LexSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus M/S HARDEO SHRINATH AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B ,, THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. MIS HARDEO SHRINATH AND ORS. JULY 11, 1994 (KULDIP SINGH AND YOGESHWAR DAYAL, JJ.) Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972: Section 2(b)(e)(p}-Directions restraining 'Agriculturists' from selling C their produce through 'Commission AgentsL..ffeld valid. Expression 'Trader'-Does not include 'Agriculturist<-Such inclusion would defeat the object of the Acl--Object of the Act explained. The appellant-Stale issued directions restraining the agriculturists D from selling their produce through the Commission Agents. Respondents· Commission Agents challenged the validity or Instructions on the ground that they were contrary to the provisions or the Madhya Pradesh Krlshl UpaJ Mandi Adhlnlyam, 1972 and In any case the agriculturists being traders the Commission Agents were entitled to selVpurchase the agricul- E tural produce on their behalf. The High Court held that (I) In the definition or 'trader' the words used are 'buys or sells'. Therefore, trader means any person who In bis normal course or business either buys or sells agricul· tural produce and Includes a person engaged In processing or agricultural produce; (II) thus the agriculturist who sells bis produce through a Com· mission Agent Is a trader according to the definition of 'trader'. Accord· F lngly, It quashed the Instructions holding that the petitioners cannot be prohibited from acting as Commission Agents on behalf of the agricul· turist. State prererred an appeal In this Court. Allomng the appeal and setting aside the High Court's order, this G Court HELD : 1. The expression "trader" under Section 2(p) of the M.P. Krlsbl Upaj Mandi Adhlnlyam, 1972 means a person who "In his normal course or busin~ss" "buys or sells" any notified agricultural produce. The High Court noticed the words "buys" or "sells" but failed to appreciate that H the said buying and selling bas to be "In his normal course or business". 300 I ~· f. STATE OF M.P. v. H. SHRINATH [KULDIP SINGH,J.] 301 The normal course of business of an agriculturist is neither buying nor A selling. Cultivation of land to gain agricultural produce is the normal course of business of an agriculturist. It is no doubt correct that a farmer takes his produce to the market for sale but that by itself would not bring him within the definition of 'trader' under the Act. [303-H, 304-A] B 2. One of the avowed objects of agricultural produce marketing legislation is to save the farmers from the middlemen. The farmer can directly sell bis produce to the consumers/purchasing agencies in the markets constituted and established under the Act. Accepting the inter- pretation given by the High Court would defeat the very object of the Act. Even otherwise the traders and the commission agents have been specili- C cally excluded from the definition of "agriculturist" under Section 2(b) of the Act. Therefore, the High Court fell into patent error in holding that the expression "trader' includes Agriculturists. [304-B, C, 303-G] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3962 of 1987. ]) From the Judgment 1 and Order dated 8.4.87 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.P. No. 1863 of 1986. S.V. Deshpande and S.K. Agnihotri for the Appellant. D.K. Garg for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E KULDIP SINGH, J. This appeal by the State of Madhya Pradesh is F directed against the order dated April 8, 1987 of Indore. Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, wherein the expression "Trader" under Sec- tion 2(p) of the Madhya Pradesh Krishi Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (the Act) has been interpreted to include an 'agriculturist'. Sub-sections .(b), (e) and (p) of Section 2 which are relevant are G reyroduced hereunder: - "(b) 'agriculturist' means a person whose main source of livelihood is wholly dependent on agricultural produce and who cultivates land on one's own accounts- H 302 A B c D E SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1994] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. (i) by one's own labour; or (ii) by the labour of either spouse; or (iii) under the personal supervision of oneself or any member of one's family referred to in sub-clause (ii) above by hired labour or by servants on wages payable in cash or kind but not as crop share, but does not include a trader, commission agent, processor, broker, weighmen or hammal of agriculture produce although such trader, commission agent, processor, broker, weighmen or hammal
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.