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

1953 Supreme(All) 111

MOOTHAM, GURTU
BABU RAM SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
GOPALJI MEHROTRA, V.D.BHARAGAVA

MOOTHAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in which the petitioner prays, first for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash two orders of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, dated respectively the 21st July and the 3rd November, 1951, and an order of the State Transport tribunal dated 6-8-1952, and secondly, for a writ of mandamus to issue to the State Transport authority, Lucknow, to compel it to accept the replacement of one motor vehicle by another.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is engaged in the business of plying stage carriages and he has been doing so since the year 1930. The facts upon which the petitioner relies are set out in the affidavit which accompanies his petition; and it is of importance to observe that no counter-affidavit has been filed. He states that in September, 1949, the Provincial Transport Authority was prepared to sanction the issue to him of a temporary permit, but as the petitioner had sold the vehicle which previously he had owned and was not possessed of sufficient money to purchase a new vehicle, he approached a financier named Chatter Sen for financial assistance. On the 23rd September chatter Sen purchased a stage ca






























































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