LexBRITISH INDIA CORPORATION LTD. versus MARKET COMMITTEE, DHARIWAL & ANOTHER
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
159 BRITISH INDIA CORPORATION LTD. v. MARKET COMMITTBB, DHAR!WA.L & ANOTHBR December 16, 1982 [V.D. TULZAPURUR AND A. VARADARAJAN, JJ.] Punjab Agdcultural Produce Mark1ts Act, 1961 Section 23-Ru/e 19 (7)- Scope of-Goods purcha1ed by head office but weighed and delivered wilhin 1he market comn,it11e aria-If attract fee. The appelJant, with its head office at K1npur in U.P .. runs two woollen mills-one of which is in Dha'riwal in the State of Pu 1jab. The raw material purchased by the head office at K<1.npur wa~ sent from variou:i centres J to the . mills and no raw material used in the mills was purchased locally :,or within the area of the Market Committee. On demand of market fee bf the Committee under sectjoo 21 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 the appellant stated t~at no purchase or sale of the raw material received by the mills took place within the area of the Market Committee and that for this reas:Jn the C::>mnittee had jjno jurisdiction to levy any fee in respect of those materials. A Writ Petition filed by the appellant in the High Court was dismissed as infructuous since the M:irket Committee agreed to withdraw the a~sessment and to make fresh assessment according to the rules. Sorn_e time !ater. however, the M lrket Co1n11ittee once again levied market fee and penalty. A single Judge of the High Court quashed the demand notice of the Market Committee on the ground that the assessment order was not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and Rules. But a Division Bench of the H1g'l. Cot1rta1low~d the C()-nmittee's L~tters Pateat Appeal. On the question whether the Market Com nittee was CO!D,1-'teat to levy fees. Dismissing the appeal, HELD: Clause~ (bl and (c) oF rule 29 (7) of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets(Geoeril) Rules, 196Z would be attracted bringing the transac.' tion within the term 'bought or sold' if in pursuance of the agreement of sale or pllrchase, even if entered ·at the head office of the mills at Kanpur. the agricultural· produce was weighed in the market area or if in l)µrsua.oce of the A B c D E G H 160 SUPREJ.I~ COURT REPORTS [1983] 2 s.c.R. A agreement of sale or purchase the agricultural produce was delivered in tho said .area to the purchaser or to some other [iperson on behalf of the purchaser. [163 E·F] I . Jn the instant case both clauses \b) and (c) would be applicable provided the transaction of sale was completed immediately on the delivery of the goods to the mills on weighment within the market area, if the delivery and/or weighment B are such that without both or either of them there will no sale at all in law. c D E F G H [164 A-BJ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 681 of 1978. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 2nd day of Seplembcr, 1976 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Letters Pate.nt Appeal No. 208 of 1974. Y.S. Chita/e, Mrs. A.K Verma and Ashok Gupta for the Appellant. Hardev Singh and R.S. Sodhi for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VARADARAJAN, J. This appeai by special leave is directed against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in L'tters Patent Appeal No. 208 of 1974 by the respondent in that appeal. The appellant who filed the Writ Petition, has its bead office at Kanpur and is running two woollen mills, one at Dhariwal, in the name and style of New Egerton Woollen Mills (hereinafter referred to· a1 'Ohariwal Mills') and another at Kanpur in the name and style ot 'Lal-Im!i Cawnpore Woollen Mills' (hereinafter referred to as 'Kanpur Mills'). The case of the appellant-company ";as that after the purchase of raw material made by its head office at Kanpur the raw material is sent from various centres in India as well as from abroad to both the mills in accordance with their requirements and no raw material used in th~ Dhariwal Mills is purchased locally or within the area of the Market Committee, Dhariwal excepting that during the years 1969 and 1970 two contracts for the purchase of raw wool of the value of Rs. 6,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- were entered into within the area of the said Market Committee. The appellant's case was that no purchase or sale of the raw materi!ll received by the Dhariwal Mills takes place within the area of the Market Committee and that, however, the Market Committee made a demand for payment of market
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.