Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the essential commodities act 1955 Year: 1982 Page 2 of about 94 results (0.075 seconds)

Mar 16 1982 (SC)

P.P. Enterprises and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-16-1982

Reported in : AIR1982SC1016; 1982(1)SCALE184; (1982)2SCC33; [1982]3SCR510; 1982(14)LC236(SC)

..... took up the first point and urged that the impugned order is not covered by any of the clauses of section 3 of the essential commodities act.5. section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955, insofar as it is material for the purposes of this case, reads :3. (1) if the central government is of opinion ..... effect to the legislative intent of public welfare. so construed, the impugned order is fully protected and is not ultra vires section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955.7. this leads us to the second contention, namely, the impugned order being violative of article 19(1)(g) of the constitution inasmuch as ..... that it is necessary or expedient so to do for maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, or for securing any essential commodity ..... 1. in exercise of powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955, sugar control order 1966 was issued by the government of india, ministry of agriculture. clause 5 of that order ..... to challenge the constitutional validity of the said order on three grounds ; (1) the impugned order is not covered by section 3 of the essential commodities act and is ultra vires; (2) the impugned order imposes unreasonable restrictions on the right of the petitioners to carry on their trade and so it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 17 1982 (HC)

Shamji Mithubhai Vora Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-17-1982

Reported in : AIR1983Bom219; 1983(1)BomCR411

..... facts and circumstance of the case. the facts set out hereinafter would make it clear that the relief sought by the petitioner was totally misconceived.2. the essential commodities act, 1955 was passed by the central government for the control of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and commerce in, certain ..... this position state that the licensing authority would not insist on compliance with this condition. the other condition set out in this letter are:(1) affidavit regarding non-conviction under essential commodities act,. (2) original bank certificate indicating financial soundness and bank balance. (3) latest rent receipt of the office and godown premises, and (4) the copy of the income ..... the principle contention urged in support of the reliefs sought in the petitioner. the submission cannot be entertained. s. 3(2)(d) of the essential commodities act, enable the government to regular by licences, the storage of any essential commodity. the expression 'stockiest' under section 2 (g) of the order defines 'stockiest' as a person who deals in cement involving the purchase, ..... confers power upon the central government to provided for regulating by licences, permits or otherwise the storage, transport, distribution. disposal, acquisition, use or consumption of any essential commodity. s. 5 of the act enable the central government to delegate its powers to any state government or officer or authority subordinate to the state government . in exercise of the powers, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1982 (HC)

Ratnaraj Thangraj Vs. Deputy Controller of Rationing and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-12-1982

Reported in : 1982(1)BomCR475

..... order dated february 6, 1982 passed by the learned principal judge of the bombay city civil court, bombay, as the judicial authority appointed under section 6-c of the essential commodities act, 1955 (act no. 10 of 1955), whereby he dismissed the appeal filed is the petitioner, namely, miscellaneous appeal no. 6 of 1982, as being barred by limitation.2. the petitioner is a dealer in ..... oil seized by the police under a panchanama. the petitioner was also arrested and subsequently charged with having committed offences under the aforesaid orders read with section 7 of the essential commodities act.4. by an order dated november 24, 1981 the first respondent, the deputy controller of rationing, ordered the said entire quantity of 644 kilograms to be confiscated to the ..... government. under section 6-c(1) of the essential commodities act an appeal against an order of confiscation passed under section 6-a of the said act lies to a judicial authority appointed by the state government concerned, in this case the state of maharashtra. the judicial authority whom the ..... 500 kilograms of edible oil is required to take out a licence under the said orders in addition to a gumaste licence and a licence under the bombay municipal corporation act, (bombay act no. iii of 1888).3. on october 23, 1981 the third respondent, namely, the inspector of police, crime branch (control), c.i.d., bombay, a long with the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1982 (HC)

Harilal Bansu Kewat Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-12-1982

Reported in : 1983(1)BomCR569

..... the control of the production, supply or distribution of or trade and commerce in, any commodity essential to the community; or(b) dealing in any commodity---(i) which is an essential commodity as defined in the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955) or(ii) with respect to which provisions have been made in any such other law as in referred to ..... means for the purpose of selling the same in black market for monetary gains in a manner which may directly or indirectly defeats or tend to defeat the provisions of essential commodities act, 1955 (as amended upto date) and maharashtra cement (licensing and control) order, 1973, (as amended upto date). you have been thus indulging in the anti-social activities ..... , the petitioner was prosecuted for offences under clauses 3, 8 and 15 of the aforesaid maharashtra cement (licensing and control) order read with section 7 of the essential commodities act, 1955 in respect of each of the raids carried out in the premises mentioned above. the petitioner was interrogated during the investigation of all the three cases and when questioned ..... the explanation to section 3(1) gives the meaning attached to the expression 'acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community' as follows:-'(a) omitting or instigating any person to commit any offence punishable under the essential commodities act, 1955 (10 of 1955), or under any other law for the time being in force relating to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1982 (HC)

Brijlal Vs. the State of Rajasthan

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Nov-30-1982

Reported in : 1983CriLJ1511; 1982()WLN785

..... any offence'. but it is well settled rule of law that when a specific provision is made under the special act as we have section 7(1)(b) in the essential commodities act, 1955, that would prevail over the general provisions contained in the cr. p.c. they cannot be used to supplement ..... interpretation of the term 'property' in clause (b) of section 7(1) of the essential commodities act, 1955. the question was whether the utensils containing the food-stuffs by which the provisions of gujarat guest control order, 1955 were contravened could be confiscated under-the provisions of section 517(1) of cr. p.c ..... or add something to the provision in the special act. in the special act, the second part as we find in section 517.(1 ..... high court for setting aside the order of the magistrate under revision. in view of the special provision of the special enactments namely, the essential commodities act and the defence of india rules, his lordship was pleased to propound the principle that the legislature intended to give power of forfeiture by an ..... . his lordship was pleased to draw a distinction between the law relating to confiscation enumerated in section 517 (1) of cr. p.c. and section 7(1)(b) of the essential commodities act and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 1982 (HC)

Patel Kodarbhai Jivabhai and ors. Vs. State and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Nov-22-1982

Reported in : (1983)1GLR325

..... , a case for passing of a statutory order where it was clearly mentioned that that order was being made in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. now in this particular case when one looks at government resolution dated 5-7-1982 it is clear that it is not a statutory order which is issued in exercise ..... navalnathji yogi v. collector of bulsar and ors. reported on : air1981guj87 . it was a case where the order made in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955 was challenged. it was found that the order itself recited that the government of india issued a particular notification and after obtaining prior concurrence of the central government, the government ..... of gujarat made that order. it was clear in that case that reference to section 3 of the essential commodities act and further reference to the notification which the government of india issued clearly imply that the state government had formed a requisite opinion within the meaning of section 3(1 ..... to whether that resolution is adopted or passed in exercise of the powers conferred on the government under section 80(1) or 80(2) of the gujarat co-operative societies act, 1961. secondly there are clear imputations and the imputations are that in order that the petitioners who did not belong to congress (i) may be reduced to minority, three appointments .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1982 (HC)

State of Gujarat Vs. New Swadeshi Mills and Etc.

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : Dec-23-1982

Reported in : 1983CriLJ1268; (1983)1GLR594

..... mill company they cannot be held liable for the alleged offence of the contravention of the aforesaid control order. mr. thakore has pointed out that under section 10 of the essential commodities act, 1955 the prosecution must prove that the contravention was committed by a person who is in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of business of the ..... the quarter 1-1-77 to 31-3-77 and thus contravened the provisions of rule 21-a of the cotton textile control order 1948 and under the provisions of essential commodities act, 1955.3. the prosecution case was that at the relevant time the accused no. 1 was the managing director and accused no. 2 was the president of the mill-company which ..... learned magistrate was not justified in acquitting the said two accused.6. before the criminal liability can be fastened on an accused person it is essential for the prosecution to prove that the accused has committed the act alleged. in the very nature of things the offence alleged here is of a nature where the accused nos. 1 and 2 would be ..... vicariously liable for the alleged offence. in the circumstances it is essential for the prosecution to prove that the accused were, in fact, holding the positions of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1982 (HC)

Bhanwar Lal Brij Gopal and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : Aug-25-1982

Reported in : AIR1983Raj104; [1987(54)FLR216]; 1982()WLN497

order, 1980 - clause 18 and constitution of india--articles 14 & 16--notification dated 27-5-1981--validity of--notification held valid by supreme court--m/s pokarchand v. state of rajasthan is not a good lawi have no hesitation to hold that judgment of this court m/s pokar chand jeevraj and 11 ors. v. the rajasthan and ors. 1981 wln 561 cannot be treated as good law in view of authoritative pronouncement of the hon'ble supreme court in mohan lal lila dhar and anr. v. state of rajasthan and ors. air 1982 s.c. 29; surajmal kailash chand v. union india and anr. 1982 s.c. 130. in both the later decisions this notification has been declared valid.(c) essential commodities act, 1955 - section 3b and rajasthan trade articles (licensing & control)

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 03 1982 (SC)

Sukhnandan Saran Dinesh Kumar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and or ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-03-1982

Reported in : AIR1982SC902; 1982(1)SCALE165; (1982)2SCC150; [1982]3SCR371; 1982(14)LC503(SC)

..... protection to the farmers who have undertaken raising of sugarcane crop, the central government issued the control order in exercise of the power conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act, 1955. by clause 3 of this order, power was conferred on the central government to fix minimum price of sugarcane to be paid by producers of sugar for sugarcane purchased ..... it was urged that the sugarcane control order was issued in exercise of power conferred by section 3 of the essential commodities act. one of the objects sought to be achieved by the essential commodites act, 1955, is to ensure availability at fair price the essential commodity to the consumers. it was further urged that one can visualise that the power to fix minimum price or ..... sugarcane as also the consumers of the essential commodity. number of regulations have been enacted almost since the dawn of independence to regulate this powerful combination of manufacturers of sugar and khandsari sugar all over the country for ..... growers. producers of sugar and khandsari sugar constitute a powerful trade lobby, the fact of which one can take judicial notice. sugar being an essential commodity occasionally kept in short supply and being a commodity needed for consumption by almost the entire population, the powerful industry magnates in this field are in a position to dominate both the growers of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 1982 (HC)

Gangaram Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Apr-23-1982

Reported in : 1982CriLJ1433

..... commerce in any commodity essential to the community : or (b) dealing in any commodity - (i) which is an essential commodity as defined in the essential commodities act, 1955, or. (ii) with respect to which provisions have been made in any such other law as is view to making gain in any manner which may ..... directly or indirectly defeat or lend to defeat the provisions of that act or other law aforesaid'. 26. the impugned ..... as follows :- 'for the purpose of this sub-section the expression 'acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies of commodities essential to the community' means - (a) committing or instigating any person to commit any offence punishable under the essential commodities act, under any other law for the 1955, or force relating to the control of the production, supply or distribution of a trade and .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //