It was alleged that while on paper the transactions entered into between the members of the Society and the purchasers showed sales at the prices fixed by law, in reality, higher prices were charged.
Me Co operative Society took the matter in appeal to the Division Bench of the High Court which allowed the appeal and dismissed the writ petition.
of number bringing into the Societys accounts moneys due to the Society and which had been earned through sales effected by the Society, he filed, as narrated before, a writ petition and there raised three points challenging the legality of the reference to the Deputy Registrar to enquire into and determine the claim.
On appeal the learned Judges of the High Court have, as stated earlier, rejected all the three points urged on behalf of the appellant.
The Co operative Society of which the appellant was the President till November, 1951, held a licence, under the Madras General Sales Tax Act for doing business as a Commission Agent and the Society was earning companymission on the turnover of the sales effected of the agricultural produce of its members and others.
Their companyrectness have yet to be tested in the arbitration proceedings.
As stated already, the Society was entitled to charge companymission on the sales effected through it.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 18, 1959, of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal No.
These were, the allegations and it is on the basis of these allegations that the claim against the appellant and others had been made.
The amount claimed was Rs.
When this claim was made, inter alia, against the appellant viz.,
The prices fixed for sale at Anakapalli, then in the State of Madras, were somewhat lower than those which had been fixed in other States.
A special officer was appointed to take charge of the affairs of the Society and this officer filed a claim before the Registrar, inter alia, against the appellant.
Thereafter the appellant moved this Court for special leave certificate of fitness having been refused by the High Court and has preferred the present appeal.
As regards this it was stated that companymission was earned on the entire price at which the gur was sold, and while the amount of companymission payable on the basis of companytrolled prices was credited to the Society, the companymission earned in respect of the extra price which its members obtained, was, it was stated, number brought to the credit of the Society in its accounts but appropriated by members of the management.
193 of 1962.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ayyangar J. The appellant was the President of the Anakapalli Co operative Marketing Society Ltd. A Society companystituted mainly for the purpose of enabling its members to obtain credit facilities and to arrange for the sale of agricultural products at reasonable prices.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The prices fixed varied from State to State.
V. V. Nair and P. Ram Reddy, for the appellant.
226 of the Constitution, prohibiting the Deputy Registrar from dealing with the claim which he was directed to try.
R. Chaudhuri and B. R. G. K. Achar, for respondent No.
There were companyplaints regarding the working of the Society and accordingly an enquiry was instituted into its affairs by the Registrar of Co operative Societies, Madras at a time when Anakapalli, number in Andhra Pradesh, was in the State of Madras.
13,000 and odd and details were given as to how this sum was made up.
Naunit Lal, for the respondent No.
In October, 1950 the Government of India promulgated the Gur Control Order fixing the maximum price at which gur companyld be sold in different States.
The main item of the claim was companymission stated to have been actually earned by the Society on the sales effected by it of jaggery belonging to its producer members but which was number credited to the Society.
The learned Single Judge who heard the petition allowed the petition and granted the appellant the relief he sought.
On receipt of this claim the Registrar appointed, under S. 51 2 of the Act, the Deputy Registrar of Co operative Societies, Visakhapatnam to act as an arbitrator to adjudicate the claim.
This gave occasion for the members of the Society to sell their jaggery at higher prices than fixed because there was demand for jaggery from merchants at prices higher than the companytrolled price.
Immediately this order was passed the appellant filed a petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for the issue of a writ ,of prohibition under Art.
111 of 1957.
