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 the respondent's investment scheme constituted a "prize chit" within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978, so as to attract the statutory ban and justify the Registrar's action.
Analysis: The Act was enacted to prohibit schemes that collect money from participants and use it for awarding prizes or refunding amounts with or without premium, while excluding only conventional chits. The definition of "prize chit" is inclusive and is intended to cover schemes that operate under different names but share the essential features of collection of money, allotment of prizes by draw or otherwise, and refund of the balance to non-winning subscribers. The form adopted by the scheme, including routing part of the amount through a bank deposit, did not alter its real character. The company collected a lump sum from each member, deducted a portion for prizes and overheads, and induced subscribers to part with money in the hope of obtaining prizes, which brought the arrangement within the statutory mischief.
Conclusion: The scheme was a prize chit within Section 2(e) of the Act and the Registrar's action was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: A scheme falls within the inclusive definition of "prize chit" if participants are induced to part with money, or a part of it, in return for the chance of prizes and refund of the balance, even if the scheme is dressed in another commercial form.