Mumbai Court May 1950 Judgments
Dattappa Mahadappa Vs. Secretary, Municipal Committee
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-23-1950
Reported in: 1952CriLJ471
ORDERMudholkar, J.1. This order will also govern the decision of criminal Revn. No. 29 of 1960 The applicant in each ease was convicted at a summary trial of an offence under Section 5(a), C.P. and Berar Prevention of Adulteration Act and sentenced be pay a tine of Rs. 51. Each of them was ordered to pay in addition compensation of Rs. 1-12-0 to the non-applicant.2. The non applicant is the Municipal Committee at Buldana. Its case is that on is 18.1.1949 each of the applicants offered for sale milk which was not of the standard fixed by the Provincial Government by the Notification No. 3775 160 XV of 1941, dated 30.6.1948, under Section 6(1) of the Act. It is admitted before me that each of the applicants offered milk for sale and that a sample was taken therefrom and sent by the Municipal Committee for analysis to the Public Analyst, C.P. and Berar.3. Each of the applicants, however, denied that the milk was adulterated.4. The milk in question was buffalo milk, and the standard prescr...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Hanif Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-16-1950
Reported in: 1951CriLJ74
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 226 (1) of the Constitution for the enforcement of the fundamental rights conferred by the Constitution under Article 19 (1).2. It is common ground that the petitioner went to Karachi in June 1948 and returned to India on 14-11-1948 on a temporary permit valid for two months. Thereafter he applied to the Deputy Commissioner, Nagpur, for the issue of a certificate of permanent residence in India. No such certificate was given to him, and the petitioner was asked to leave India by 20.1-1919. It may be mentioned that the petitioner has his home in Nagpur where the members of his family live, However, in pursuance of the order served on him by the Deputy Commissioner, Nagpur, he left this place on 19-1-1949 for Bombay. From there he went to Karachi by sea and landed there on 30-1-1949. He then went by air from Karachi to Dacca on 3-2-1949. He left Dacca immediately after reaching there and entered the Indian Union. He eventually returned to Nagpur, ...
Tag this Judgment!Punamchand Ganeshdas Vs. King-emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-04-1950
Reported in: 1951CriLJ96
ORDERMudholkar, J.1. The applicant has been convicted of an offence under Section 21 (1)(a). C. P. and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 (XXI 21. of 1947) and sentenced to pay a fine of as. 10.2. The applicant is the owner of a printing press in Arvi. He does job work only. According to the prosecution he is a 'dealer' within the definition of the expression contained in Section 3 (0), Sales Tax Act, that the turnover of his business for the year 1945-46 was in excess of Rs. 5,000, that ha was bound to obtain a registration certificate under Section 8 (1) of the Act, and that he contravened the provisions of this section. According to the applicant he is not a dealer within the definition of the expression contained in the Act and that the work he does, does not amount to Bale of goods. Farther, according to him, the turnover for the year 1945.46 was not Rs. 5,000 because he was entitled to deduct from the value of orders placed with him daring that year a sum of Rs. 367-14-0, which represente...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›