case law
Arun Purohit
(Querist) 27 August 2009
This query is : Resolved
please let me know as soon as possible the facts & judgement of case "Krishna Sagar Mills V/s Union Of India, AIR 1959 SC 316"which is the clarification for the "Explaining the "Reasonableness for the Restriction to the Fundamental right to Freedom as per Article19(2)nto 19(6)
.
Kiran Kumar
(Expert) 27 August 2009
i think u r talking abt The Lord Krishna Sugar Mills case?
if it is then check the following link:
http://www.commonlii.org/in/cases/INSC/1959/66.html
Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar
(Expert) 27 August 2009
correct page number is 1124. there is another judgment with same name/appellants reported in 1966 (AIR 1966 SUPREME COURT 1519 "Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Municipal Board, Saharanpur"). full text of judgment of 1959 coveres 24 pages.Headnotes are given bellow:
AIR 1959 SUPREME COURT 1124 "Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Ltd. v Union Of India"
(V 46 C 151)
6th May, 1959.
Coram : 6 B. P. SINHA, S. J. IMAM, J. L. KAPUR, A. K. SARKAR, K. SUBBA RAO AND M. HIDAYATULLAH JJ.
Petns. Nos. 9 and 14 of 1959, D/- 6 -5 -1959
1. The Lord Krishna Sugar Mills Ltd. and another (In Petn. No. 9 of 59) and
2. Shiva Prasad Banarsi Das Sugar Mills and another (In Petn. No. 14 of 59) Petitioners v. The Union of India and another. Respondents.
(A) Sugar Export Promotion Act (30 of 1958), S.1 - CONSTITUTIONALITY OF AN ACT - Validity of the Act - Scope of Entry 36 of Union List - Act is in public interest - Classification is valid - No discrimination - Act held valid.
Constitution of India, Art.14, Sch.7, List I, Entry 36.
Entry No. 36 of the Union List if interpreted widely, would embrace within itself not only laws relating to the control of foreign exchange but also to its acquisition to better the economic stability of the country. The need for foreign exchange to finance the various development schemes is obvious and it is thus plain that the object of the Sugar Export Promotion Act is in the public interest. If we are to exist as a progressive nation, it is very necessary that we carve out a place for ourselves in the International market. (Para 21)
That the Central Government has selected the sugar industry for an export programme does not mean that it cannot make a classification of the commodities, bearing in mind which commodity will have an easy market abroad for the purpose of earning foreign exchange. It is quite obvious that the Central Government cannot order the export of all and sundry manufactured commodities from the country, without being assured of a market in foreign countries. Necessarily, the Government can only embark upon an export policy in relation to those products, for which there is an easy and readily available market abroad. For this reason also, sugar produced by the, vacuum pan process may have been selected, because such sugar is perhaps in demand abroad and nut sugar produced by any other process. (Para 21)
In this view of the matter, it cannot be said that there is discrimination in so far as sugar manufacturers by the vacuum pan process are concerned. Government is the best judge is to which commodities are most likely to earn foreign exchange, and the selection thus made is justifiable as a reasonable classification which is related to the object of the Act, namely, the earning of foreign exchange. (Para 22)
Anno: AIR Com., Const, of India, Art. 14 N. 3, 42; Sch. VII List I Entry 36 N. I.
(B) Constitution of India, Art.19(5) - LAW - Reasonable restriction - Test of - Examination of other laws, when can be made.
Majority view, Subba Rao J., dissenting- The argument that though one can look at the surrounding circumstances, it is not open to the Court to examine other laws on the subject, unless those laws be incorporated by reference is fallacious. The Court in judging the reasonableness of a law will necessarily see, not only the surrounding circumstances but all contemporaneous legislation passed as part of a single scheme. The reasonableness of the restriction and not of the law has to be found out, and if restriction is under one law but countervailing advantages are created by another law passed as part of the same legislative plan, the Court should not refuse to take that other law into account. (1953) AC 514, Rel. on. Case law Referred. (Para 26)
The existence of such other law is not difficult to establish. The Courts can take judicial notice of it, AIR 1939 PC 53, Rel. on. (Para 27)
Subba Rao J. : The validity of an Act shall not be made to depend upon another Act unconnected w
