Court : Delhi
Reported in : AIR1973Delhi15
1. The respondent therein M/s. Rishi Raj and Company filed an application in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, 1st, Class, Delhi, under Section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for referring certain disputes between the respondent and the appellant to arbitration of the arbitrator named in the agreement dated 5-11-1963. According to the averments in the application, the Regional Director (Food), Northern Region, had issued an invitation to tender dated 21-9-1963 for the appointment of loading/unloading and transport contractors at Government of India Godowns and Railway Heads at Agra. The tender submitted by the respondent was accepted by the government by its letter of acceptance dated 11-10-1963. The respondent commenced the work but before the work was completed and before the expiry of the period of the contract, the Regional Director (Food) cancelled the contract on 25-6-1964. The Regional Director further claimed a sum of Rs.21,314.15 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1950Ori169
Ray, C.J. 1. The petition ig directed against an order of remand passed by Sri B. C. Das, District Judge of Cuttaok-Dbenkanal, in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 87 of 1948, reversing an order dated, 4th qetober 1948 of Sri B. S. Patnaik, Additional Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, in Money Suit No. 8/342 of 1948/47. The suit was for recovery of Rs. 2193-12-0 being the sum borrowed with interest accrued thereon, under two handnotes executed by the opposite party in favour of the petitioner. The defendant resisted the suit, while accepting that the hand-notes were genuine and for consideration, with a plea of payment. The material date on which and since when the events giving rise to this application occurred is 3rd July 1948. On that date, the plaintiff was ready to go on with the hearing of the suit, and filed a list of witnesses. The defendant interposed a plea, as a barrier to the suit, by a petition purporting to be one undtr Order 23, Rule 3, Civil P. C. for recording as a compromise an aw...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1975Delhi868
S. Rangarajan, J.(1) The respondent (R. S. Ramachandran). Editor of a Weekly called 'Crusader', not only wrote a letter to the Registrar of this Court on 3rd June 1974 but also published the contents of that letter in two issues of his paper, namely, of the 3rd and 12th August, 1974. A notice to show cause why action should not be taken against the respondent under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter called 'the Act') in respect of the said letter, dated 3rd June 1974, had been directed to issue by a Division Bench of this Court on 24-7-1974. Rule was not issued in the first instance since the Division Bench could not then make certain whether the impugned letter had in fact been written by the respondent. When he did not deny the letter but admitted it he was heard by the Division Bench which by its order dated 16-5-1975 drew Ins attention to certain specific portions of the letter which prima facieconstituted contempt and thus took cognizance, suo moth, of the alleged crimi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1951All257
Malik, C.J.1. These applications have been filed on behalf of certain persons who own motor buses and carry passengers for hire on various routes in Uttar Pradesh. The applicants want appropriate relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. The applications can be grouped according to the routes over which the transport buses of the various bus-owners or transport companies were running.2. Civil Misc. Cases Nos. 4 to 7, 71 to 98 and 133 to 140 of 1950 relate to the route Khurja-Bulandshahr-Delhi. The applicants in these cases are represented by Mr. Gopal Swarup Pathak. Civil Misc. Cases Nos. 8 to 70 of 1950 relate to Meerut-Delhi route and the applicants in these cases are also represented by Mr. Pathak.3. Civil Misc. Cases Nos. 99, 100, 104 to 116 of 1950 relate to Garhmukteshwar-Hapur-Delhi route and the applicants in these cases are represented by Shri Alladi Krishnaswami and Mr. S.B. L. Gour.4. Civil Misc. Cases Nos. 118, 119 and 120 of 1950 relate to buses running on the Mathura ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1973SC1461; (1973)4SCC225; [1973]SuppSCR1
1. I propose to divide my judgment into eight parts. Part I will deal with Introduction; Part II with interpretation of Golakhnath case; Part III with the interpretation of the original Article 368, as it existed prior to its amendment; Part IV with the validity of the Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Act; Part V with the validity of Section 2 of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act; Part VI with the validity of Section 3 of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act; Part VII with Constitution (Twenty- ninth Amendment) Act; and Part VIII with conclusions.PART I-Introduction2. All the six writ petitions involve common questions as to the validity of the Twenty- fourth, Twenty-fifth and Twenty-ninth Amendments of the Constitution. I may give a few facts in Writ petition No. 135 of 1970 to show how the question arises in this petition. Writ Petition No. 135 of 1970 was filed by the petitioner on March 21, 1970 under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of his ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal508
