SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(AP) 344

BILAL NAZKI, GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
Coramandal Traders – Appellant
Versus
Agricultural Market Committee, Guntur – Respondent


BILAL NAZKI, J.

( 1 ) ALL these petitions raise common question of law and fact and had been referred to this Bench by a Single judge of this Court vide his order of reference dated 12. 9. 2002. The facts as averred in Criminal Petition No. 5302 of 2000 shall be taken for reference.

( 2 ) THE petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent filed a complaint in STC no. 101 of 1998 before the Additional Munsif magistrate, Guntur under Sections 7, 23 and 25 (2) of the A. P. Agricultural (Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The case of the 1st respondent was that the petitioner was doing business in onions, which was a notified agricultural commodity in the notified area, without obtaining a licence from the 1st respondent-Market committee as was required under the provisions of the Act. The filing of complaint was termed as gross abuse of process of law and was sought to be quashed on the ground that in terms of G. O. Rt. No. 997 dated 4. 4. 1979, onion was omitted from the applicability of the provisions of the Act. Therefore running a business in onions without obtaining licence from Market committee would not be an offence under the Act. S








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top