Karnataka High Court
KARNATAKA BANK LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA - Respondent
Decided On : 10-06-99
Weights and Measures - Karnataka Weights and Measures Act, 1958, Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985 - Section 24
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the validity of notices issued by the department of weights and measures, arguing that the petitioner-bank does not use the weighing instrument in connection with any trade or commercial transaction.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the impugned notices requiring the production of the weighing instruments for verification do not suffer from any illegality.
Issues: Validity of notices issued for verification of weighing instrument under the Karnataka Weights and Measures Act, 1958 and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Enforcement) Act, 1985.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the expression 'transaction' and 'domestic purposes' under the Acts to include transactions with customers by a bank and held that the use of weighing machines by the bank for official purposes in the course of transactions makes verification and stamping necessary.
Final Decision: The petition failed and was dismissed by the court.
( 1 ) THE petitioners in these petitions call in question the validity of notices issued by the concerned inspectors of the department of weights and measures, directing production of weighing instrument used by them for verification and stamping under the Provisions of the kar- nataka weights arid measures Act, 1958. The challenge primarily rests on the plea that, the petitioner-bank does not make use of the weighing instrument in connection with any trade or commercial transaction so as to attract the Provisions of Section 11 of the Mysore (now karnataka) weights and measures (enforcement) Act, 1958 under which the notices have been issued.
( 2 ) AT the hearing today the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner was slightly different. It was conceded that since Karnataka weights and measures (enforcement) Act, 1958 was no longer in operation with the corning into force of standards of weights and measures (enforcement) Act, 1985 (Central Act 54 of 1985), the validity of the impugned notices shall have to be examined by reference to the existing statutory Provisions. In that view, therefore, the question is whether the impugned notices could be sustained under the Provisions of Section 24 of the Central Act mentioned earlier, relevant portion whereof reads as under:"24. Verification and stamping of weights or measures: (1) every person having any weight or measure in his possession, custody or control in circumstances indicating that such weight or measure is being or is intended or likely to be used by him in any transaction or for industrial production or for protection shall, before, putting such weight or measure into such use, have such weight or measure verified at such place and during such hours as the controller may, by general or special Order, specify in this behalf (hereinafter referred to as the specified place or specified time), on payment of such fees as may be prescribed. (2) every weight or measure referred to in sub-section. (1) shall be re-verified at such periodical intervals as may be prescribed. Explanation. For the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that no periodical re-verification shall be necessary in relation to any weight or measure which is used exclusively for domestic purposes".
( 3 ) IT is evident from the above, that every person who has in his possession, custody or control of any weight or measure in circumstances indicating that the same may be used or is intended or likely to be used in connection with any transaction or for industrial production or for protection has to, before putting such weight or measure into such use, get the same verified from the authority designated for that purpose. The critical expression that calls for interpretation is-"any transaction or for industrial production or for protection". It is not in dispute that the petitioner-bank does not use the weighing instrument for any "industrial production" nor is the bank engaged in any industrial activity. According to Mr. Vishwanath, the provision was applicable to the bank in situations where weighing machines are used by it in connection with any transaction that it may enter into with the customers. The expression 'transaction' has not been defined under the act. Support was however drawn by Mr. Vishwanath from the meaning given to the said expression in Section 2 (z) of the standards of weights and measures Act, 1976 (act No. 60 of 1976), which reads as under:"2 (Z) "transaction" means (i) any contract, whether for sale, purchase, exchange or any other purpose, or (ii) any assessment of royalty, toll, duty or other dues, or (iii) the assessment of any work done, wages due or services rendered". while it is not permissible for the courts to borrow the meaning attached to an expression used in one enactment from that given to it in another enactment, yet, in the light of the specific Provisions made in Section 3 (o) of the enforcement act the word 'transaction' used in Section 24 of
AI
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.