known in the art and that the coolers of the subject patent have acquired status and reputation The Grievance of the Plaintif...
Pran Nath Pushkarma Vs. Madan Mohan
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-28-1975
Reported in: 1975RLR427
Prithvi Raj, J.(1) This is defendant No. 1's application under section 34 of the Arbitration Act (herein called 'the Act') seeking stay of the suit on the ground that deed of partnership dated 1st July, 1957, executed betweenthe plaintiff and defendant No. 1 contains arbitration clause which is comprehensive and covers all disputes between the parties and that the suit having been filed in respect of matters covered by the arbitration clause is liable to be stayed. (2) The case of defendant No. 1 is that he had taken no steps so far in the suit except for filing of the Vakalatnama by his counsel on 7th January, 1974. It is further averred that he was always ready and willing to submit any dispute to arbitration in accordance with law and that he is still ready and willing to submit to arbitration proceedings if such proceeding? would lie in law ; that the disputes and differences between the parties had in fact been referred to arbitration sometime in June/July, 1971 and that the suit ...
Y.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-27-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi453
V.S. Deshpande (1) It is generally assumed that there is greater constitutional and legal assurance of fair treatment and security of tenure in the sphere of public employment than in private employment (except for 'workman' under labour legislation). Employment under Government is par excellence, public. Article 12 of the Constitution, however, offers the protection of fundamental rights against the state which includes not only the Government but also Legislatures, local authorities and 'other- authorities'. Under Article 226 of the Constitution, writ petitions are maintainable not only against the Government but also against an 'authority' for the enforcement of fundamental rights or any other purposes, i.e. enforcement of other rights.(2) The tendency of the modern State (particularly in India) to regulate by or under legislation more and more activities gives a public character to these regulatory agencies. Questions have increasingly arisen as to what extent and for what purposes...
Anand Prakash Om Prakash Vs. Oswal Trading Agency and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-26-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi24
ORDER1. This suit for the recovery of balance of the price of goods said to have been sold to the defendants involves a difficult question of considerable public importance viz., whether., 'A claim arising out of a transaction entered into between the parties otherwise than in the open market and intended to be carried out with the aid of unaccounted funds, popularly called the 'black money' and to defraud public revenues is invalid and unenforceable.2. The plaintiff, a registered partnership carrying on wholesale business in textiles and hosiery goods in a large wav as a representative of a number of leading manufacturing units and having number of sister concerns, claims to have supplied on various dates between October 21, 1969 and December 28. 1969, hosiery goods of the total value of Rs. 1,68,059.25 to defendant No. 2 carrying on business in the name and style of defendant No. 1 against the said defendant's chits out of which the said defendant is said to have paid a sum of Rs. 25...
Ex-service Enterprises (P.) Ltd. Vs. Samey Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: May-23-1975
Reported in: ILR1975Delhi539
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) The facts of this case need not be recounted in detail. They arc fully set out in my order dated September 30, 1974, made on I A 1706 of 1974. They are also set out in the order of the appellate bench dated October 17, 1974 which heard the appeal against my order.(2) On January 18, 1971, the plaintiff brought a suit for specific performance against the defendant. Specific performance was sought in respect of agricultural land measuring 48 bighas and 10 bids was owned by the defendant in vilage Khampur Sub Tehsil Mehrauh. The defendant had agreed to sell the land to the plaintiff. As he did not convey the property the plaintiff brought the suit.(3) On November 1, 1973, before T.P. S. Chawla J, the parties reached a compromise. The terms were reduced to writing. The suit was decreed in terms of the compromise.(4) The term of the compromise was that the plaintiff will pay Rs. 50,000.00 over the original agreed price of Rs. 66.100.00 which be had already paid to...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »