SETH BANARSI DAS versus THE CANE COMMISSIONER & ANOTHER

SETH BANARSI DAS versus THE CANE COMMISSIONER & ANOTHER

The agreements were binding despite minor omissions; Rule 23 as a whole does not offend Article 14, but Rule 23(6) providing for appeals goes beyond statutory powers and is void. The entire Rule 23 is to be struck down as discriminatory and ultra vires, as the appeal provision is not severable.

Parties
Appellant: Seth Banarsi Das; Respondent: Cane Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow; Respondent: Cane Marketing Society Ltd., Bijnor
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 December 1962
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Allahabad High Court Judgment Dated February 2, 1956
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs (majority opinion).
Legal Topics
Sugar Factories Control, Statutory Interpretation, Rule Making Powers, Equality Before Law
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Agriculture Law Sugar Factories Control Statutory Interpretation Rule Making Powers Equality Before Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seth Banarsi Das

Appellant

Cane Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow

Respondent

Cane Marketing Society Ltd., Bijnor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Allahabad High Court Judgment Dated February 2, 1956

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the form agreements under the Uttar Pradesh Sugar Factories Control Act are binding despite omissions.
  2. 2 Whether Rule 23 of the U.P. Sugar Factories Control Rules, 1938, is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.
  3. 3 Whether Rule 23(6) providing for an appeal is beyond the rule-making power under Section 30 of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The agreements were binding despite minor omissions; Rule 23 as a whole does not offend Article 14, but Rule 23(6) providing for appeals goes beyond statutory powers and is void. The entire Rule 23 is to be struck down as discriminatory and ultra vires, as the appeal provision is not severable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs (majority opinion).

Orders

  • Dismissal of appeal.
  • Proceedings not quashed; no writ issued as per majority.