Delhi Court October 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.
Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Vs. Wearwell Cycles Co. (India) L ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi150
V.S. Desapandel, J.1. The suit of the plaintiff-appellant has been dismissed under 0. Xvii, R. 3, Civil Procedure Code. Hence this appeal by the plaintiff. The main question to be considered is whether the plaintiff-appellant committed a 'default' within the meaning of the said' rule so as to justify the dismissal of the suit by the trial Court.2. The suit was originally brought by m/s. Esso standard eastern Inc. company which was a corporation incorporated in the united states and was thus a foreign company. This foreign company had an undertaking working in India and managed by its Indian subsidiary by the company. This undertaking was acquired by the central government by the Esso(Acquisition of undertakings in India) Act no 4 of 1974.at first, the undertaking vested in the central government. Later, it vested in the Hindustan Petroleum Corporation limited which is a company registered under the Indian companies Act, 1956. An application has, thereforee, been made to this court unde...
Hira Lal Vs. Amarjit Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1976
Reported in: 1977RLR520
Prakash Narain, J.(1) RESPDT. 2 obtained an eviction order against petitioner on 4.8.66 which was executable after31.12.71. On 17.4.72, Respdt. 2 applied for permission U/s 19 of Slum Areas Act which was granted on 28.1.75. Tenant filed petition U/Art. 227 to High Court questioning order of competent authority on grounds, amongst other, that tenant's affidavit had been wrongly rejected. Judgment after giving above facts. para 9 onwards is :- (2) Before I close I would like to comment upon the question of affidavits once again, Social beneficial legislation has been undertaken by the State to fulfill the avowed purpose of creating a welfare State. It is for this reason that special Tribunals have been created and certain benefits and protections have been given to what may generally be called the weaker section of the society. In order, however, to mitigate the trouble and inconvenience caused by high cost of litigation or the time taken in normal litigation, summary procedures have bee...
Esso Standard Eastern Inc. Company Vs. Wearwell Cycle Company
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-29-1976
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT131; 1977RLR497
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The suit of the plaintiff-appellant has been dismissed under Order Xvii rule 3 Civil Procedure Code. Hence this appeal by the plaintiff. The main question to be considered is whether the plaintiff-appellant committed a 'default' within the incaning of the said rule so as to justify the dismissal of the suit by the trial court.(2) The suit was originally brought by M/s. Esso Stand(3) Secondly, it was argued by the respondent that the original plaintiff company, Esso Eastern Inc. ceased to exist and with that the suit filed by it abated. But it is precisely to prevent such abatement that Act No. 4 of 1974 provides that such a suit would not abate and that it shall be continued either by the Central Government in which the Indian undertaking of the company vests or by the successor in which the said undertaking would later vest. We, thereforee, allow the application for amendment.(4) Merits Of The APPEAL- The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed on 6th June, 1964 by ...
Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Ved Ram
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-28-1976
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT120
Vyas Dev Misra, J. (1) This revision is directed against the judgment of Mr. G.R. Luthra, Additional Sessions Judge, -upholding the conviction of the respondent under section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, but releasing him on probation. (2) The respondent was found selling cow's milk. A sample of the same was taken by Food Inspector J.P. Tyagi for analysis. The Public Analyst found the sample to be adulterated because of the deficiency 'in milk solids not fat per cent which is equivalent to 17.8 percentage deficiency in milk solids not fat (%added water)'. As far as milk fat was concerned, it was found to be 3.8%. In other words, it was more than the standard laid down. The standard required only 3.5%. (3) The respondent was prosecuted by the Delhi Municipal Corporation and he was duly convicted. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for nine months and a fine of Rs. 2000.00 by the trial Magistrate. In appeal the respondent did not challenge the conviction but as...
Jugmug Electric and Radio Co. Vs. Telerad Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-19-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi252; ILR1977Delhi295; 1977RLR131
B.C. Misra, J.(1) This first appeal under section 109(6) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 43 of 1958, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the appellants against the order of the Assistant Registrar, dated 26th August, 1970, by which he has ordered the removal of the trade mark of the appellants (No. 217016B) dated 7th August, 1963, on the grounds that it offends sections 11 and 18 of the Act. (2) The material facts of the case are that the appellants, namely, Jugmug Electric & Radio Company claiming to be manufacturers of electric heaters, immersion heaters (electrical), hot plates for cooking, electric toasters, table lamps, heating apparatus and parts of the aforesaid goods, applied for registration of their trade mark 'TELERAD', which was granted by the impugned mark mentioned above. The respondents, who are Telerad Private Limited had their own trade mark registered under No. 181813 and 195883 in respect of Radio and television as 'TELERAD', opposed the ...
