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

1967 Supreme(Bom) 69

Bombay High Court
CHITALE,PALEKAR
N.E.Merchant - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Decided On : 07/31/1967

Advocates:
R. W. Adik and W. N. Yande, for Appellants; M. A. Rane, Asst. Govt. Pleader, for the State.

The establishment of a chartered accountant is not a commercial establishment within the meaning of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

Headnote:

BOMBAY SHOPS AND ESTABLISHMENTS ACT, 1948 - SECTION 7(2-A) - APPLICABILITY TO CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS - ESTABLISHMENT OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS NOT A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT - CONVICTION AND SENTENCE SET ASIDE.

Fact of the Case:

The applicants, chartered accountants, were convicted and sentenced under Section 52(a) read with Section 7(2)(2-A) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948, for failing to renew their registration certificate. They challenged the conviction on the ground that their establishment was not a commercial establishment within the meaning of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the applicants' establishment was not a commercial establishment within the meaning of the Act. It found that the applicants were practising a profession, not a business or trade, and that there was no element of commerce in their activities. The court also found that the work done by the articled clerks who assisted the applicants was of a routine nature and did not involve the exercise of individual judgement or advice.

Issues: Whether the applicants' establishment was a commercial establishment within the meaning of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicants' establishment was not a commercial establishment because: * The applicants were practising a profession, not a business or trade. * There was no element of commerce in their activities. * The work done by the articled clerks who assisted the applicants was of a routine nature and did not involve the exercise of individual judgement or advice.

Final Decision: The court made the rule absolute, set aside the conviction and sentence, and ordered the refund of any fine paid.

Judgement

PALEKAR, J. :- This is a revision from an order of conviction and sentence passed by the Honorary Presidency Magistrate (Municipal Bench), Bombay, under S. 52(a) read with S. 7(2 (2-A) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. The applicants are chartered accountants carrying on their business in the name Messrs. N.E. Merchant and Co. Both of them are qualified chartered accountants entitled to practise as such in their own right.

2. One Narayan Mahadeo Malik who is the Inspector in the Shops and Establishments Department of the Bombay Municipal Corporation visited the establishment of the applicants on 15-7-1965 and found the following contraventions of the Act, viz., the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948.

(1) The registration Certificate was not displayed at a conspicuous place in the establishment.

(2) Application in Form "B" together with the prescribed fee for the renewal of the Registration Certificate No. B-II-1831 for the year 1965 was not submitted.

The learned Magistrate held that the first contravention had not been proved but the second was proved. He, therefore, convicted the applicant under S. 52(a) read with Section 7(2)(2-A) of the Act.

(3) Section 7(2-A) of the Act provides

"A registration certificate granted under Sub-Section (2), shall be valid up to the end of the year for which it is granted. An application for the renewal of a registration certificate shall be submitted not less than fifteen days before the date of expiry of the registration certificate or of the renewed registration certificate, as the case may be, and shall be accompanied by such fees, and the renewed registration certificate shall be in such form, as may be prescribed."

The form prescribed is form B. There is no dispute that the applicants had obtained a registration certificate under S. 7(1) and (2) of the Act for the year 1964 being Registration Certificate No. B-II-1831. but no application for the renewal of that certificate was made as required by Sub-Section (2-A). In other words, the contravention it admitted. The contention which was put forward on behalf of the applicants was that the Act was not applicable to the establishment of the applicants, and therefore, there was no need to apply either for a registration certificate under S. 7(1) and (2) of, for a renewal of that registration certificate under Sub-Sec. (2-A). That contention, however, was negatived by the learned Honorary Presidency Magistrate, and on conviction the applicants were ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 30 each or in default to suffer simple fine of Rs. 30 each or in default to suffer simple imprisonment for seven days.

3. Section 7 of the Act is found in Chapter II dealing with Registration of Establishments and requires the employer of every establishment to send to the Inspector of the local area concerned a statement in a prescribed form together with a fee for obtaining a registration certificate. The applicants contend that they do not come within the definition of either the word "employer" or "establishment" as defined in the Act, and hence there could be no contravention of any of the provisions of S. 7.

4. The Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948, is an Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to the regulation of conditions of work and employment in shops, commercial establishments, residential hotels restaurants, eating houses, theatres, other places of public amusement or entertainment and other establishments. Section 2 under its Cl. (7) defines the word "employer". Employer means a person owning or having ultimate control over the affairs of an establishment. Under Cl. (8) "Establishments" means a shop, commercial establishment, residential hotel, restaurant, eating house, theatre, or other place of public amusement or entertainment to which this Act applies and includes such other establishment as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be an establishment for the purpose of the A




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top