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

1993 Supreme(Del) 614

B.N.KIRPAL, USHA MEHRA
LAHORI MAL – Appellant
Versus
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.C.CHOPRA, R.K.AGARWAL

B. N. Kirpal, J.

( 1 ) THE question which arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the respondents can impose a ban on the display of hoardings/advertisements, sign-boards and other advertisements within its jursidiction and whether any prior permission is necessary before the said advertisements are put up.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the petitioners are carrying on the business of advertising and/or are displaying/advertising various products of their customers by placing hoardings/advertisements, sign-boards, neon signs etc. at various sites. Some of the sites belong to public undertakings like the railways while hoardings/advertisements are also put at sites owned by private parties.

( 3 ) UNDER the provisions of the Punjab Municipal Act, bye-laws relating to control and regulation of advertisements were framed by the New Delhi Municipal Committee vide Notification dated 17th September, 1960. According to the respondents bye-law No. 6 thereof required prior permission of the NDMC before any hoarding/advertisement could be put up. The validity of this bye-law was challenged and the learned single Judge of this Court in the case of New Delhi Municipal





















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