Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
5 judgments · newest first · showing 1–5
The appellants, rice millers and commission agents, challenged the levy of market fee on rice imposed by Marketing Committees under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, arguing that the Karnataka Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984 (a Control Order issued under the …
The appellants purchased raw cashew nuts, a notified agricultural produce under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, and processed them into cashew kernels, also a notified produce. While they paid market fee on the purchase of cashew nuts, the Market Committee …
The Agricultural Produce Market Committee, created under the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, terminated several temporary employees, prompting the Labour Court to order their reinstatement. The Committee challenged the Labour Court’s jurisdiction, arguing that it was …
The Secretary of the Dakshina Kannada Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee filed a criminal complaint against two respondents for alleged violations of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966, without any resolution or authorization from the Committee. The trial court …
The case concerned the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 and its amendments, which imposed a market fee on sellers and buyers of agricultural produce and later enhanced the fee from 1% to 2%. The petitioners challenged (i) the constitutional validity of Section 65(1) as …
