Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.27 seconds)
Da vs Tota Ram Etc. on 8 December, 2017 cites

Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Ghisa Ram on 23 November, 1966

The Hon'ble Court also took a note of the ruling in Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ghisa Ram [AIR 1967 SC 970] wherein it was observed that the right has been given to the vendor for his satisfaction and proper defence, to get the sample analysed by a "greater expert whose certificate is to be accepted by court as conclusive evidence". What is important to be noted is, that no such finality and conclusiveness has been attached to the report of PA and it has been only attached to the report of CFL.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 437 - Full Document

The Administrator Of The City Of Nagpur vs Laxman And Anr. on 18 February, 1985

19. The defence has further relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Administrator of City of Nagpur vs Laxman and another Criminal Appeal No 132/2016 decided on 04.05.1986 wherein it was decided that "This appeal against acquittal arises under Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The whole question is whether the sample of cow milk is adulterated so as to attract the penal provision of the Act. Learned Magistrate who acquitted the respondent who was a small milk vendor noted that the fat percentage is 6% as against 3.5% which is more than the standard prescribed for cow milk. The only shortfall was that S.N.F. was 7.3% where it ought to have been 8.5%. Further, it noted that the total solids are 13.37 which is again more than the satisfying standard of cow milk. Under these circumstances, we cannot say that Courts below have erred in acquitting them giving the benefit of doubt to the respondents. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. However, other questions of law which have been debated by the courts below do not really matter. Therefore, we do not propose to examine the same. "
Bombay High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 25 - Full Document

Calcutta Municipal Corporation vs Pawan K. Saraf And Anr on 13 January, 1999

In Calcutta Municipal Corporation v. Pawan Kumar Saraf [AIR 1999 SC 738], it has been authoritatively laid down that the legal impact of a certificate of the Director of CFL is three fold: (a) it annuls or replaces the report of the PA, (b) it gains finality regarding the quality and standard of the food article involved in the case and (c) it becomes irrefutable so far as the facts stated therein are concerned.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 349 - Full Document
1   2 Next