Nif Pvt. Ltd vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 1250 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

          S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5211/2019

NIF Pvt. Ltd., 119-121, Block P And T, Fazal Ganj, Kalpi Road,
Kanpur-208012      (Uttarpradesh)           Through         Sh.     Manoj    Singh
Assistant General Manager, Nif Pvt. Ltd.
                                                                     ----Appellant
                                   Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan, Food Safety Officer, Sirohi
2.      Commissioner Of Food Safety, Rajasthan
3.      Madan Gopal Prajapati, M/s Sarneshwar Provision Store
        Sarneshwar Road, Sirohi
4.      Lakhpat Raj Gandhi, M/s Gandhi Chunnilal Lalchand And
        Bros, Sumerpur, Pali
5.      Rahul Shrivastav, Nominee M/s Nif Pvt, Ltd.
                                                                  ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ashish Tak through V.c. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Maharshi through V.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

03/02/2022

Learned counsel for appellant submits that the product of

Deshi Gee (Namaste India) has wrongly been declared

misbranding whereas the product has cleared all the food analyst

test and further the similar issue has already been adjudicated

between the parties in other litigation, therefore, the impugned

judgment is also hit by the Principal of res judicata.

Heard.

The appeal is admitted on the following questions:-

(I) whether the issue involved between the parties has already been adjudicated and has attained finality,

(2 of 2) [CMA-5211/2019]

therefore, the impugned judgment is against the principal of res judicata?

(ii) whether the product of 'Namaste India' has wrongly been declared misbranding without considering that the product has already been cleared standards of quality Ghee as laid down under the relevant provisions of Food Safety & Standards (Food Products Standard and Food Additives) Regulation, 2011?

As far as stay is concerned, appellant has already deposited

the penalty amount and thus stay application has become

infructuous.

Accordingly, stay application is dismissed as not press.

Record of this case be also summoned.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/3

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)