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

1986 Supreme(Guj) 113

I.C.BHATT, S.B.MAJMUDAR
BALDEVBHAI AMBALAL PATNI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.D.DESAI, S.R.SHAH

S. B. MAJMUDAR, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the legality of various orders at Annexures A `b C D E and `h passed by the authorities functioning under the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act 1953 and the Rules framed thereunder. In order to appreciate the grievances of the petitioner a few relevant facts will have to be noted at the out set.

( 2 ) THE petitioner claims to be a Licence holder entitled to run a cinema theater named VISHNU CINEMA at village Mansa taluka Vijapur district Mehsana. The petitioner was issued Cinema Licence under the provisions of Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Bombay Cinema Act ). He was also holding the Booking Licence which is a consequential licence based upon the Cinema Licence. The said licence was also issued to him under the very same Act. Under these licences the petitioner was doing the business of exhibiting films at Vishnu Cinema at Mansa taluka Vijapur district Mehsana.

( 3 ) THE respondents herein are the authorities entrusted with the task of enforcing the provisions of the Act and the Rules. The respondent No. 3 Collector and Collector of






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