1995 (2) TMI 463

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ook the plea that a representation of M/s. Tajus Productions, a firm located in Cannanore, about 200 kms. from the place of the accused came to his shop and sold the article and he also pleaded that he has a bill Ex. D1 which has the necessary warranty signed by the representative of the said firm. He put forth the defence under Section 19(2) of the Act. Accepting the plea, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused. 2. The State preferred an appeal and the High Court after taking into consideration the evidence of PW1, Food Inspector, Cannanore and PW3, the complainant reached the conclusion that the said firm was a bogus non-existing manufacturing firm and therefore the accused was not able to prove that he is entitled to the benefit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cessary for the accused to show is that he has purchased the article from any manufacturer, distributor or dealer with a written warranty in the prescribed form. In the instant case admittedly there was a bill Ex. D1 which contained the warranty. Further it Is also the admitted case that the tin purchased from the alleged manufacturer was sold to PW3, the Food Inspector, Palghat in the same form and in the same condition. Therefore the requirements of Section 19(2) read with Rule 12 A are satisfied in the instant case for the purpose of the defence taken by the accused. 5. The High Court, however, proceeded on the footing that the evidence of PW1, Food Inspector, Cannanore shows that M/s. Tajus Productions is a bogus non-existing manufac....