1977 INSC 0015
                                        The Mahabir Beopar Mandal Ltd.

                                                           Vs

                                       The Forward Markets Commission

                                          Civil Appeal Nos. 873 of 1975

                                           (CJI A.N. Ray, M.H. Beg JJ )

                                                      13.01.1977

                                                     JUDGMENT

RAY, C.J. ­

1. Civil Appeals 873 and 1425 are by certificate under Article 133(1) of the Constitution of Indian
and Civil Appeal 1748 is by special leave.

2. These appeals turn on the question whether the Commission described as the Forward Markets
Commission under the Forward Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952, can impose conditions under
Section 14-A and Section 14-B on the commodities in respect of which business can be carried on
by persons who apply for registration.

3. This Court in Union of India v. M/s. Rajdhani Grains and Jaggery Exchange Ltd. [1975 Supp
SCR 1 : (1975) 1 SCC 676] dealt with this specific question and came to the conclusion that the
specification of the commodities in respect of which the business can be carried on is a condition
concerned with the regulation and control of the business relating to forward contracts. It is idle to
suggest that the commission in granting certificate of registration to carry on business will not be
competent to specify the commodities in which the persons asking for registration will deal.

4. Another contention was raised before us that the provisions contained in Section 4 of the Forward
Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1952 do not confer power on the commission to impose conditions.
This contention is also repelled by the decision of this Court to which reference has already been
made. It has been held in that case that commission alone is vested with power to impose conditions
in regard to commodities in respect of which forward contracts can be entered into by a particular
association. Sections 15 to 18 of the Act do not clash with the power of the commission to impose
conditions in respect of commodities in which business of forward contract can be carried on.

5. Another contention was advanced before us that with regard to be recognised associations the
commission had no power to impose conditions with regard to commodities in which they deal.
This contention also answered by the decision of this Court (supra). Further the provisions
contained in Chapter III-A specifically deal with registration of all associations concerned with
regulation and control of forward contracts and the power of the commission to grant or refuse such
certificate of registration.

6. All contentions advanced by the appellants are already answered by the decision of this Court
(supra) and the observations made herein. The appeals are therefore dismissed. There will be no
order as to costs.
</html