AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE SHOLAPUR Vs. PANTAPPA SAYANNA VANGARI
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE, SHOLAPUR
PANTAPPA SAYANNA VANGARI
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THESE five applications in revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, are filed by the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Sholapur, constituted under the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, and now governed by the , and will be hereinafter referred to as "the Market Committee". The Market Committee filed five suits, from which the above revisions arise, against five traders of Sholapur in August, 1965, claiming to recover from each of them Rs. 100/- as licence-fees, or in the alternative, as damages with interest at 12 p. c. p. a. as the defendants traded in the yards of the Market Committee without obtaining respectively a licence during the period from September 1, 1963 to August 31, 1964.
(2.) IT was alleged in the plaint, that all the defendants in five suits, who are dealing in the agricultural produce as defined by the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, within the market area as traders, were purchasing and selling agricultural produce in the market yard, and hence they were bound to obtain a licence after paying licence-fees to the Market Committee, as laid down by Sections 4, 5-A and 20 of the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939 and Rule 65 (7) of the Bombay Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1941. The plaintiff Market Committee further alleged that in the year 1963-64, without obtaining licences required under the Act and the Rules, the respective defendants carried on the trade in the market yard in the agricultural produce. On January 30, 1964, a notice was sent to each of them to obtain necessary licence. Ignoring the said notice and in violation of the law, the defendants continued that trade in the market-yard. Hence the Market Committee prosecuted them in respect of the transactions of trade done by each of the traders and they were convicted on May 13, 1965 under Section 4 (2), read with Section 20, Rule 65 (7) framed under the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 15/- each, or in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for 7 days.
(3.) THE plaintiff Market Committee submitted that the Market Committee had a right to recover from every trader, buying or selling agricultural produce within the market area or yard of the Market Committee as licence-fees Rs. 100/- under the Marketing Act, and further that as the defendants traded without paying the licence-fees, the Market Committee was entitled to recover the licence fees as damages. In spite of this and notwithstanding the conviction of the defendants, the defendants did not care to pay the licence fees for the year 1963-64. Hence a suit was filed for recovery of licence fees from each of the defendants.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.