Delhi Court October 1977 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.
Ram Rattan Bhartia Vs. Food Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Delhi183; 1978RLR177
Prithvi Raj, J.1. The petitioner, Shri Ram Rattan Bhartia, entered into a contract with the respondent Food Corporation of India, (herein called 'the Corporation') for handling and transport of food grains at Chandausi Depot, District Moradabad, between 1st May, 1971, to 31st April, 1973, vide contract entered into between the parties in pursuance of invitation to tender No. FAM/71-Chandausi. The contract contained arbitration clause No, 19, providing that all disputes and differences arising out of or in any way touching or concerning the agreement whatsoever (except as to any matter the decision of which is expressly provided for in the contract) shall be referred to the sole arbitration of any person appointed by the Managing Director of the Food Corporation of India.2. Disputes arose between the parties in respect of the alleged claim of the petitioner on account of transportation of food grains for which the petitioner claimed a sum of Rs. 61,000/- including security deposit of Rs...
Roop Lal Makkar Vs. Jagdish Singh and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-26-1977
Reported in: ILR1978Delhi40
H.L. Anand, J. (1) These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by two different citizens challenge the legal validity of orders of surveillance and of opening of history sheets made against them by the Delhi Police pursuant to the provisions of the Punjab Police Rules as applicable to Delhi, and raise important questions as to the nature and extent of right of privacy and as to the justifiability of an order of surveillance, etc.(2) Petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 1378 of 1973 is and was, at the material time, one of the Directors and Vice-Chairman of the 0m Oil and Oil Seeds Exchange Limited, Delhi, and claims to be a, social worker associated with large number of societies devoted to social and religious purposes. Petitioner in Civil Writ Petition No. 1454/73 had also been a Director of Om Oil & Oil Seeds Exchange Limited. The petitioners, as indeed the aforesaid company, have been carrying on business in forward trading in certain commodities. Both the petis...
Jugmug Electric and Radio Co. Vs. Telerad Private Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-25-1977
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT315
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) The sole question for decision in this appeal is whether the Assistant Registrar (Trade Marks) in his order dated August 26, 1970 and the learned Single Judge in the first appeal disposed of on the 19th October 1976 were right in cancelling the registration of the appellant's trade mark 'Telerad' on the ground that the said registration had been made in contravention of section 11(a) of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (hereinafter called the Act). The facts constituting the alleged contravention of section 11(a) of the Act are as follows :-(2) The respondent used the trade mark 'TELERAD' in respect of 'radio receiving sets and component parts thereof' being goods included in class 9 of the Fourth Schedule of the Rules made under the Act since 1-10-1957 and got the said trade mark registered under No. 181813 on 14th October 1957. It also got registered the said word 'TELERAD' together with a device of a diamond in respect of 'radio receiving sets and comp...
Purshottam Dass and ors. Vs. Har NaraIn and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Delhi114; 14(1978)DLT8; [1978]113ITR389(Delhi)
Yogeshwar Dayal, J. (1) This appeal has been placed before the full Beach in view of the order of reference dated May 18, 1977, passed by Kapur, J-(2) The appeal was filed by the plaintiff-appellants against the order dated May 14, 1973 passed by Shri A. K. Srivastava, Sub-Judge, Delhi holding that the value of the suit for purposes of court-fees and jurisdiction was Rs. 54,000 and also holding that the suit had not been valued correctly for purposes of court-fees and jurisdiction and that he had no jurisdiction to try the suit and directed that the plaint be returned to the plaintiffs for presentation to the proper court.(3) The plaintiff-appellants had filed the present suit, out of which the appeal arises, in their representative capacity under Order 1, rule 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The prayer made in the plaint was as under : '17.Therefore, the plaintiffs pray that a Declaration decree to the effect' with costs of the suit be passed in favor of the Ram Sanahi Sect. that th...
Muni Lal Vohra and anr. Vs. Delhi Municipal Corporation and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-24-1977
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT323
T.V.R. Tatachari, C.J. (1) This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners, Shri Muni Lal Vohra and Shri Hira Lal Vohra, praying that the order (Annexure A.6), dated 19th June, 1974, whereby the Assistant Assessor and Collector, Delhi Municipal Corporation, enhanced the rateable value of the property No. 2537/X, known was RamJas Building, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi, from Rs. 44,010 to Rs. 82,350 as well as the order of Shri O. P. Singla, Additional District, Judge, Delhi, dated 23rd April, 1976, upholding on appeal the aforesaid order of the Assistant Assessor and Collector be quashed. The Delhi Municipal Corporation has been imp leaded as the first respondent and Shri O. P. Singia has been imp leaded as the second respondent.(2) The petitioners are the owners of the aforesaid Ramjas Building situated on Plot No. Ii, Block No. Iv, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi, which bears the Municipal No. 2537/X. The petitioners let out the entire ground floor of the building with attached bath and lav...
Ram Kishan Vs. State and
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-20-1977
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT188
Yogeshwar Dayal, J. (1) This is a revision petition filed by Ram Krishan against his conviction and sentence under section 7 read with section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act for sale of adulterated curd of tonned milk on 25th June, 1973 to Food Inspector S.K. Ahuja for analysis, the sale having been made by one Hari Singh on behalf of the petitioner. (2) The trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 . (3) The petitioner, being aggrieved from the conviction and sentence, went up in appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who on hearing the appeal, affirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence to six months Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3000.00 . In default of payment of fine, he was directed to undergo R.I. six months. (4) The petitioner came up to this Court by way of the present revision petition against his conviction and sentence. (5) When the petition came up f...
Ram Piari and ors. Vs. the Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Delhi129; 1978RLR186
Prithvi Raj, J. 1. Lands covered by award No. 1956 dated 21st March, 1967, were acquired by the Delhi Administration for a public purpose, viz., planned development of Delhi at public expense. One Smt Surjo along with others claiming to be persons interested in respect of their lands acquired feeling aggrieved by the award filed reference petition under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (herein to be called 'the Act') before the Land Acquisition Collector (herein to be called 'the Collector') requiring him to refer the matter for the determination of the Court. During the pendency of the reference petition in the Court of an Additional District Judge, Delhi, (Shri G. R. Luthra), Smt. Surjo died. Am application was filed in the Court on 12th Oct. 1971, requesting that her daughters, namely, Smt. Ram Piari, Smt. Bhagwati, Smt. Champa and Smt. Ratna in whose favor Smt. Surjo was stated to have made a will be brought on the record, As per averment in the said application Smt. Surjo died on...
G.D. Iyer and ors. Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-17-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ1180; 15(1979)DLT138
Avadh Behari Rohatgi, J. (1) For the first time in India the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 introduced the law of limitation in criminal cases. Chapter xxxvi is a newly introduced chapter containing brand-new sections 467 to 473. These sections prescribe periods of limitation for launching a criminal prosecution in, certain cases. Under the repealed Code of 1898, no period of limitation was prescribed or launching a criminal prosecution and the court could not throw out a private complaint or a police report solely on the ground of delay, though delay might be a good ground for doubting the prosecution story. This was consistent with the original theory of criminal justice. In a civil case a party can always compromise or get rid of his liability with the assent of the injured party. But crimes are offences against the State. All proceedings are in theory instituted on behalf of the Crown or the State. The law of limitation did not apply to criminal proceedings unless it was made app...
State Bank of India Vs. Harnam Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-14-1977
Reported in: 13(1977)DLT190
D.K. Kapur, J. (1) The tenant has appealed against the order of ejectment passed by the Additional Rent Controller which was confirmed by the Rent Control Tribunal. A preliminary question has arisen as to whether the appeal is within time. An application as also been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act claiming extension of limitation. I take up this question of limitation first. (2) The judgment of the Tribunal was pronounced on 28th October, 1976. The certified copy was applied for on 3rd November 1976 and was ready on 4th December 1976. The appeal was filed in this Court on 17th February, 1977. Along with the appeal an application was filed claiming exemption from the certified copy of the Rent Controlier's order. That was C.M. 304 of 1977. On this application I exempted the filing of the certified copy and admitted the appeal. There was also an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condensation of delay in filing the appeal. I was under the impressio...
Eknath Laxman Choudhury Vs. Superintendent Central Jail and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Oct-11-1977
Reported in: ILR1978Delhi157
Avadh Behari, J. (1) Eknath Laxman Choudhury, petitioner inthis petition, seeks a writ of habeas corpus challenging the validity ofhis detention.(2) The Additional District Magistrate Delhi passed an order ofdetention on 21/04/1977 under sub-clause (i) of clause (a) ofsub-section (1) of section 3 of the Maintenance of Internal SecurityAct (the Act) directing that the petitioner be detained on the groundthat it was necessary so to do 'with a view to preventing him fromacting in any manner prejudicial to the security of India.' Immediatelyhe was served with the grounds of detention.(3) The petitioner is the deputy marketing manager in the StateTrading Corporation. In the grounds of detention it was alleged thathe was passing secret information and classified documents to theagent of a foreign power. It was said that in a confessional statementmade by him before the metropolitan magistrate on 14/02/1977he had confessed his guilt. The grounds of detention are the following:'ONreceipt of in...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »