Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.39 seconds)
Kandula Radhakrishna Rao And Ors. vs The Province Of Madras Represented By ... on 16 November, 1951
cites
Section 8 in Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930 [Entire Act]
The Public Prosecutor vs R.T. Narasimha Reddy on 30 July, 1947
8. On the facts found in the 'Public Prosecutor v. Narasimha Reddy', 1947-2 Mad LJ 220 and the 'Government of Madras v. Veerabhadrappa', I. L. R. (1951) Mad 257, there can be no doubt whatever that the merchants in those cases do not fall within the definition of "dealer". They themselves neither sold nor bought the goods. They simply brought the seller and the buyer together and received a brokerage or commission by way of remuneration for their trouble. It does not appear that the plaintiffs in those cases were entrusted with the possession or control of the goods or that they had authority to transfer the property or the title, in the goods. They could not therefore have effected a sale as defined in Section 2 (h) of the Act.