Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    State of Bombay v. RMDC

    Uploaded by

    shanika
    The document discusses the case of State Of Bombay vs R. M. D. Chamarbaugwala. It summarizes that the case involved an advertisement for gambling in Bengaluru that was circulated in Bombay as well. It discusses the relevant Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition Control and Tax Act of 1948 and constitutional provisions regarding territorial nexus under Article 245 and trade, commerce, and intercourse under Article 301. The court ultimately held that there was sufficient territorial nexus for the State Legislature to collect tax, the prize competitions were gambling in nature and not protected trade, and the petitioners' rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 were not violated.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    State of Bombay v. RMDC

    Uploaded by

    shanika
    2K views1 page
    The document discusses the case of State Of Bombay vs R. M. D. Chamarbaugwala. It summarizes that the case involved an advertisement for gambling in Bengaluru that was circulated in Bombay as well. It discusses the relevant Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition Control and Tax Act of 1948 and constitutional provisions regarding territorial nexus under Article 245 and trade, commerce, and intercourse under Article 301. The court ultimately held that there was sufficient territorial nexus for the State Legislature to collect tax, the prize competitions were gambling in nature and not protected trade, and the petitioners' rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 were not violated.

    Original Description:

    case study on State of Bombay v. RMDC

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses the case of State Of Bombay vs R. M. D. Chamarbaugwala. It summarizes that the case involved an advertisement for gambling in Bengaluru that was circulated in Bombay as well. It discusses the relevant Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition Control and Tax Act of 1948 and constitutional provisions regarding territorial nexus under Article 245 and trade, commerce, and intercourse under Article 301. The court ultimately held that there was sufficient territorial nexus for the State Legislature to collect tax, the prize competitions were gambling in nature and not protected trade, and the petitioners' rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 were not violated.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views1 page

    State of Bombay v. RMDC

    Uploaded by

    shanika
    The document discusses the case of State Of Bombay vs R. M. D. Chamarbaugwala. It summarizes that the case involved an advertisement for gambling in Bengaluru that was circulated in Bombay as well. It discusses the relevant Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition Control and Tax Act of 1948 and constitutional provisions regarding territorial nexus under Article 245 and trade, commerce, and intercourse under Article 301. The court ultimately held that there was sufficient territorial nexus for the State Legislature to collect tax, the prize competitions were gambling in nature and not protected trade, and the petitioners' rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301 were not violated.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    State Of Bombay vs R. M. D.

    Chamarbaugwala

    Facts- advertisement of gambling practiced in bengaluru in a newspaper which is circulated not


    only in Bengaluru but also in Bombay.

    LEGAL PROVISIONS- The Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competition


    Control and Tax Act of 1948,
    S.2(1)(d) - definition - prize competition means a prize competition within
    the meaning of the Prize Competitions Act, 1955;
    s. 2(1) (e) -'promoter in relation to a prize competition means the person
    licensed to promote or conduct a prize competition under the Prize Competitions Act,
    1955 and in relation to a lottery includes a proprietor, manager, Organizer or any
    person having the control or directing the conduct of a lottery and in the case of a
    lottery conducted through a newspaper includes the publisher of such newspaper.

    Constitutional provisions –

    Doctrine of territorial nexus- Article 245


    Article 301 - Subject to the other provisions of this Part, trade, commerce and intercourse
    throughout the territory of India shall be free.

    It was held that while testing the validity of the Bombay lotteries act, it would be
    necessary to decide whether it was with respect to the topic assigned to the legislature
    There is sufficient territorial nexus to entitle the State Legislature to collect the tax
    from the petitioners who carry on the prize competitions through the medium of a
    newspaper printed and published outside the State of Bombay. The prize competitions
    being of a gambling nature, they cannot be regarded as trade or commerce and as such
    the petitioners cannot claim any fundamental right under Art. 19(1)(g) in respect of
    such competitions, nor are they entitled to the protection of Art. 301.

    You might also like