Delhi Court December 1996 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.
Atma Ram Properties Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Air India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)641; 65(1997)DLT533
K. Ramamoorthy, J. (1) The plaintiff has filed the application under Order Xii Rule 6 read with Section 151 Civil Procedure Code for a decree being passed against defendant. The plaintiff has prayed for the following reliefs in the plaint : (A)That by way of a decree for possession the plaintiff may be put into the actual, physical and vacant possession of the premises bearing Flat No. 34, including the barest portion, Along with the toilet room, F-l, show room garage bearing Nos. 74,75 and 81 and servant quarters No. 108, 109 & 110 as well as bath room and W.C. under the stairs by evicting the defendant No. 1 from the aforesaid premises situated in Atma Ram Mansion (Scindia House), Connaught Circus, New Delhi. (B)That a decree for Rs. 33,37,475.00 as arrears of rent for the period from 1.12.1991 to 15.7.1992 and from 1.9.1993 to 31.10.1993 @ Rs. 3,54,321.00 per month may be passed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants Along with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of...
Calcutta Soap Oil Industries Vs. Ram Rattan Singh Namdhari
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)244; 1997(40)DRJ553
Usha Mehra, J. (1) M/S Calcutta Soap Oil Industry felt aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Additional District Judge dated 10th December,1990. The appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed. The appellant's main grievance is that the Courts below ignored admitted documents, namely, Exhibit DW-5/6 the affidavit of September,1978 filed by the plaintiff Shri Ram Rattan Singh Namdhari with the Delhi Administration. In this affidavit it was admitted that the tenanted premises was a built up area and not an open land. Similarly in the letter dated 13/14th September,1994, Exhibit DW-5/4 it was admitted by Smt.Leela Wati erstwhile landlady that the premises let out to the appellant consisted of super structure and not a open land. This is so stated in the letter Exhibit DW-2/2. The courts below ignored these documents and instead decided the suit in favor of the plaintiff (respondent herein) on the basis of surmises and conjecture. Court below came to the conclusion that the ten...
Satya Prakash Behl Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)611; 65(1997)DLT395
N.G. Nandi, J.(1) In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for a writ of habeas corpus the petitioner pray for direction to the respondents to forthwith produce the detenu/petitioner before this Court and to forthwith set the petitioner at liberty And quash the order of detention No. F.801/7/96-PITNDPC dated 19.4.1996 And quash the declaration No. 5/96 and to declare as illegal unconstitutional, mala fide and void. (2) The facts leading to the filing of this petition shortly stated are that the flat No. 34-F Building, Nirmal Colony, Bandra (West), Mumbai was raided by the officers of the Ncb, Mumbai on 10.1.1996 which resulted into recovery and seizure of four polythene bags containing brown sugar lying in a steel cupboard in kitchen and 75 capsules containing brown powder from a cavity in the back rest of the sofacum-bed. The brown powder was found to be heroine; that the statement of Ms. Margaret ...
Ranbir Singh Vs. Vidya Sagar Sood
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Dec-01-1996
Reported in: 1997IAD(Delhi)531; 65(1997)DLT1019; (1997)116PLR75
Lokeshwar Prasad, J. (1) The present Revision Petition is directed against order dated the 2nd May, 1989, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi in Mca No. 19/84 - entitled Ranbir Singh and Others v. Vidya Sagar Sood b Others, whereby the learned Additional District Judge dismissed the appeal of the petitioners filed by them against the order dated 8th August, 1984, passed by the learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Delhi in Suit No. 304/84 entitled Ranbir Singh & Others v. Vidya Sagar Sood and Others. (2) The facts relevant for the disposal of the present Revision Petition, briefly stated, are that the petitioners have filed a suit for permanent injunction against the respondents in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Delhi, averring that M/s. Senior Estate Agency (petitioner No. 5), a firm of which petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 are the partners, is a tenant in respect of property, bearing No. 35/1 and 35/2, Raghunandan Singh Building, H-Block, Connaught place. New Delhi as also the te...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›