Finding of valid dealer registration treated as fact; no question of law arose in reference jurisdiction.

A finding that a purchasing dealer held a valid registration certificate, when based on appreciation of the record, is a pure finding of fact and not open to interference in reference jurisdiction. On that footing, the consequential direction to scrutinise declarations and allow only those in order followed automatically. The Court therefore held that no referable question of law arose from the framed issues and declined to answer the reference, rendering it not maintainable on those questions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the questions referred arose as questions of law, and whether the finding that the purchasing dealer was validly registered could be interfered with in reference jurisdiction.

Analysis: The determination that the purchasing dealer held a valid registration certificate was based on appreciation of the materials on record and was treated as a pure finding of fact. Once that finding stood, the consequential direction to scrutinise the declarations and allow only those in order followed as a matter of course. In such circumstances, no referable question of law was shown to arise under the reference provision.

Conclusion: The reference was not maintainable on the questions framed, and the Court declined to answer them.

Ratio Decidendi: A finding that a dealer is validly registered, when supported by evidence, is a finding of fact; a reference court will not entertain questions that do not raise a question of law from such a finding.

---