Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a shop assistant or servant, acting under the control of the proprietor's successor, could be treated as a retail dealer carrying on business without a registration certificate and therefore be liable under the Act.
Analysis: The penal liability under Section 6, as enforced through Section 7, attached to the person who actually carried on business as a retail dealer. The scheme of the Act and the rules distinguished a retail dealer from a servant or salesman employed by him. Rule 11 dealt with the liability of the person carrying on the retail business after the dealer's death, but it did not convert a mere employee into a dealer. On the findings recorded, control of the business had passed to the deceased dealer's son, and the applicant acted only as a servant rendering accounts and working under another's control. A person in that position could not be treated as carrying on the retail business within the meaning of the Act.
Conclusion: The applicant was not a retail dealer and could not be prosecuted for contravention of the Act as a mere servant.
Final Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were set aside, and the fine was ordered to be refunded if paid.
Ratio Decidendi: Penal liability for carrying on business without a registration certificate under this regulatory scheme falls only on the person who ially carries on business as a retail dealer, not on a mere servant or salesman lacking control of the business.