R.S.A. No. 494 of 1985 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH R.S.A. No. 494 of 1985 Date of Decision: October 14,2011 Market Committee, Mansa ............................. Appellant versus Firm M/s Jagdamba Industries, Mansa ...................................................... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri Present: Mr. M.L.Saini, Advocate for the appellant. ... RITU BAHRI, J.(Oral) This is a Regular Second Appeal against the judgment of the lower Appellate Court dated 24.9.1984 whereby the appeal filed by the Market Committee, Mansa against the judgment of the Sub Judge Ist Class, Mansa, dated 25.10.1983 has been dismissed. The plaintiff M/s Jagdamba Industries, Mansa, has filed a suit for permanent injunction restraining the Market Committee, Mansa, from recovering `15,405.80 from it as market fees. The plaintiff company has purchased cotton in R.S.A. No. 494 of 1985 [ 2 ] Mansa Mandi from 21.11.1974 to 5.6.1975 and has paid a sum of `46,224.28 as market fees to the defendant at the rate of `1.50% in accordance with the rules. Vide Act No.28 of 1973, the market fees was enhanced by 1-1/2%. Thereafter, vide Act No. 13 of 1974 the market fees was enhanced from 1-1/2% to 2-1/4%. Many shopkeepers challenged this by filing writ petitions in this Court and vide judgment dated 8.11.1974 reported in A.I.R. 1976 Punjab & Haryana Page-1, the enhancement of the market fee was set aside. Thereafter, the Punjab Government vide Act No. 14 of 1975 again enhanced the market fees to 2.25% under the provisions of Section 23 of Punjab Agricultural Produce Markets Act. However, the Punjab Board issued directions to the Market Committee to collect the market fee at the rate of `2% with effect from 23.8.1975. The Committee is not entitled to recover market fee at the rate of `2% with effect from 21.11.1974 to 5.6.1975 as Act No.14 of 1975 was effective from 23.8.1975. Hence, the Market Committee filed its written statement and contested the suit. It was admitted that the Supreme Court had upheld the market fee at the rate of `2% but this rate was effective to be recovered before 23.8.1975. On pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:- “1.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the injunction prayed for? OPP R.S.A. No. 494 of 1985 [ 3 ] 2.Whether the suit is not maintainable? OPP 3.Whether the plaintiff has no cause of actin to file this suit? OPD 4.Whether the recovery is time barred? OPP. 5.Relief.” The suit of the plaintiff was decreed by the trial Court on 25.10.1983 restraining the defendant from recovering the amount in question in pursuance to the notice Ex.P1. On appeal, the learned District Judge, Bathinda, dismissed the appeal of the Market Committee on 24.9.1984 by placing reliance on the Supreme Court judgment in Kewal Krishan Puri and another v. State of Punjab and others AIR 1980 Supreme Court 1008 that the amendment made by Act No. 14 of 1975 was to be made effective from 23.8.1975 and the notice of recovery Ex.P1 for the period enhancing the market fee from 1-1/2% to 2% with effect from 21.11.1974 to 5.6.1975 was not justified. Mr. M.L.Saini, counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kewal Krishan Puri's case (supra) to contend that for all intents and purposes the revision in market fee was to be made effective from November 1974. This argument of the counsel for the appellant is not justified in view of the observation made by the Supreme Court that in view of the Full Bench judgment in Kewal R.S.A. No. 494 of 1985 [ 4 ] Krishan Puri v. State of Punjab AIR 1977 Punj and Har 347 the increase in the rate of market fee of `2% was to be effective from 23.8.1975 after passing of the Act 14 of 1975. The appeals filed by the Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board and others have been dismissed by the Supreme Court on 21.12.1979 by holding that in view of the judgment passed in Kewal Krishan Puri's case (supra) the appeals have become infructuous (Ex.D2). No ground is made out to interfere in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court. Dismissed. ( RITU BAHRI ) 14.10.2011 JUDGE rup