Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Seeds Act, 1966

7 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

M/S. SHAKTHI SEEDS PVT. LTD.versusDY. COMMNR. (CT) AND ANR.

2007 INSC 67130 May 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Mis. Shakthi Seeds Pvt. Ltd., a registered dealer in agricultural seeds, claimed exemption from sales tax on certain seed varieties by invoking G.O.Ms. No. 604 (1991) and G.O.Ms. No. 129 (1989), asserting that the seeds were either certified or truthfully labelled. The Deputy Commissioner, after finding the seeds were

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI AND ORS.versusPILLIBHIT PANTNAGAR BEEJ LTD. AND ANR.

2003 INSC 67828 November 2003Dismissed

The appellant Market Committee sought to levy market fees under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam on Pillibhit Pantnagar BeeJ Ltd., which deals in the purchase, processing and sale of certified wheat seeds. The respondents argued that wheat seed is not listed in the Schedule of the Act and therefore is n

V. SHANTHAversusSTATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS.

2017 INSC 46824 May 2017Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V. Shanth, was the owner of a seed distribution company accused of selling spurious chilli seeds that caused loss to farmers, leading to three FIRs under the IPC and the Seeds Act, 1966. The State invoked preventive detention under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits,

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERSversusMAHARASHTRA HYBRID SEEDS CO. PVT. LTD.

2019 INSC 94522 August 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra appealed against the High Court order that de‑sealed the godowns of Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co. Ltd. The company processed cotton and non‑cotton seeds at its Dhanora unit and stored packed and labelled seeds in an attached godown without obtaining a licence for storage, sale, packaging or labe

M/S. NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD.versusM. MADHUSUDHAN REDDY AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 2916 January 2012Dismissed

Farmers who bought foundation seeds from National Seeds Corporation (NSC) alleged crop failure due to defective seeds and sought compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. NSC contended that the Seeds Act, 1966 was a special law that exclusively governed seed quality disputes, that the growers were not "cons

SEEDSMAN ASSOCIATION, HYDERABAD AND ORS.versusPRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., A.P. AND ORS.

2004 INSC 9610 February 2004Dismissed

The Seedsman Association of Hyderabad and two seed companies filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the levy of market fee under Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 on seeds they produce, process and market. They contended that seeds are not meant for huma

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search