Skip to main content

FRP

 Fair & Remunerative Price (FRP) is the minimum price that is to be paid by the sugar mills to the sugar farmers. The sugar mills are legally bound to pay FRP to the farmer for cane production. Mills have the option to sign an agreement that allow them to pay FRP in installment. Delay in payment attract up to 15% of interest per annum & the sugar commissioner can recover unpaid FRP as due revenue recovery by attaching properties of the mills. The FRP across the country governed under the sugar control act, 1966 issued under Essential Commodities act, 1955 which mandate the payment within 14 days of the date of delivery of the cane. FRP is determined on the recommendation of the Commission for Agricultural Costs & Prices (CACP) & announced by the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affair (CCEA). The FRP is based on the Rangarajan committee report on recognizing the sugar industries. 

Recently Maharashtra Government has introduced FRP in the state that allow sugar mills to pay Fair & Remunerative Price in 2 trenches. The first installment would have paid within 14 days of delivery cane & second installment within 15 days of the closure of the mills. 

The farmers in Maharashtra are not satisfied with the state government decision regarding FRP and they started protesting against the FRP. The farmer concerned with FRP is that it will impact their income as FRP paid in installment & will depend on an unknown variable. This will impact on their liabilities to bank loan & other expenses as they are to be paid as usual. The farmers required more money in the beginning of the season as it will decide the next crop cycle. 

The FRP is fixed at Rs 2900 per tonne at a base recovery of 10% for the sugar season 2021-2022. The Maharashtra government take a great step for the farmers welfare but state government need to keep in mind that it will cause trouble to the farmer at certain scale. The government should reconsider the policy and frame it accordingly in order to avoid such losses like farmer mentioned in their commentary. 

The farmers are already aggrieved by the farmers bill that was introduced by the parliament. The FRP is another issue that haunt the farmers especially sugar cane farmer. Sugar cane is a cash crop that is grown hot & humid climate around 75 to 100 cm rainfall. The top sugarcane producing states in India are Uttar Pradesh (UP), Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu & Bihar. The sugar cane farming required manual labour from sowing to harvesting that required hard labour and human resources with less use of machines in the land. India is the 2nd largest producer of Sugar Cane after Brazil. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more