EDWARD KEVENTER PVT. LIMITED versus BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING BOARD AND ORS.

Citation: [2000] 2 S.C.R. 1194 · Decided: 11-04-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.N. KHARE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
EDWARD.KEVENIBR PVT. LIMITED 
-~~
v.. 
BIHAR STATE AGRICULTURAL MARKETiNG BOARD AND ORS. 
APRIL 11, 2000 
B 
[V.N. KHARE AND DORAISWAMI RAJU, JJ.] 
Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960-Section 2( 1 )( a)-Agri-
cultural produce-Power to levy fee-If any agricultural produce not specified 
in the Schedule-No power with State Agricultural Marketing Board to levy 
c 
fee on such produce-Products like 'Frooti' and 'Appy', ready to serve 
beverages, not being specified in the Schedule-Whether covered by the term 
agricultural produce, as defined in section 2( 1 )(a) of the Act-Held, No. 
The respondents Bihar State Agricultural Marketing Board set up 
under the Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960, treating 'Frooti' 
D 
and 'Appy', products manufactured by the appellant company, as mango 
and apple products, issued a notice requiring the appellant to pay market 
fee on the products. The appellant challenged the demand of fee by ming a 
writ petition claiming that both the drinks are not covered by the schedule 
to the Act whereas the respondents submitted that the products being 
E 
mango and apple juices are covered under the item 'mango' and 'apple' as 
specified in the Schedule. However, the Writ Petition was dismissed and 
Letters Patent Appeal filed against the Judgment of the Single Judge was 
"' 
also dismissed. Hence this appeal. The question raised for consideration in 
the appeal was, whether the products which are ready to serve beverages 
. under the brand name 'Frooti' and 'Appy' fall under the description of 
F 
mango and apple, specified in the Schedule. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1.1. A perusal of Section 2(1)(a) of the Bihar Agricultural 
Produce Market Act unambiguously shows that the agricultural produce 
G 
which are to be covered by the sweep of the Act necessarily has to be 
specified in the Schedule. If any agricultural produce is not specified in the 
Schedule, it goes beyond the purview of the Act and the Agricultural 
Board has no power to levy fee on such produce. In the Schedule under 
-
;• 
caption 'fruits' mango and apple have been specified as agricultural pro-
H 
duce. (1198-A-B] 
1194 
-
EDWARD KEVENTER PVT. LTD. v. B.S.A.M.J1. 
1195 
' 
1.2. 'Frooti' and 'Appy' are manufactured out of mango pulp and 
apple concentrate, but after the mango pulp and apple concentrate are 
processed and beverages are manufactured, the products become entirely 
different items and the fruits mango and apple lose their identity. In 
common parlance, these beverages are no longer known as mango and 
apple as fruits. In other words, after processing mango pulp and apple 
concentrate, although the basic character of the mango pulp and apple 
concentrate may be present in beverages, but the end products are not 
fruits i.e. mango and apple which are specified in the Schedule. Under such 
circumstances, the products like 'Frooti' and 'Appy' which are ready to 
serve beverages not being specified in the Schedule are not covered by the 
term agricultural produce, as defined in Section 2(1)(a) of the Act. There-
fore, the respondent had no authority to demand any fee from the appel-
lant on marketing the said products. (1198-E-H; 1200-C] 
Belsund Sugar Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar & Ors., (1999] 9 SCC 620, 
A 
B 
c 
followed. 
D 
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti & Am: v. Mis. Shankar Industries & Ors., 
[1993] Supp. 3 SCC 361, distinguished. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2503 of 1998. 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.1.98 of the Patna High Court 
in L.P.A. No. 778 of 1997. 
Utpal Mazumdar, Raja Chatterjee and Mrs. Sarla Chandra for the 
Appellant. 
Mukul Rohtagi, Irshad Ahmad and Rashid Saeed for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
V.N. KHARE, J. The appellant herein is a company registered under 
the Indian Companies' Act and has its head office and factory outside the 
State of Bihar. The company manufactures fruit drinks and markets them 
under the brand name of 'Frooti" and 'Appy' in the State of Bihar through 
F 
G 
its agents. The Bihar Legislature has enacted an Act known as 'Bihar 
H 
1196 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2000) 2 S.C.R. 
A 
Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960' (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 
The object of the Act is to provide better regulation of buying and selling of 
agricultural produce and the arrangement of market for agriculturhl produce 
in the State of Bihar. Under Section 27 of the Act, the Market Committee se

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.