Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-17-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Delhi202; ILR1972Delhi122
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) After the dis(2) The right of appeal is a substantive one and has to be given by some statute expressly or by necessary implication. We have to find out, thereforee, the particular provision of law which gives the Union of India the right of appeal. Section 4(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure enacts that 'in the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or otherwise affect any special or local law'. Provisions of the Letters Patent of the High Courts have been held to be such 'special law'. For instance, clause 36 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Bombay was held to be applicable in preferences to section 98 of the Code to govern an appeal from the original side of the High Court to a third Judge where two Judges had differed. (Bhahidas v. Pai Gulab 1921) 481. A. 1810. Under sub-section (1) of .section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 'where a single Judge of the High Court of Delhi exercises ordinary...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-19-1971
Reported in : AIR1972Delhi50
1. The main question which arises for decision in this appeal by the wife under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is as to what is meant by the expression 'incurably of unsound mind' used in Section 13(d)(iii) of the Act 2. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 does not define the term 'unsound mind' I find that while laying down the conditions for a Hindu Marriage under Section 5(ii) of the Act the Parliament used word 'idiot or lunatic' for disqualifying a party from entering into a valid marriage. Under Section 10(1)(e) the term 'unsound mind' has been used for giving a right to a party to pray for a decree of judicial separation. Under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act a party is entitled to ask for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party has 'been incurably of unsound mind' for a continuous period of not less than three years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. The use of different expressio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-22-1971
Reported in : 1971CriLJ1605; ILR1971Delhi607; 1971RLR17
M.R.A. Ansari, J. (1) This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of a Single Bench of this Court in C.W. No. 464/70. The first appellant herein is a Company engaged in the manufacture and sale of corn flakes and the second appellant is its Managing Director. The, corn flakes manufactured by the first appellant are sold under the brand 'Bingo Corn Flakes'. M/s. Lipton (India) Limited are the sole distributors of the corn flakes manufactured by the first appellant. On 61-1970, a food inspector of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi purchased three packets of Bingo Corn Flakes from the shop of one Shri Madan Gopal, situated at 78, Ansari Market, Daryaganj, Delhi. One of these packets was sent to the Public Analyst for examination and the Public Analyst sent a report to the effect that the corn flakes contained in this packet were adulterated inasmuch as they contained 5.77% moisture by weight as against the maximum moisture content of 5% by weight prescribed under the standards f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Mar-11-1971
Reported in : ILR1971Delhi338; [1972]84ITR125(Delhi)
Hardayal Hardy, J. (1) In this reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') the following two questions of law have been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'A' New Delhi) : (1)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs. 5,282.00 incurred by the assessed in connection with his foreign tour was a revenue expenditure entitled to deduction in computing his professional income (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. the Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 3.000.00 received by the assessed was receipt of a casual and non-recourring nature exempt from tax u/s. 4(3) (vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act 1922?The respondent who will herein-after be referred to as 'Asscssee' is a medical practitioner and is a specalist in the treatment of skin diseases. The assessment year is 1958-59, the relevant previous year being the financi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Oct-30-1971
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi804
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The petition of the respondent made under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and under Article 227 of the Constitution was allowed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. This appeal against the said order is filed under clause 10 of the Letters Patent issued on 2t-3-1919 for the High Court of Lahore since then applicable to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, and the High Court of Delhi. Clause 10 reads as below :- '10.And we do further ordain that an appeal shall lie to said High Court of Judicature at Lahore from the judgment (not being a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in respect of a decree or order made in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction by a Court subject to the superintendence of the said High Court, and not being an order made in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, and not being a sentence or order passed or made in the exercise oi the power of superintendence under the provision of S. 107 of the Governmen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-29-1971
