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

1996 Supreme(Kar) 289

T.S.THAKUR
S. NAGARAJ – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


TIRATH S. THAKUR, J.

( 1 ) CONSTITUTIONAL validity of Section 93 (2) (c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rule 113 (5) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules is what is called in question in this writ petition. The challenge falls for consideration in the following circumstances.

( 2 ) IN terms of the Provisions of Section 93 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, an agent or a canvasser, dealing in the sale of tickets for travel by a public service vehicle or otherwise engaged soliciting customers for such vehicles, as also an agent engaged in the business of collecting, forwarding or distributing goods carried by goods carriage is required to obtain a licence from the competent authority who may grant the same subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by the state government. One of the conditions that can be prescribed for the grant of any such licence is the deposit of a security amount not exceeding Rs. 50,000/- in the case of an agent in the business of collecting, forwarding or distributing goods carried by goods carriage, and a sum not exceeding rupees five thousand in the case of any other agent or canvasser. As per Rule 113 (5) of the Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, the










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