Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
217 judgments · newest first · showing 201–217
The Allahabad Canning Co., a manufacturer of syrups and related food products, purchased levy sugar from K.M. Sugar Mills at a price higher than the controlled price. The excess amount of Rs 22,681.88 recovered by the High Court registrar was credited to the Levy Sugar Price Equalisation Fund under …
The State of Punjab prosecuted Nohar Chand, a fertilizer manufacturer in Ludhiana, for producing sub‑standard fertilizer that was marketed through his agent, Sachdeva Enterprises, in Kapurthala. A sample taken from the agent’s premises was found sub‑standard, leading to a criminal complaint under …
The case concerned a challenge by fertilizer dealers to a Uttar Pradesh Government notification issued under Rule 114 of the Defence of India Rules, 1971, which fixed the selling price of fertilizer stocks acquired before 31 May 1974 at the lower price fixed by an earlier Central Government …
The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966, particularly section 7(6) which bans sale of notified produce outside the market, and section 12(1) which authorises a market fee. The petitioners argued that these …
Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (M&M) sought a declaration under Section 72A of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, to carry forward the accumulated loss and unabsorbed depreciation of International Tractor Company of India Ltd. (ITCI) after their amalgamation. The Specified Authority, after a screening committee, …
The State of Andhra Pradesh issued orders fixing maximum prices for certain cooked food items served by catering establishments under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Several hoteliers challenged the orders, arguing that the term "foodstuffs" in the Act does not cover cooked food and that the …
The appellants, major pharmaceutical manufacturers, challenged the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 which imposed a 10% surcharge on dealers with a gross turnover exceeding Rs.5 lakh and prohibited those dealers from passing the surcharge on to purchasers. They argued that the provision conflicted with the …
The Central Government, under the Sugar (Control) Order 1966, issued Order No. GSR‑410‑E/Ess. Com./Sugar on 14 July 1980 limiting the quantity of vacuum‑pan sugar and khandsari that recognised dealers could keep in stock and imposing a ten‑day holding period. Recognised dealers challenged the order …
The petitioners, manufacturers of khandsari sugar, challenged a Uttar Pradesh Government notification that allowed a rebate of 0.625 kg per quintal for the binding material when sugarcane was brought in bundles. They argued that the power to prescribe such a rebate was conditional on fixing a …
The petitioners, dealers in rice and owners of a rice mill, challenged Clause 3 of the Haryana Rice Bran (Distribution and Price) Control Order, 1967, which required a permit for the sale of rice bran. They argued that rice bran is not an "essential commodity" under the Essential Commodities Act, …
The petitioners, including A.K. Roy, challenged the National Security Ordinance, 1980 and the subsequent National Security Act, 1980 on grounds that the President's ordinance‑making power under Article 123 is an executive power and not "law" within the meaning of Article 21, that the provisions of …
The Uttar Pradesh Government, invoking the Essential Commodities Act, fixed a stock limit of 250 quintals for wholesale wheat dealers and issued a teleprinter instruction restricting movement of wheat without a formal order. Wholesale dealers challenged the stock limit and the movement restrictions …
The Madhya Pradesh Government, under the Essential Commodities Act, replaced its 1960 scheme of running fair‑price shops through retail dealers with a 1981 scheme that appointed agents, giving preference to consumers' cooperative societies, to distribute foodstuffs at fair prices. Petitioners …
The State of Karnataka appealed against the High Court's setting aside of a confiscation order of a 7,200 kg consignment of groundnut oil. The oil had been seized because the transporter failed to file the mandatory Form II declaration with the Tehsildar before the consignment left the place, as …
In Uttar Pradesh, a severe sugar shortage prompted the Cane Commissioner to issue a notification under clause 8 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, banning all power crushers in the reserved areas of sugar mills from 9 Oct 1980 to 1 Dec 1980, except those described as ‘vertical’. The …
The Kerala State Government declared raw cashew nut an essential article under the Kerala Essential Articles Control (Temporary Powers) Act, 1961 and issued a procurement and distribution order. Petitioners processing cashew nuts challenged the declaration under Article 32, arguing that raw cashew …
The State of Bihar charged seven respondents under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act for alleged misappropriation of G.C. sheets. The case, initiated in 1963, suffered extreme delays with the charge framed only in 1967 and the trial dragging on for over 20 years. The Patna High Court …