Radha Kishan Bal Kishan Muchhal and Co. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Co ...
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1976
Reported in: ILR1977Delhi162; 1977LabIC1041
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J.(1) On November 12, 1957, four persons-Brij Lal Kejriwal, Hari Chander Kejriwal, Smt. Sushila Devi Singhania and Smt. Gita Bai Jalan-formed a partnership to carry on business at shops 266-268 Katra Pyarelal, Chandni Chowk, Delhi, This partnership had an agency of sale and purchase of cloth of M/s. Biria Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. The shop was called Biria Mills Cloth Shops. This partnership carried on business from 1957 till 19th July, 1962 when Biria Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd. terminated the agency held by the said partnership.(2) The partnership of 1957 was immediately succeeded by a new partnership which was formed on August 16, 1962. Th-e new partnership consisted of five partners. One partner common in the old and new partnership was Brij Lal Kejriwal. The new partnership was called Radha Kishan Bal Kishan Muchhal & Co., petitioners in this case.(3) This partnership came into existence on 16th August, 1962. A deed of partnership was ...
Shri Amba Motors Agencies (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. the Registrar of Companies
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1976
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas89(Delhi); ILR1977Delhi383
D.K. Kapur, J.(1) This application under Section 19 of the Companies A6t, 1956, has been moved in July, 1976, in relation to an order passed by this court on 5th March, 1976, in Company Petition No. 21 of 1975. The order was passed by myself on 5th March, 1976, confirming an alteration in the Memorandum of Association. The provisions of section 18 of the Companies Act, 1956, required the order to be filed within three months from the date of the order together with a printed copy of the Memorandum as altered. The petitioner failed to file the documents within the requisite time. The effect of failure to file the documents within time is specifically provided for in section 19 of the Act which states that if the documents are not filed, then the proceedings connected with the same shall become void and inoperative. Consequently, the order ceased to have effect on 26th June, 1976, as stated in the application. There is a proviso to section 19, which enables the Court to revive the order ...
Mohinder Singh Vs. Union of India and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi156
ORDER1. The question that this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India raises is as to the validity of a circular of the Railway Board banning all business dealings with the petitioner, -an erstwhile contractor on Indian Railways, including projects, for an indefinite period.2. It is not disputed that the petitioner has been -a registered Railway contractor and has been having dealings with the Indian Railways until August 1973, when, apparently as a sequel to dissatisfaction with the petitioner, dealings with the petitioner on the Indian Railways, including projects, were banned for an indefinite period by a circular of the Railway Board of August 26, 1973 (Annexure P-5). The petition is replete with references to Arts. 14, 19 and 301 to 304 of the Constitution of India, but at the hearing of the petition it was conceded on behalf of the petitioner that the assault mounted on the impressive constitutional edifice was not open to the petitioner because of the susp...
The National Small Industries Corporation Limited Vs. Golden Workshop
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: ILR1977Delhi241
M.S. Joshi, J.(1) On 26-4-1966 Messrs Golden Workshop,Ambala Road, Saharanpur, entered into a hire-purchase agreement with the National Small Industries Corporation Limited, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'), in respect of a Stankoimport (U.S.S.R.) Model 3A 423 crankshaft regrinding machine. The machine was imported from Russia at the instance of the Golden Workshop and its price was fixed at Rs. 82,209.78. Out of the said amount Rs. 15,374.10 were paid by Golden Workshop to the Corporation from time to time. The machine was, however, damaged when it was being transported from Bombay to Delhi. Golden Workshop refused to take its delivery on the ground of the said damage and also because of certain payments having been asked for by the Corporation. There was a clause in the agreement that any dispute or difference which may arise between the parties with regard to its construction, meaning and effect or any part thereof or any other matter under the said agreement...
Lachhman Das Bihari Lal Vs. Bhagwan Dass Etc
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi200; ILR1977Delhi327
B.C. Misra, J. (1) This first appeal has been filed under sec- corporation 109(6) of the Trade & Merchandize Marks Act, 43 of 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It is directed against the order of the Assistant Registrar, dated 25th April, 1970, by which he has refused the application of the appellants to remove the mark of the contesting respondents I to 3 (hereinafter referred to as the respondents), from the register of trade marks. (2) 'THEfacts of the case are that the appellants filed an application under section 56 of the Act to rectify the register by removal of the entry No. 183344 of the impugned trade mark of the respondents. The allegations made by the appellants were that they were the registered proprietors of trade mark No. 141860 having the leading feature of the device of a train and the words 'ROYAL Frontier Mail SNUFF'in class 34 and that the respondents had contravened the conditions of the registration of their own mark, which they had altered by adding a d...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »