Delhi Court September 1978 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.
Joginder Singh Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-09-1978
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT205
R.N. Aggarwal, J.(1) Joginder Singh Alies Joginder Pal, aged 22, was tried in the Court of Mr. T.S. Oberoi, Additional Sessions Judge on the charges under Sections 394 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code. The Additional Sessions Judge found the accused guilty of the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. The accused was also found guilty of an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. (2) Against his convictions and sentences the accused has come in appeal. (3) The case for the prosecution is this: On 15th September 1977 at about 2.30 p.m. Surat Singh Mann (P.W. 4) boarded bus No. 131 from Singhu Border for Mandi House. Public Witness . 4 changed the bus at G.P.O. Kashmiri Gate and boarded bus No. 28 for Mandi House. Public Witness . 4 took a seat near the window but as it started raining he got up from the seat and...
Mohd. YamIn Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT120
R.N. Aggarwal, J.(1) MOHD. Yamin, aged 25, was tried in the Court of Shri V.B. Bansal, Additional Sessions Judge on the charges under Sessions 393, 398 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code. He was also tried for the offence under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. The learned Additional Sections Judge found the accused guilty of all the charges and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years under Section 393 read with Section 398 and to rigorous imprisonment for one year on the charge under Section 451 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused was convicted of the offence under the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Against his convictions and sentences the accused has preferred this appeal through jail. The case for the prosecution is this Public Witness .4 Gurdial Singh with his wife Rattan Devi (P.W.3) and children resided in house No. 26/25, Gali No. 11 Vishwas Nagar. Gurdial Singh has a tea stall ...
Karma Wali Vs. Rajinder Singh
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT1; 1978RLR611
Awadh Behari Rohtagi, J. (1) The petitioner Smt. Karma Wali is the landlady. The respondent Shri Rajinder Singh is her tenant in the ground floor of house No. F-20, Rajouri Garden at a rent of Rs 140.00 per month. (2) On October 7, 1976 the landlady brought a petition for the eviction of the tenant on the ground of personal bonafide necessity specified in clause (e) of proviso to sub-section (1) of S. 14 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (The Act). The Additional Controller tried the petition under the newly introduced procedure of S. 25B, of the Act. Summons were issued to the tenant. He did not appear. He made no application for leave to defend the case. The Additional Controller, deeming the allegations in the eviction petition to have been admitted to be correct, passed the eviction order against the tenant on February 21,1977. (3) On April 12, 1977 the tenant received a notice dated March 31, 1977 from the landlady. From this he came to know that an ex-parte eviction order had b...
Co-op for American Relief Vs. P.N. Krishna Murthy
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT221
H.L. Anand, J.1. Defendants, Cooperative American Relief Every where, CARE, and others, in two consolidated suits by plaintiff, P.N. Krishnamurthy, based on the latter's claim to copyright in the work entitled 'LAKSHMAN KILLS A TIGER', challenge an order of the trial Court directing the discovery by the defendants of certain documents on an application of the plaintiff under Order 11 Rules 12, 15 and 18 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The facts and Circumstances leading to the challenge may be briefly stated.2. Plaintiff, Krishnamurthy, who claims to be the author of story entitled 'LAKSHMAN KILLS A TIGER, which has been copyrighted in his favor, alleges that CARE,under license from the plaintiff, entered into contracts with 'CHILDREN ARE PRECIOUS', a name and style in which the plaintiff carries on printing and publication business, for the printing and publication of the said story 'in the form of a cartoon booklet', in various Indian languages and in different ...
Eric Sunil Edride Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1978
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT208
R.N. Aggarwal, J.(1) Ram Babu aged 25, Sri Krishan aged 18 and Eric Sunil Edridge aged 22 were tried in the Court of Shri V.B. Bansal, Additional Sessions Judge on charges under Sections 452. 392 and 397 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In addition to the above charges Sunil was also tried for an offence under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. An order for externment was made against Ram Babu on 21st August 1974 and he was also tried, in addition to the charges mentioned above, for the offence under Section 142 of the Bombay Police Act. The Additional Sessions Judge found all the accused guilty of the offences charged with and sentenced each one of them to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years on the charge under Section 432 and to rigorous imprisonment for 7 years on the charge under Section 392 read with Section 397 of the Indian penal Code. Sunil was further sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 2 years for the offence under the Arms Act and Ram Babu was sentenced to rig...
Vishwa Nath Vs. State
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-06-1978
Reported in: 15(1979)DLT19
R.N. Aggarwal, J. (1) This is a petition by Vishwa Nath Verma through jail. The petitioner is being tried in the court of Shri D.R. Khanna, Additional Sessions Judge for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is stated by the petitioner that the prosecution evidence is being recorded.(2) The complaint of the petitioner is that when he is escorted from the jail to the Court and taken back, he is handcuffed and this is a great physical and mental torture to him. The petitioner alleges that he was a permanent Govern ment servant and had been working in the Ministry of External Affairs and that he is also agraduate from the Punjab University and he has been classed as a better class prisoner and, thereforee, he should not be handcuffed. (3) Rule 26. 21Aofthe Punjab Police Rules Vol. Iii Chapter 26 divides the under trial prisoners into two classes (i) ordinary ; and (ii) better class. Those undertrial prisoners who are accustomed to better standard of living c...
Gobind Ram Matta Vs. Ramesh Lata Chaudhry
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-04-1978
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT201
Rajindar Sachar, J.(1) This judgment shall dispose of two R.S.A. No. 18/77 and R.S.A. No. 156/77. The proceedings in both these cases were consolidated in Trial Court. Counsel for the parties concede that apart from the different documents showing the receipts of rents and transfers by the Custodian Department, points of law arising in both the cases are common. It is also conceded by Mr. Bhatia and Mr. B.I. Singh, counsel for the appellants and Mr. Rameshwar Dial, counsel for the respondent in both the appeals that judgment given in R.S.A. 18/77 in which the main arguments were addressed would determine the result in the other appeal.(2) The respondent/plaintiff filed a suit in which she claimed that the portion of the property were occupied by the appellant unauthorisedly and, thereforee, claimed possession of it and damages for use. Admittedly, the property (including suit premises) was originally an evacuee property. In the first instance, this property was transferred by the Centr...
Union of India Vs. Mai Dayal Agarwal and anr.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1978
Reported in: ILR1979Delhi198
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) Respondent No. 1 who was the sole contesting respondent (respondent No. 2 being the arbitrator) died on the 12th September, 1976. This fact was intimated by Shri J. P. Gupta counsel for the decree-holder. Mai Dayal, to Shri H. S. Dhir, counsel for the judgment-debtor in the execution proceedings. Shri J. P. Gupta also got substituted the names of two legal representatives of the deceased, Mai Dayal, in the execution proceedings, 0n^l9th January, ' 1977, thereforee, Shri H. S. Dhir, counsel for the Union of India, came to know firstly, that Mai Dayal died on 12th September, 1976, and secondly, that tWo persons had been substituted as his legal representatives in the- execution proceedings. (2) On this knowledge, the learned counsel, Shri H. S. Dhir, could have straightway made an application in this appeal as the appellant staling that respondent No. 1 was dead and according to the information given by Shri J. P. Gupta, counsel for the deceased respondent and subse...
Shital Parshad Vs. Mohan Lal
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Sep-01-1978
Reported in: 14(1978)DLT248; 1978RLR603
R.N. Aggarwal, J. (1) The relevant facts for the decision of this second appeal are these : The appellant Shital Parshad is a tenant of premises described as 307/2 Mohalla Ram Nagar, Gandhi Nagar, at a rent of Rs. 46.00 per month under Mohan Lal. On 13th September 1973 the landlord served a notice on the tenant demanding the arrears of rent since 1st July 1973. On 16th November 1973 grounds : (a) non-filled an application for the eviction of the tenant on the landlord payment of arrears of rent and (b) that he required the premises bonafide for his own occupations.(2) The tenant in reply controverter the allegations of the landlord. The tenant pleaded that the rent for July 1973 was paid to the landlord but he refused to issue the receipt inspire of registered notice dated 7th September 1973. The tenant further pleaded that he had tendered the rent for the months of August, September and October 1973 to the landlord but the landlord refused to accept the rent. The tenant further denied...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›