Delhi Court February 1976 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.
Arti Singh Vs. Kanwar Pal Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi76
B.C. Misra, J.(1) This first appeal from order has been filed by the wife against the order of the Subordinate Judge, I Class, Delhi, dated 3rd September, 1975, by which he has declined to grant maintenance to the appellant wife under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 25 of 1955, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), till the decision of the legality of the marriage of the appellant with the respondent. (2) The material facts of the case are that the appellant, who is said to be a Bengali lady, was first married on 7th March, 1944 to a Kashmiri gentleman, by name Dr. B.N. Zutshi, from whom she had children. On 18th November, 1968 that marriage was annulled by a decree for divorce granted by the District Judge at Jaipur. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to these facts. It is also not disputed that thereafter, sometime in 1969 the appellant and the respondent were married and they cohabited and lived as husband and wife for a long period until 27th February, 1974...
Chattar Singh Vs. Banarsi Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-1976
Reported in: 12(1976)DLT195; 1976RLR414
B.G. Misra, J. (1) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 59 of 1958, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been filed by the tenant against the appellate order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 19th September, 1973, by which it has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the Controller, dated 4th May, 1973, finally ordering eviction of the tenant appellant on the ground of non-payment of rent mentioned in clause (a) of the proviso to subsection (1) of section 14 of the Act, read with section 14(2). (2) The material facts of the case are that the appellant is a tenant in respect of premises at East Patel Nagar, on a rent of Rs. 3 5.00 per month. On the previous occasion he fell into arrears of rent and a petition for his eviction on the ground of non-payment of rent was instituted. This was disposed of by order of the Controller dated 19th August, 1960 (certified copy of which is Ex. A2 on the file). A detailed reference to this order will be m...
Kasturi Lal Vs. Charan Das
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-27-1976
Reported in: 1976RLR392
B.C. Misra, J.(1) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 59 of 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been tiled by the tenant against the order of the Rent Control Tribunal, dated 10th September, 1975 by which it has dismissed the appeal in liming and affirmed the order of the Additional Controller, dated with September, 1975 ordering the appellant to deliver possession of the premises in dispute to the respondent (2) The material facts of the case are that the premises in dispute (Nos. 2672-73, Ward No. V, Roshanpura, Nai Sarak Delhi), belong to the respondent landlord. On 3rd April, 1972 the respondent landlord filed an application under section 21 of the Act for permission to let out the said premises for a period of two years with effect from ll the April, 1972. The appellant tenant filed a written statement admitting the contents of the application. The statements of the parties were recorded and the Controller by order dated 6th April, 1972 ...
Kuldip Chand Sharma Vs. Geeta Sharma
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-25-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi124; ILR1976Delhi854
B. Misra, J.(1) This first appeal from order under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), has been filed by the husband against the order of the Additional District Judge, dated 25th March, 1975, by which he has allowed to the respondent wife a permanent alimony of Rs. 50 per month with effect from 9th August, 1974 under section 25 of the Act. (2) The fact's leading to this appeal are that the appellant and the respondent were married according to the Hindu rites. The respondent- wife filed an application for annulment of the said marriage on the ground that the husband had been married to one Pushpa Sharma earlier in 1966 which marriage had been dissolved by a decree of divorce granted on 28th May, 1970 by Mr. K. S. Sidhu, then Additional District Judge, in Matrimonial Case No. 46 of 1970 and that the appellant contracted the marriage with the respondent within one year on 16th February, 1971 in contravention of the provisions of section 15 of...
Prahlad Das Vs. Bhagirath Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-24-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi129; ILR1976Delhi737; 1976RLR492
B.C. Misra, J.(1) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 59 of 1958, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has been filed by the tenant against the appellate order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 30th September, 1972, by which it has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order of the Controller, dated 31st January, 1972, finally ordering eviction of the appellant on the ground of non-payment of rent and it treated it a case of second default and so the benefit of section 14(2) could not be afforded to the appellant. (2) The appeal in this court was filed on 10th October, 1972 accompanied by a certified copy of the appellate judgment, but with a plain copy of the order of the Controller and without certified copy of the same. The appeal was accompanied by an application for exemption from filing the certified copy of the same and the exemption was granted subject to that plea of limitation. The certified copy has finally been filed in this court on 4th J...
Kanhiya Lal Bansal Vs. Raj Nath Sharma and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-22-1976
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT69; 1978RLR294
V.D. Misra, J. (1) This second appeal under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act is directed agairst the order of Mr. P.K. Bahri,Rent Control Tribunal, upholding the order of the Additional Controller. (2) The relevant facts, in brief, are these. One Raghu Nath Sharma was the owner of house No. 21, Bazar Lane, Babar Road, New Delhi. He rented it to Kanhiya Lal Bansal (the tenant), the present appellant. He served a notice dated December 2, 1955 (Exhibit AW5/9) on the tenant terminating his tenancy. On the failure of the tenant to vacate, he filed a eviction petition on the ground of bona-fide requirement for his residence. On the basis of a compromise, eviction order allowing time to the tenant up to December 31, 1958 to vacate the premises was passed. The tenant refused to vacate and challenged the order as a nullity. During these proceedings, Raghu Nath Sharma died and his legal representatives (the landlords), the present respondents, were brought on record. The matter went up t...
Kishan Lal Gupta Vs. Dujodwala Industries and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Delhi19
1. Issuing Commissions for recording the statements of witnesses is not unusual in civil cases. It is being done ever since the Code of Civil Procedure was enforced more than a hundred years ago. Whenever a case for such examination is made out, parties are allowed to examine their witnesses on commission. in the case before us the defendant asked for permission to examine his witnesses on commission The permission was given. Now he refuses to examine them and contends that he will examine them on commission only after the plaintiff has examined his witnesses and closed his case. He claims it as his right. He declines to examine them before the case is set down for hearing. If he is right then there is an end of the conception of a continuous trial. Let us, thereforee, examine the Code of Civil Procedure and find out its intention.2. The rules of pleading and other ancillary rules contained in the Code of Civil Procedure have one main object in view. It is to find out and narrow down t...
Krishan Lal Gupta Vs. Dujodwala Industries and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-19-1976
Reported in: ILR1976Delhi442
ORDERxviii Rule 1(2) proviso enacts that when the hearing of evidence has once begun, hearing of the suit shall be continued from day to day. In practice, this provision is rarely observed. The practice which prevails in England should be followed, i.e. the evidence should be recorded continuously without any break, except in very exceptional circumstances such as the illness of a party, his witnesses or the advocate appearing in the case. There are too many adjournments on the ground of (a) non-attendance of witnesses, (b) want of time and (c) convenience of counsel. Orderxvi Rules 1 and 2 should be amended so as to provide that the list of witnesses to be summoned by any party should be filed within a specified time. The date of hearing should be fixed only after such a list is filled and having regard to the time that may be reasonably required for summoning the witnesses. The date of hearing should be fixed in consultation with the advocates of both sides. Where a party has applied...
Walter Alfred Baid Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1976
Reported in: AIR1976Delhi302
ORDER1. Whether the provisions in the recruitment rules for the post of senior nursing tutor in the School of Nursing, Irwin Hospital, New Delhi, which make the post a female preserve, are constitutionally valid or not is the only question that this petition under Article 226 raises.2. The petitioner, a qualified 'A' grade male nurse was appointed as 'sister tutor' in the School of Nursing, Irwin Hospital New Delhi and was confirmed in the post against a permanent vacancy with effect from July 23, 1953, (Annexure 'A'). At that time, the petitioner was the only sister tutor in the School of Nursing and was, thereforee, discharging administrative responsibilities in addition to the duties of a tutor. According to the petitioner, the responsibility and duties of a sister tutor are detailed in Annexure 'B' to the petition. Annexure 'B' purports to set out the responsibility and duties of 'the senior nursing tutor'. According to Annexure 'B' the senior nursing tutor or if there is only one ...
Bal Kishan Dass and Sons Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Feb-18-1976
Reported in: [1976]103ITR825(Delhi)
T.P.S. Chawla, J. (1) These are ten petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In all of them the parties are the same. So also are the essential facts and the questions to which they give rise. The only difference is that they pertain to different assessment years for purposes of income tax. Respecting the questions for determination that is of no significance, and, consequently, I proceed to dispose of all of them by this common judgment. (2) Many years ago there was a Hindu Joint Family (the 'assessed') which carried on business in watches under the name and style of M/s Bal Kishan Dass & Sons at Chandni Chowk, Delhi. Ever since 1931-32 it was assessed to income tax and its assessment year was the same as the financial year. At the material time the karta was Bal Kishan Dass. For the seven assessment years extending between 1st April 1941 to 31st March 1949, assessments were first made under the Income Tax Act 1922 in the ordinary way. Afterwards, taking advantage of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »