M.RAMA JOIS, M.M.MIRDHE
MANAKCHAND MOTILAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
( 1 ) IN this batch of Writ petitions, the petitioners, who are carrying on their business as Pawn Broken after having secured licences under the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 and persons who are doing business as Money Lenders having taken licences under the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 have questioned the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers (Amendment) Act, 1985 and the Karnataka Money Lenders (Amendment) Act, 1985 on the ground that the provisions of the said Acts are violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and they have also questioned the constitutional validity of Section 4 (2) (c) and Section 23 (2) of the Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 as violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.
( 2 ) THE material facts necessary for the disposal of these cases are these:- With the object of making better provisions for the regulation and control of transactions of money lending in the State, the Legislature enacted the Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 ("money lenders Act" for short ). Section 2 (10) of the Act defines the expression 'money Lender', It reads:-"2 (10) "money Lender" means (i) an individual; or (ii) a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.