Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

In Re: Kuppuswami Naidu

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 12, 1943
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/776650

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Decided On
Subject
Motor Vehicles

Case Summary

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

-

Key legal issue
Motor Vehicles

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Kuppuswami Naidu

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1943Mad491; (1943)1MLJ344

Excerpt

- orderhorwill, j.1. the petitioner has been convicted for exceeding by a few miles per hour the speed limit fixed by the road transport board just outside madura on the madura-dindigul road.2. the first point raised in this petition is that the road transport board has not ' fixed ' the speed of 15 miles an hour--which the petitioner is said to have exceeded--within the meaning of section 71 (2) of the motor vehicles act. it has been held in several decisions of this court that the fixing of the speed by the board is the publication in the official gazette. the expression ' official gazette ' is defined in the general clauses act, section 37-a, as meaning the gazette of india or, as the case may be, the official gazette of the province--which, in this presidency, would mean the fort st. george gazette. it is admitted by the prosecution that there has been no publication in the fort st. george gazette but only in the district gazette. as there has been no publication in the official gazette, the speed limit for this area was not fixed by the road transport board. it follows that the petitioner was not guilty of exceeding the speed ' fixed '' by the road transport board and ought not therefore to have been convicted.3. the petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside. the fine will be refunded.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Horwill, J.

1. The petitioner has been convicted for exceeding by a few miles per hour the speed limit fixed by the Road Transport Board just outside Madura on the Madura-Dindigul Road.

2. The first point raised in this petition is that the Road Transport Board has not ' fixed ' the speed of 15 miles an hour--which the petitioner is said to have exceeded--within the meaning of Section 71 (2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. It has been held in several decisions of this Court that the fixing of the speed by the Board is the publication in the Official Gazette. The expression ' Official Gazette ' is defined in the General Clauses Act, Section 37-A, as meaning the Gazette of India or, as the case may be, the Official Gazette of the province--which, in this Presidency, would mean the Fort St. George Gazette. It is admitted by the prosecution that there has been no publication in the Fort St. George Gazette but only in the District Gazette. As there has been no publication in the Official Gazette, the speed limit for this area was not fixed by the Road Transport Board. It follows that the petitioner was not guilty of exceeding the speed ' fixed '' by the Road Transport Board and ought not therefore to have been convicted.

3. The petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence set aside. The fine will be refunded.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial