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

1926 Supreme(Mad) 402

ODGERS
In Re: Muthu Balu Chetti – Appellant
Versus
Unknown – Respondent


ORDER

Odgers, J.

1. This batch of Criminal Revision cases has been referred by the Sessions Judge of Madura. The First Class Bench of Magistrates, Madura Town, convicted the persons concerned under Section 338 of the District Municipalities Act on the ground that they had not taken out licences under Section 249 of the same Act. Permission had been obtained under Section 250 and it was contended before the Bench of Magistrates and before us in revision that if such permission is obtained it is unnecessary to take out a licence under Section 249. Reliance is placed on the ruling of a Bench of this Court in Cr. R.C. No. 503 of 1925 Madura Municipality v. Muthu Balu Chetty (1926) 50 M L J 384 and the learned Sessions Judge has referred the matter to this Court on the ground that the convictions are illegal having regard to that ruling. The Magistrates found as a fact that the working of the rice mills in question is likely to be dangerous to human life or health or property and would therefore fall within the mischief of Schedule V, Clause (q) of the Act. So we must take it that the persons concerned have been found to be doing in the course of an industrial process something which is l
















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