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: D. Narasimha Aiyar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Nov 23, 1945
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/799446

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: D. Narasimha Aiyar

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1946Mad153; (1945)2MLJ585

Excerpt

- orderkuppuswami aiyar, j.1. rule 39(1) (b) of the traffic rules runs thus : 'no person shall ride a cycle on any road in any other manner than on the saddle.2. admittedly, the petitioner was riding not on the saddle but on the carrier behind the saddle and above the wheel. he is therefore guilty of the offence with which he has been charged.3. what is contended is that what was intended to be prohibited was the propulsion of the wheels by moving the pedal without sitting on the saddle. that also could be said to be prohibited as it is riding in any other manner but by sitting in any place without propelling the wheels. etymologically, it will be correct to say that the man, who is sitting on the carrier and is carried on the cycle, is riding the cycle. but then he will not be riding it sitting on the saddle.4. the petitioner was rightly convicted and the sentence cannot be said to be excessive. the petition is dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Kuppuswami Aiyar, J.

1. Rule 39(1) (b) of the Traffic Rules runs thus : 'No person shall ride a cycle on any road in any other manner than on the saddle.

2. Admittedly, the petitioner was riding not on the saddle but on the carrier behind the saddle and above the wheel. He is therefore guilty of the offence with which he has been charged.

3. What is contended is that what was intended to be prohibited was the propulsion of the wheels by moving the pedal without sitting on the saddle. That also could be said to be prohibited as it is riding in any other manner but by sitting in any place without propelling the wheels. Etymologically, it will be correct to say that the man, who is sitting on the carrier and is carried on the cycle, is riding the cycle. But then he will not be riding it sitting on the saddle.

4. The petitioner was rightly convicted and the sentence cannot be said to be excessive. The petition is dismissed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial