ANIL AGRAWAL Vs. KRISHI UPAJ MANDI SAMITY NEVRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 against the order dated passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Raipur (CG) in Civil Suit No. 14-A/2001 (amounting to decree under Section 2(2) of CPC 1908), wherein the said Court rejected the plaint filed by the appellant under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC on the ground that there is provision of appeal under Section 34 of the Chhattisgarh Krish Upaj Mandi Adhiniyam, 1972 (for short, "the Act, 1972") against the order passed under Section 33 (1) of the said Act and civil suit is not maintainable.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that the appellant is wholesale dealer dealing in grains and is having a licence to deal in the foodgrains products from respondent No.1/Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti as per provisions of the Act, 197 On 22-1-2001 the appellant has been informed that his licence is cancelled under Section 33 of the Act, 1972 and the said licence was restored on 23-1-2001. The appellant has field a suit before the trial Court stating that he suffered loss day in a day out @ Rs. 10,000/- per day, but the trial Court rejected the plaint as mentioned above. As per the appellant, cancellation of licence was not bonafide and, therefore,, suit was maintainable, and therefore, the finding of the trial Court be reversed.

(3.) Power of cancellation of a licence is conferred on Market Committee and that too for the reasons to be assigned in writing as per Section 33 of the Ac,t, 1972 which may be read as under: