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

1966 Supreme(Pat) 77

K.K.DUTTA, R.L.NARASIMHAM
Chandi Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Prasad Agarwal – Respondent


Judgment

Dutta, J.

1. This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India arises out of an order passed by the authorities of the Arrah Municipality, holding that the petitioner is liable to take three separate licences and pay three separate licence fees under Sec.259 (1) of the Bihar and Orissa Municipal Act for carrying on business of crushing oil seeds, crushing wheat and polishing rice at a place situate in Mohalla Chowdhriana of Arrah Town.

2. The case of the petitioners is that he is carrying on the business of crushing oil seeds and wheat only in the same premises with the help of a motor, namely, an electric motor of ten horse power and he is liable to take out only one licence and pay only one licence fee for carrying on such businesses.

3. The allegation of the petitioner that he is carrying on businesses of crushing oil seeds and wheat only was controverted in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Municipality, in Para. 4 of which it was alleged that the petitioner has been running three businesses and not two as claimed by him. In his rejoinder to this counter affidavit on behalf of the Municipality, the petitioner again alleged that he is runni

















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