Queen Empress Vs. Gujria

Queen Empress vs Gujria

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Decided Jul 08, 1885

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/332634

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/332634
Court: Mumbai
Judge: Nanabhai Haridas, ;W. Wedderburn and ;Bart, JJ.
Decided On: Jul 08, 1885
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Municipal (Bombey) Act VI of 1873, Sections 33 and 74 - 'External alteration'--Opening of a new doorway in building without notice to municipality. - - but as the act complained of in this case is not alleged to have caused any inconvenience to anybody, we reduce the sentence to the nominal fine of one anna only.

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Queen Empress

Respondent

Gujria

Legal References

Reported In: (1885)ILR9Bom568

Excerpt

municipal (bombey) act vi of 1873, sections 33 and 74 - 'external alteration'--opening of a new doorway in building without notice to municipality. - - but as the act complained of in this case is not alleged to have caused any inconvenience to anybody, we reduce the sentence to the nominal fine of one anna only.nanabhai haridas, j.1. the district magistrate to be informed that the opening of a new external door is an external alteration of the building in which the door is opened, and that such an act done without the notice to the municipality, contemplated by section 33 of bombay act vi of 1873, is an offence punishable under section 74 of that act; but as the act complained of in this case is not alleged to have caused any inconvenience to anybody, we reduce the sentence to the nominal fine of one anna only. the difference between the fine originally levied and the induced fine to be repaid to the accused.

Full Judgment

Nanabhai Haridas, J.

1. The District Magistrate to be informed that the opening of a new external door is an external alteration of the building in which the door is opened, and that such an act done without the notice to the municipality, contemplated by Section 33 of Bombay Act VI of 1873, is an offence punishable under Section 74 of that Act; but as the act complained of in this case is not alleged to have caused any inconvenience to anybody, we reduce the sentence to the nominal fine of one anna only. The difference between the fine originally levied and the induced fine to be repaid to the accused.

Same Parties Queen Empress vs Gujria Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Nanabhai Haridas, ;W. Wedderburn and ;Bart, JJ.

Criminal