Queen-empress Vs. Konda

Queen-empress vs Konda

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 03, 1893

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/788724

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/788724
Court: Chennai
Judge: Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Shephard, J.
Decided On: Mar 03, 1893
Subject: Contract;Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal breach of Contract Act - Act XIII of 1859, Section 2--Limitation of civil claim--Order by the Magistrate for repayment of advances. -

Key legal issue: Contract;Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Queen-empress

Respondent

Konda

Legal References

Reported In: (1893)ILR16Mad347; (1893)3MLJ180

Excerpt

criminal breach of contract act - act xiii of 1859, section 2--limitation of civil claim--order by the magistrate for repayment of advances. - 1. in these cases the magistrate dismissed the charge laid under section 2 of act xiii of 1859 on the ground that the term for which the contract between the parties had been made had expired. in our opinion this affords no reason why the magistrate should not have adopted the alternative course provided in section 2, and have directed the accused to repay the money advanced or such part thereof as might seem to the magistrate just. the mere fact that the advance was made so long ago that the money could not be recovered by action is in our judgment no sufficient ground for refusing altogether to give effect to the penal provision of the act.2. in cases in which there has been great or unexplained delay on the part of the complainant the magistrate can use his discretion as to the amount which he may direct to be repaid. the orders of dismissal are set aside and the magistrate directed to proceed according to law.

Full Judgment

1. In these cases the Magistrate dismissed the charge laid under Section 2 of Act XIII of 1859 on the ground that the term for which the contract between the parties had been made had expired. In our opinion this affords no reason why the Magistrate should not have adopted the alternative course provided in Section 2, and have directed the accused to repay the money advanced or such part thereof as might seem to the Magistrate just. The mere fact that the advance was made so long ago that the money could not be recovered by action is in our judgment no sufficient ground for refusing altogether to give effect to the penal provision of the Act.

2. In cases in which there has been great or unexplained delay on the part of the complainant the Magistrate can use his discretion as to the amount which he may direct to be repaid. The orders of dismissal are set aside and the Magistrate directed to proceed according to law.

Same Parties Queen-empress vs Konda Same Subject Contract;Criminal Same Judge Arthur J.H. Collins, Kt., C.J. and ;Shephard, J.

Contract;Criminal