SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1969 Supreme(SC) 341

J.M.SHELAT, I.D.DUA, C.A.VAIDIALINGAM
Jeewan Nath Wahal – Appellant
Versus
Sheikh Mahfooz – Respondent


Advocates:
C.K.DAFTARY, H.R.GOKHALE, ILYAS HUSSAIN, J.P.GOYAL, S.Baggar, S.K.DHAVAN, V.C.PRASHAR, YOGESHAR PRASAD

Judgment

SHELAT, J. : The question arising in this appeal, by certificate, may be stated thus :

When an applicant applies for a permit to run a passenger bus service on the ground that the route for which he applies, though one not yet opened, is necessary in public interest, but the Regional Transport Authority comes to the conclusion that it does not, and thereupon rejects his application, whether his order is one under S. 48 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 4 of 1939 and is, therefore, appealable under Section 64 (a) of that Act ?

2. The route involved in this case was the one between Meerut and Dankaur which had no direct passenger bus service. There were, however, two routes which were being operated, namely, one from Meerut to Bulandshahar and the other from Siana to Dankaur, one crossing the other, so that if one wanted to go from Meerut to Dankaur there was no direct service, and, therefore, he would have first to travel in the bus running from Meerut to Bulandshahar, get down at a place near Gulsothi and catch the bus running from Siana to Dankaur. This was the position when the appellants, amongst others, applied to the Regional Transport Authority for permits to operate a direct s












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top