Sinha, J.1. These are two applications, one by the Indian and General Investment Trust. Ltd., suing as Trustees of the Khalli-kote Raj Sterling Loan, 1906 and another by the Indian and General Investment Trust Ltd., for an order that certified copies of the orders passed on the 29th day of November 1949 by the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, England, in Actions Nos. 337 of 1949 and 351 of 1949 of that Court together with certified copies of the certificates dated the 9th day of January 1950 issued by the Master of the Supreme Court of Judicature in England, granted under Section 10 of the Foreign judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, 1933, together with the usual certificate of non-satisfaction, be transmitted to the District Judge's Court at Berhampore in the province of Orissa, for execution. These applications have been made under Section 44A read with Section 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure. By consent of parties, the two matters have been heard together.2. The facts ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2006)144PLR802; 2006(11)SCALE108
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.Background facts:2. Appellants are tenants in the premises situated within the Union Territory of Chandigarh. They were protected in terms of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short, 'the 1949 Act'). The Administrator of Chandigarh in exercise of his power conferred upon him under Section 3 of the 1949 Act issued a notification dated 07.11.2002 whereby and whereunder it was directed that the provisions thereof would not apply to the buildings; monthly rent whereof exceeded Rs. 1,500/-. Aggrieved by issuance of the said notification, Appellants filed writ petitions before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, questioning the vires of Section 3 of the 1949 Act as also the validity of the said notification dated 07.11.2002 on diverse grounds. The said petitions have been dismissed. These appeals arise for the said judgments and orders. Before adverting to the questions involved in these appeals, we may notice the legislative...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Swatanter Kumar, C.J.1. The Law of Arbitration was earlier governed by Indian Arbitration Act, 1899. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 also provided for arbitration as Special Proceedings in the following terms:89. Arbitration. (1) Save in so far as is otherwise provided by the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899; or by any other law for the time being in force, all references to arbitration whether by an order in suit or otherwise, and all proceedings there under, shall be governed by the provisions contained in the Second Schedule.(2) The provisions of the Second Schedule shall not affect any arbitration pending at the commencement of this Code, but shall apply to any arbitration after that date under any agreement or reference made before the commencement of this Code.The said provision however, was repealed by Section 49 and Schedule III of Arbitration Act (10 of 1940). The Arbitration Act of 1940 itself was repealed by Section 85 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, hereinafter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2005SC3401; 2005(4)AWC3085(SC); 2005(4)CTC606; 2006(1)CTLJ19(SC); JT2005(8)SC171; (2005)12SCC77; 2005(2)LC1366(SC)
S.B. Sinha. J1. Constitutionality of Section 22-A of the Registration Act (The Act) as amended by the State of Rajasthan as also the notifications issued by it in terms thereof are in question in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 28.11.2000 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3554 of 1999.FACTS:2. The Respondent herein is a resident of town of Bikaner. He was a Khatedar tenant of agricultural lands situated at Chak No. 13 KYD, Square No. 110/24, Killa No. 1 to 25 Bighas, Tehsil Khajuwala, District Bikaner. He appointed one Sukhdeo Singh as his attorney authorizing him to look after his lands, cultivate the same and to do all other acts, deeds and things including mortgage or sell the same, get the requisite deeds and documents registered, by a deed of Power Of Attorney dated 16.7.1999. The said deed was presented before the Sub-Registrar. Bikaner on 30.7.1999 for the purpose of regi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2005KAR3710; 2005(4)KarLJ481
ORDERV. Gopala Gowda, J.1. These batches of writ petitions are filed by the owners of agricultural and/or converted lands, house sites, residential/farm houses, companies and builders and others questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the acquisition of vast extent of lands for a development scheme called ARKAVATHI LAYOUT. The main features of the layout, as mentioned in the report of the Engineering Department of the BDA, are:(a) Total extent of land required : 2750 acres(b) Proposed residential sites : 28600(c) Civic Amenity sites : 50(d) Commercial sites : 150(e) Total estimation : Rs. 933.47 Crores(f) Total amount received : Rs. 981.36 Crores(g) Saving : Rs. 47.89 Crores(h) No. of villages covered : 16(i) No. of applicants : 2,32,000The details of various dimensions of the residential sites, the extent of land used for various purposes such as residential sites, park and play grounds, civic amenities, roads etc., the amount that would be realised from the sites, the t...
Tag this Judgment!