Reported in : 9(1973)DLT20
Parkash Narain, J. (1) This appeal is directed against the order of a learned Single Judge of this Court sitting on the original side whereby an interim injunction was issued against the appellant on a motion by the respondent.(2) The respondent/plaintiff manufactures and sells playing cards. On 8th February, 1966, the respondent/plaintiff registered under No. 233581 In Class 16 a trade mark consisting of the device of a tractor and the word 'tractor' turn his playing cards. The appellant defendant also trades in playing cards and it is alleged by the respondent that early in 1971 he came to know that the appellant had adopted the trade mark 'Ferguson' in relation to its playing cards and was marketing the same under that name also using the device of a tractor on the back of the playing cards. The respondent thereforee, brought an action against the appellant seeking permanent injunction restraining the appellant from infringing the registered trade mark of the respondent and passing ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Apr-16-1971
Reported in : ILR1971Delhi51B; [1972]84ITR451(Delhi)
S.N. Andley, J. (1) The question which falls for consideration in this writ petition is whether the expression 'tax payable' used in section 280Zb of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as ''the Act' means the tax payable according to the Income-tax Officer upon regular assessment as contended by the respondents or the tax payable upon a self assessment as contended by the petitioner. This section appears in Chapter XXII-B of the Act relating to Tax Credit Certificates. This Chapter comprises of sections 280Y to 280ZE and was inserted by the Finance Act, 1965 with effect from April 1, 1965. The petitioner is a public limited company and carries on business. inter alia, of the manufacture and sale of cement and refractories etc. It manufactures and produces articles which are mentioned in the 1st Schedule to the .Industries (Development & Regulation) Act, 1951. The respondents to the petition are the Central Board of Direct Taxes (respondent No. 1); the Commissioner of Inc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-18-1971
Reported in : ILR1971Delhi147; [1972]30STC132(Delhi)
V.S. Deshpande, J. (1) The English phrase 'He will never set the Thames on fire' (corresponding in French and German to 'He will never set the Seine on fire' and 'He will never set the Rhine on fire') to denote the highly improbable failed to find a parallel in India when in March 1968 the newspapers carried the sensational headlines 'Ganga on fire'.(2) When the Barauni Refinery was established near the town of Monghyr on Ganga in 1964, it was required by section 12(1) of the Factories Act, 1948, to make effective arrangements for the disposal of wastes and effluents arising in the manufacturing process at the Refinery. The scheme Brd 39 prepared by it to. discharge the effluents into the Ganga was approved by the Bihar Government under section 12(2) thereof. The Refinery followed the said scheme of discharging its effluent into the Ganga. On 3rd March 1968 the water -supply to Monghyr town was suspended as oil was noticed on the surface of the water near the intake pumping sets. A fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-18-1971
Reported in : ILR1971Delhi21
V.S. Deshpande, J.(1) With a view to regulate development and use of land and buildings in Delhi a civic survey of Delhi was carried out and a Master Plan was promulgated by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter called the Authority) under section 7 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 (hereinafter called the Act). The Master Plan, which came into force on 1-9-1962, defined the various zones into which Delhi was divided for the purposes of development and indicated the manner in which the land in each zone was proposed to be used and the stages by which any such development shall be carried out. The Master Plan divided Delhi into various zones such as residential, commercial, industrial etc. The premises situated in each such use zone are to be used only for those purposes and not for other purposes. The premises of the petitioners are situated in residential use zones. They began to be used for commercial purposes after the coming into force of the Master Plan. The dates from whi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-23-1971
Reported in : ILR1972Delhi446
Sachar, J.(1) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the list of. appointment of Superintend ents Class Ii Gazetted (annexure 'C') prepared by respondents 1 to 3 in pursuance of Rule 9(3) (a) of the Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Service Rules, 1968, (hereinafter called the Rules) and also asking for a mandamus directing the respondents i.e. Union of India and Depart- mental Promotion Committee respondents I and 2 respectively, to fill the post of the Superintendent of the Service by departmental candidates holding appointments in the existing grades by screening them for such initial appointment afresh. The petition also seeks to strike off Regulation 4(4) of the Armed Forces Headquarters Civil Services (Promotion to grades of Senior Civilian Staff Officers, Civilian Staff Officers. and Superintendent) Regulations, 1968, (hereinafter called the Regulations) as ultra virus of Articles. 14 & 16 of the Constitution and the Rules.(2) Prior to 1...
Tag this Judgment!