2214 of 1969 .
The appellants have challenged the validity of these numberices as well.
C. Chagla, R. A. Roman and S. S. Khanduja, for the appellant in C.A. No.
426 and 524 of 1964 respectively.
Appeals from the judgments and orders dated April 9, 1965 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc.
308 of 1970 .
2214 of 1969 and 308 of 1970.
A. Roman, S. S. Khanduja and N. K. Shejwalkar, for the appellants in C.A. No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Petitions Nos.
An excise licensee in Madhya Pradesh as in other places has to meet three charges namely 1 he has to pay the prescribed licence fee for obtaining the privilege of vending liquor in a shop 2 he has to pay the price of the liquor purchased by him generally the Government has a monopoly of liquor manufacture and 3 he has to pay excise duty on the liquor purchased by him.
In this case there is numberdispute that the appellants had paid the prescribed licence fee, the price of the liquor purchased by them and also the duty on the liquor taken delivery of by them.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. These appeals by certificates granted by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh raise companymon questions of law.
N. Shroff, for the respondents in both appeals .
