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

1971 Supreme(AP) 227

CHENNAKESAVA REDDY
Lagisetty Ramaiah – Appellant
Versus
State Of A. P. – Respondent


( 1 ) ON 22nd January, 1970, the petitioners were granted a licence to carry on business in foodgrains under the andhra Pradesh Foodgrains Dealer s licensing order. On 27th June, 1970 the deputy Superintendent of Police vigilence cell Anantapur inspected the rice-mill of the petitioner and seized a quantity of 714 quintals of rice which was found in the premises of the mill. The district Revenue Officer, Kurnool issued a notice under section 6-B of the Essential commodities Act to the petitioner to show cause why the quantity of 714 quintals of rice should not be confiscated. The allegations in the notice were that the petitioner had carried on business in paddy and rice from and January, 1970 to 21st January, 1970 without a valid licence and that the petitioners had also contravened the Andhra Pradesh rice procurement, Levy and Restriction of sale order by selling certain quantity of of rice without delivering the quantity required to be delivered to the agent under the Procurement, Levy and Restriction of sale order. After hearing the arguments of the counsel for the petitioners the Collector of Kurnool confiscated the rice on the ground that the petitioners had carried on busine






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