V.A.MOHTA, N.W.SAMBRE
Namdeorao Krishnaji Gajabhiye – Appellant
Versus
Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee – Respondent
2. Rule returnable forthwith.
3. Petitioner claims that he is a Broker and therefore the Award passed by the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Narkhed, dated 15-1-1990 holding him to be a Commission Agent is liable to be quashed and set aside.
4. The facts of the case are that the petitioner was given a licence as an Adtiya by the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee (A.P.M.C.), Narkhed, on his application dated 24-9-1988. The petitioner gave an undertaking that he will abide by the Rules and Regulations of the A.P.M.C. The licence was issued to him under Rule 6(2) of the A.P.M.C. (Regulation) Rules, 1967, wherein the conditions for working as Adtiya have been prescribed. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a Broker/Dalal and has nothing to do with the designation of Adtiya/Commission Agent. On the complaint made by the agriculturists/horticulturists, the respondent-A.P.M.C. passed a resolution authorising the Secretary to file a dispute under section 57 of the A.P.M.C. (Regulation) Act, 1963. Accordingly a dispute was raised and the Secretary of the A.P.M.C. represented the A.P.M.C. before the Authorised Officer. An Aw
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.