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

1999 Supreme(Kar) 389

P.VISHWANATHA SHETTY
S AND P ENTERPRISES – Appellant
Versus
COMISSIONER, BANGALORE MAHANAGARA PALIKE – Respondent


( 1 ) IN all these petitions, the petitioners have sought for a direction to the respondent-Corporation to consider the applications for renewal of their licence to carry on business (hereinafter referred to as "the trade licence") and also to quash the endorsement given to each of the petitioners.

( 2 ) IT is the case of the petitioners that they have been carrying on business either in Restaurants or Pubs in the premises, which are the subject-matter of dispute in these petitions, for the last several years; and the respondents, without any justification, are refusing to renew their trade licences on the ground that the premises in question are situated in a cellar portion of the buildings.

( 3 ) SRI B. K. Sampath Kumar and Sri K. L. Manjunath, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submitted that since the petitioners have been carrying on business in the premises in question for the last several years and the licences were granted to them to carry on business in the premises in question after inspection of the premises by the officers of the Corporation, it is not permissible for the respondents at this stage to refuse to renew the licences on the ground that the peti



















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