Delhi Court January 1976 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.
Kishan Chand Vs. the Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-20-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi265; ILR1976Delhi457
T.V.R. Tatacharj, C.J. (1) This Regular Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment, dated January 27. 1966, of Shri M. L. Jain. A.dditional District Judge. Delhi, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 37 of 1965, dismissing the said appeal and confirming the judgment and decree of Shri Dev Raj Khanna, Subordinate Judge 1st Class, Delhi, dated January 21, 1965, whereby the learned trial Judge dismissed Suit No. 97 of 1962. (2) The Regular Second Appeal came up for hearing originally before I. D. Dua, C.J, on January 19, 1968. One of the points raised in the second Appeal related to the virus of Rule 104 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules. 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'). There was a decision of a Single Bench of this Court in W. C. Rahbar v. Union of India. C.W.P. No. 5S7-D of 1964, decided on May II. 1967(1), in which the aforesaid rule had been struck down as being ultra virus of Section 24 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitat...
Vidyavati Bai Vs. Parkash Vati Devi and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi275; 12(1976)DLT77
1. The present application is under Sections 151, 152 and 153 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The application has been filed on 6th January, 1976, and is concerned with a suit which was decided by compromise on 2nd May, 1975. The suit was for partition and other reliefs instituted by the plaintiff, Shrimat Vidyavati Bai against Shrimati Parkash Vati Devi and others. The plaintiff was the first wife of the late Kanwar Krishna Chandra and the first defendant was the second wife. In the array of parties, Shri Mahesh Chandra son of the late Kanwar Krishna Chandra was shown as defendant No. 2 and Shrimati Usha Mahesh Chandra, his wife was shown as defendant No. 3. Defendants Nos. 4 and 5, namely, Kumari Vanita and Kunwar Raghav Chandra, the minor son and daughter of defendants Nos. 2 and 3 were shown as defendants Nos. 4 and 5 respectively. The parties proposed a settlement by which the entire suit was compromised, but there being minor defendants, the leave of the Court was sought on behal...
Suraj Parkash Vaid Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jan-12-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi279; 12(1976)DLT82
B.C. Misra, J. (1) This revision petition has been filed by the plaintiff under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, against the order of the Sub-Judge 1st Class, dated 15th October, 1974, by which he has declined the request of the plaintiff to order the defendants to admit and/or deny the documents under Order 12 Rule 2 of the Code while the learned Judge has directed the plaintiff to produce their certified copies. (2) The petitioner has instituted the suit giving rise to the revision against the Union of India, the Registrar of the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice of India for recovery of Rs. 6.000.00 as damages for wrongful reduction in rank in the employment of the petitioner in the Supreme Court. The petitioner was reduced in rank and then finally removed from service. Another suit was instituted by the petitioner attacking the aforesaid two orders. I am told that the court of first instance dismissed the said suit, but the lower appellate court held that the removal f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›