Rex v Meghji and Another
Rex v Meghji and Another (Criminal Appeals Nos. 9 & 10 of 1943 (Consolidated)) [1943] EACA 55 (1 January 1943)
The court held that Mohanlal, as a hotel-keeper, was a retailer under the Defence (Price of Goods) Regulations, 1941, because he purchased rice for use in his business and supplied it to customers, thus acting as a trader selling goods to consumers. The certificate fixing the maximum wholesale price for rice, although citing Regulation 5 of the 1941 Regulations instead of the correct authority, was not invalidated by this error. The certificate was prima facie evidence of the price fixed, and there was no evidence to the contrary. The appeals were dismissed and the sentences confirmed, as no…
Source excerpt
- Defence Regulations
- Price Control Offences
- Definition Of Consumer
- Definition Of Retailer
- Validity Of Certificate
- Hotel Keeper Liability