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

1966 Supreme(Kar) 59

A.R.SOMNATH IYER, AHMED ALI KHAN
NANEPPA – Appellant
Versus
DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DIVISION – Respondent


SOMNATH IYER, J.

( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition is directed against an order made by the Additional District Magistrate kolar, on December 3, 1963 by which he cancelled a licence granted to the petitioner for possession of a double barrel gun This order made by the Additional Distric) Magistral? was confirmed by the Divisional Commissioner in an appeal under Section 18 of the Arms Act.

( 2 ) THE argument maintained before us bv Mr Ranga Rao appearing for the petitioner is that the order made by the Licensing Authority, namely the Additional District Magistrate, was without power since before he cancelled the petitioner's licence, he gave no opportunity to the petitioner to make a representation against the cancellation of the licence. He contended, in addition, that the Divisional Commissioner mentioned in the course of Ms order many facts in support of the order by which the licence was revoked, which, the petitioner had no opportunity to meet. (8) The order made by the Licensing Authority cancelling the petitioner's licence reads: memo "in the circumstances reported by the S. P. , Kolar, the arms licence standing in the name of Sri nanappa, son of Narayanappa, of Sadali village, Sidl








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