SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1938 Supreme(Mad) 398

BURN
Vadavalli Narasimha Rao – Appellant
Versus
V. Ayyanna Rao – Respondent


ORDER

Burn, J.

1. The petitioners were convicted by the Stationary Sub-Magistrate, Ellore, of an offence under Section 430, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 each. On appeal the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ellore, confirmed the conviction but reduced the fine to Rs. 25 each. This revision petition is preferred by the accused, who contend that the conviction under Section 430, Indian Penal Code, was wrong.

2. The facts are simple. The accused hold lands under a tank which receives its supply from a channel called the Dendulur channel. The complainant in this case was the holder of land irrigated from another tank which also receives its supply from the same channel, but the supply channel to the accuseds tank takes off from the main channel at a point higher up than the supply channel of the complainants tank. In these circumstances on the 2nd August, 1937, the accused put a bund across the main channel just below the point at which the supply channel to their tank takes off, and thereby diverted all the water flowing in the main channel to their tank, preventing any water from going down to the complainants tank. The bund was kept in position for at least a month













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top