R.P.KHOSLA, S.S.DULAT, S.B.CAPOOR
Harish Chand – Appellant
Versus
Collector Of Amritsar – Respondent
1. We are asked to consider in this case whether the provisions contained in Section 35 of the Punjab State Aid to Industries Act, 1935, are repugnant to the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution.
2. The petitioner, at whose instance this question has been raised, was granted a loan of Rs. 5000 in October., 1950, this being one or the forms in which State aid could be given by virtue of Section 17 of the Act. To secure the loan, a bond, mortgaging a piece of land with Government, was obtained. The loan had to be repaid at a certain lime, but the petitioner did not make any payment and, in consequence, the officer empowered under the Act, issued a notice under Section 23 of the Act, and, since this did not have any effect, the competent officer issued a declaration mentioning the amount due from the petitioner. Section 24 of the Act makes such a declaration conclusive evidence of its contents and permits the production of such a declaration in a civil Court as it it were a decree of a civil Court, and section 25 of the Act requires that on the production of such a declaration the civil Court will proceed to attach the property mentioned in the declaration and fur ther
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.