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

1968 Supreme(All) 148

L.PRASAD
Kashi Prasad Saksena – Appellant
Versus
State Government of U. P. Lucknow – Respondent


Advocates:
K.S. Hajela, for Petitioner; Chief Standing Counsel, for Opposite Party.

ORDER :- This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner was enrolled as a Notary Public for the first time in 1959 to practise as such at Lucknow. His certificate was renewed for a period of three years with effect from 20th August, 1962. It was during this period of renewal that a complaint was made against him by another Advocate, Sri Krishan Chandra on 2nd May, 1963 to the State Government in Form 13 as required by the Notaries Rules, 1956. This complaint was referred for enquiry to the Competent Authority, namely, the District Judge, Lucknow. On the basis of the allegations made in the complaint the Competent Authority framed the following three charges :

1. That he (the petitioner) made no entry in his register regarding the three affidavits dated 25-7-1961, 24-8-1961 and 24-8-1961 of Sarju Prasad, Inder Prakash and Chandra Mohan and thus contravened Rule 11 of the Notaries Rules.

2. That none of these four affidavits were stamped with notarial stamp as required under Article 42 of the Stamp Act.

3. That none of these four affidavits was stamped with adhesive stamps in accordance with Sections 10 and 11 or the Stamp Act, though it was the duty of the Not






























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