top of page

Case Analysis On R.M.D. Chamarbaugwalla V. Union Of India (1957)




Mookambika K S, UPES School of Law, Dehradun


Facts:


The petitioner M/S R.M.D.C were advertising and running prize tournaments in various Indian states where they had been doing their business of prize competitions in Bombay, since 1948 as well. They contested the constitutionality of the Prize Competitions Act (42 of 955), section 4 and 5 which bought restrictions to the prizes offered that it must not exceed one thousand rupees in any month, alongside the number of entries shall not exceed two thousand and if the prize exceeds then it must be on behalf of the licence granted in accordance with the provisions of this Acts and the rules made thereunder. , and Rules 11 and 12, which were established under section 20 of the Act. In response to Article 32 of the Indian Constitution these petitions were filed. The petitioner contended that the definition of a “prize competition” in section 2(d) of the Act encompasses not only gambling competitions but also activities where success was largely dependent on skill. They also contended that this section is violating their fundamental right given under article 19(1)(g)2of the constitution.


Issue:


  • Whether in the definition of ‘prize competition’ in s.2(d), the Act applies to competitions which involve substantial skill and are not in the nature of gambling.


  • If the act is applicable in the aforesaid competitions, then whether the ex-concessis invalid provisions of Section 4 and 5 and Rule 11 & 12 that relates to such competitions can be implemented under the principle of severability against the competitions that are in the character of gambling.


    Legal Provisions:


• Section 2(d) of Prize Competitions Act (42 of 1955) includes the definition of “prize competition”


  • Section 4, 5 and Rule 11 & 12 of Section 20 of Prize Competitions Act (42 of 1955) imposed restrictions on the prizes offered, entries and license granted.


  • Article 19(1)(g) of The Indian Constitution talks about fundamental right to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.


  • Article 19(6) of The Indian Constitution states that Nothing in article 19(1)(g) do not prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular, 2[nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to,—


    (i)  the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or


    (ii)  the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, of any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise.




Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Licensing: 

 

All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

 

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page