RAM PAL SINGH, B.C.VARMA
ROOPSINGH – Appellant
Versus
LICENCING AUTHORITY/district MAGISTRATE – Respondent
( 2 ) THE present petitioners, on 28-2-1984, applied to the District Magistrate, Tikamgarh for renewal of the cinema licence of Mahabir Talkies for the year 1984-85. The respondent 2 also filed an application on 6-1-1984 before the same authority contending that he has a share in the said talkies and, therefore, the licence in the name of the petitioners be not renewed. The respondent 2 further contended that he is also owner of Mahabir Talkies. In the light of these rival contentions, the District Magistrate, after hearing both the parties passed an order on 23-8-1984 holding that there was sufficient proof that respondent 2 has half share in Mahabir Talkies. The District Magistrate further held that petitioner 1 should get his right and ownership of Mahabir Talkies declared within a month from the date of the order and then after a month the question of renewal shall be considered. Aggrieved by this order of the District Magistrate
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.