{"id":267671,"date":"2009-03-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-22T00:50:03","modified_gmt":"2017-12-21T19:20:03","slug":"agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: Ajit J Gunjal<\/div>\n
: 1 :\nIN TEE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA\n\nCIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD\n\nDATED THIS THE 23m DAY OF MARCH 2_0;O\"9 5   ;_. A' \n\nBEFORE\n\nTHE HONBLE MR.JU$TICE Ej1T'J..:CiUNJAI; -   \n\nWRIT PE'I'i'I'ION NO.6G361}i3Q{59(z(}M\u00bbC1'PC)\" - 2 \" V\n\nE'1*moNER\n\n(BY SR1.  \n\n._.-u.---.-.-m....\u00a7-\n\n1,  ASSISTAMFICQMMLSSIONER,\n'-EIUN_\u20ac~{Ji~\u20ac.iZz), DIST;\"'BA'GALKOT.\n\n L'  ':~;;:-.M_'r' vMA\u00a7im\u00a7:*1*AwwA,\n\n. '\u00ab.E\u00a5J[U~vMAVL%\u00a3*..NT\u00a31PPA KARADI,\nK SINCE DECEASED. BY HER LE9.\n\n2(A}.\"sRr\"C;AN\u20ac\u00a7ADHAR,\n\n~ as\/0 MMANATAPPA KARADI,\nv \"  AGE 46 YEARS, occ: BUSINESS,\n we '1LLAKAL., HUNGUNE3 TALUKA,\n\n'REI\"'.~BY HIS SPECIAL POWER\n\n..  A::*ro:'er~:EY HOLDER, SR1 MAHANTESH,\n' ...s;0 GURUPADAPPA KADIWAL,\n\nAGE 42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,\nRI 0 BAGALKOT. (COMMON)\n...RESPONDEN'FS\n{BY SR}. F'.V.I\"A'I'II.., ADV<\/a>. FOR R~--2A\nSR1 R.K.HA'I\u00b01'I, HCGP FOR R4)\n\n\n\n:2:\n\nTHESE PETETIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 2i.?6'---AND ' .\n227 01? THE CONS'i'i'I'U'I'ION op' mam PRAYING TC*._Q{}A*SH THE \nIMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE i_i~~A..[}DL;'=.V czvzg. v\nJUDGE(SR.DN) BAGALKOT IN EX.PE'}\"N. ANQ.27o\/0? Dmter\u00bb,\n03\/01\/09 VIBE ANNEXURE \u00ab.9 AND: 30109172008_Vi--DEJANP~i:-5.\n\nTHESE PETITIONS ARE CC )M{_NG C)N me, 'T5i?I if.'\u00a7_'DAY,--'THE = \"\nceum MAGE THE FOLLOWING:      \n\nThese   of by this\ncommon   i\ufb011e'*:,:n1atters are listed for\n\nordersfen e${t:eI;si_of:._of _ --\n\n52-. _  uiaxeid .'ir1 :e1uestion was acquired by the\n\n. V. A\"petjitieni\u00e9t-~j\u00a71d@eIif\"{iebtor for establishing market yard.\n\n  ft.<;} e2iy..\u00a711at the matter came up to this Court in\n\nZ  _ Mieeellaiieofi\u00e9 First Appeal No.2844\/1995. This Court\n\n '  {he apmal and enhanced market value of the\n\n  land from \u00a3315,000\/H to Rs.25,000\/----. This\n\n  "  further directed that the respozldent-decree\n\n" holder is emitlcd to solatium at 30% on enhanced\n\ncompensation, he is also entitled to the illterest at the\n\n2'\n\n\n\nrate of 9% per azmum on the enhanced  "\nawarded for one year from the dete of   it 2\nof the land in question V i.e.  \nthereafter at the rate of   the  '\nenhanced amount paiator _   The\nCourt also further   f:.f;?\u00ab;=*",:;'j')'.()I1\u00e9(':I}t-(iCCI'\u20ace\nholder is eiitit\ufb01ci-.  in terms of\namended   Acquisition A0': at\nthe rateof    enhanced amount of\noompeiisation  of preliminary notification\n\ni.e  date of taking possession\n\n V'  .31\/:_i.:984z.  also further directed that there\n\n  of the amounts aixeady paid till then.\n\nIt i: decree holder-respondent No.2 was not<\/pre>\n
with the determination of the market value,<\/p>\n
   \ufb01led a special ieeve petition before the Apex<\/p>\n
   The Apex Court declined to gent special lwve.<\/p>\n
 The judgment and award passed by the reference Court<\/p>\n
as Well as this Court was put in execution. During the \ufb02<\/p>\n
\/’<\/p>\n
if<\/p>\n
: 5 :<\/span><\/p>\n
Court has recorded 3. \ufb01nding that the merrier. of
\ncalculation \ufb01led by the decree
\nveri\ufb01cation, eouid not have directed   ,
\nfurther submits that the
\nholder is incorrect and  thejdrone 1  e.<\/p>\n
judgment debtor is correct.  2 ~.  ii\n<\/p>\n
4. Mr. F.V.Pati},  c”*u:nsel appearing for<\/p>\n
the dee1’ee\u00bb~.suomits ‘ “tb_._at\u00a7 the judgment debtors
\nhave  omit the statutory bene\ufb01ts<\/p>\n
awarded  MFA. He further submits that<\/p>\n
 ‘~  _ V’gi’:-*.er?:’by the decree holder is correct.<\/p>\n
  shave perused the impugned order passed<\/p>\n
 by  A’:.33r;ecut\u00a7ng Court. Apparently, the Executing<\/p>\n
  5 has found that the memos of calculation filed by<\/p>\n
.   the petitioner—judgnent debtor as well the decree holder<\/p>\n
are required to be veri\ufb01ed nevertheless has rejected the<\/p>\n
memo of calculation fled by the judgment debtor. Thea
\n,\/{V<\/p>\n
t 6 :\n<\/p>\n
memo of calculation \ufb01led by the judgment debtor
\nmade available by the learned counsel
\ndecree holder. A perusal of the    _
\ncaletllation. does not reflect
\ninasmuch as it appears there. oreission  V  ,
\nthe judgment debtor to  tlle
\nawarded by this  ‘  ‘A    <\/p>\n
6; “””   as “of calculation \ufb01led by
\nthe decree  court itself is in doubt<\/p>\n
inasmuch as it hase_tated that it requires veri\ufb01cation.<\/p>\n
 \u00ab.111  faiceaof ttlis”‘anomo1y, the Executing Court could<\/p>\n
 e_r1?0t_ ”   issuance of attachment warrant.<\/p>\n
{\u00a7bs(fteuely’,”ti:;e memo of calculation \ufb01led by the decree<\/p>\n
  =.ho1de1:” ge well as the judwlent debtor is still in a initial<\/p>\n
   inasmuch as the Executing Court has not<\/p>\n
. K  eecepted the memo of calct\ufb01aolon \ufb01led by the decree<\/p>\n
 holder as it does not spell truth. Having regard to the<\/p>\n
\ufb01x<\/p>\n
:7:<\/span><\/p>\n
facts, I am of the View that the Executing   .<\/p>\n
justified in issuing attachment warrant.  H ‘ ‘V<\/p>\n
7. Insofar as the  or  “oi; the = d’<\/p>\n
memos of ealctxlationixl  “:t}1’e.. ‘thatothe said
\norder need not be   ‘4 however, if an
\nobservation    debtor as
\nwell as   to \ufb01le their fresh
\nmemg   meet ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n
  cannot resile from the<\/p>\n
award pessed   in Miscellaneous First<\/p>\n
  this Court had awarded all the<\/p>\n
  tietie\ufb01ts after amendment, which is extracted<\/p>\n
sboire. V(‘,\u20ac:\u00a7x1\u00a7V::eque:1t1y, the following order is passed:<\/p>\n
dd ” =   The impug1ed order of attachment in Writ<\/p>\n
Petition No.6036 1 \/ 2009 is quashed.<\/p>\n
2. Writ I~”etition No.60360\/2009 stands
\ndismsed of. \ufb02<\/p>\n
\/’<\/p>\n
\/<\/p>\n
:8:<\/span><\/p>\n
the Apex Court in  ‘c:asVc”._of’ S <\/p>\n
Singh vs. Union<\/a> of.V_11:di\u00a7
\n2006(2) LACC  ‘<\/p>\n
Memo of   \ufb02ied in<\/p>\n
compliance   and award<\/p>\n
passes} by: ‘   tiixc Misce\ufb02aneous<\/p>\n
Petitions   h.\n<\/p>\n
The  conclude the<\/p>\n
  _ouier’  of three months from<\/p>\n
the<\/p>\n
dateof   <\/p>\n
_   Government Pleader, is<\/p>\n
   memo of appearance in four weeks. .<\/p>\n
gm.\n<\/p>\n
Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
JUDGE<\/p>\n
The Executing Court: shall
\nconsideration the decision  by  u  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 Author: Ajit J Gunjal : 1 : IN TEE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23m DAY OF MARCH 2_0;O”9 5 ;_. A’ BEFORE THE HONBLE MR.JU$TICE Ej1T’J..:CiUNJAI; – WRIT PE’I’i’I’ION NO.6G361}i3Q{59(z(}M\u00bbC1’PC)” – 2 ” […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-267671","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAgricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Agricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":493,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Agricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Agricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Agricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009"},"wordCount":493,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009","name":"Agricultural Produce Market ... vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-21T19:20:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/agricultural-produce-market-vs-the-assistant-commissioner-on-23-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Agricultural Produce Market … vs The Assistant Commissioner on 23 March, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267671","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=267671"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/267671\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=267671"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=267671"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=267671"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}