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: Venka Venkataratnam

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Dec 21, 1934
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/808537

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
Labour and Industrial

Case Summary

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

- - 142 of 1933. Mere fail-lure to put up notice of Sunday work is not an offence.

Key legal issue
Labour and Industrial

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Venka Venkataratnam

Legal References

Reported In
AIR1935Mad301

Excerpt

- - 142 of 1933. mere fail-lure to put up notice of sunday work is not an offence......by the petitioner in (these cases. at the most it seems to a, there were two offences committed which ware (1) employing four persons ion a sunday without giving notice to the inspector and without fixing a notice in the place mentioned in 8. 36, factories act. this is an offence under section 41(a) read with section 21(1)(b), factories act, it is not, i think four separate offences; (2) employing one person, the head foreman, outside the specified hours on a sunday. this is an offence under section 41 (a) read with section 26 of the act. there is no such offence as that for which the accused has been convicted in c.c. no. 142 of 1933. mere fail-lure to put up notice of sunday work is not an offence. the act which is prohibited in section 22 consists in employing persons on sunday without (a) giving 'them a compensation holiday and (b) giving notice to the inspector and putting up a notice in the place mentioned in section 36. a manager may be convicted under section 41(a) read with this section if ,he employs any person on a sunday without fulfilling all these conditions; if he violates even one of the conditions, tho offence is complete; but if he violates all three the offence is still only lone offence. therefore the conviction and sentence in c.c. no. 142 of 1933 cannot stand. i set them aside and order the fine, if collected, to be refunded.2. i see no reason to differ from the learned joint magistrate's finding, that the accused did not succeed in shifting his responsibility under section 42(1) of the act. but as i hold that the employment of the four persons mentioned in c.c. nos. 143 to 146 of 1933 constituted one offence only and not four offences, ii shall confirm the conviction and sentence in c.c. no. 143 of 1933 alone and set aside the convictions and sentences in c.c. no. 144, 145 and 146 of 1933. the fines in these cases, if collected, will be refunded. the conviction in c.c. no. 147 of 1933 is correct and the sentence is not excessive. i decline.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

Burn, J.

1. There were not really six 'offences committed by the petitioner in (these cases. At the most it seems to a, there were two offences committed which ware (1) employing four persons ion a Sunday without giving notice to the Inspector and without fixing a notice in the place mentioned in 8. 36, Factories Act. This is an offence under Section 41(a) read with Section 21(1)(b), Factories Act, it is not, I think four separate offences; (2) employing one person, the head foreman, outside the specified hours on a Sunday. This is an offence under Section 41 (a) read with Section 26 of the Act. There is no such offence as that for which the accused has been convicted in C.C. No. 142 of 1933. Mere fail-lure to put up notice of Sunday work is not an offence. The act which is prohibited in Section 22 consists in employing persons on Sunday without (a) giving 'them a compensation holiday and (b) giving notice to the Inspector and putting up a notice in the place mentioned in Section 36. A Manager may be convicted under Section 41(a) read with this section if ,he employs any person on a Sunday without fulfilling all these conditions; if he violates even one of the conditions, tho offence is complete; but if he violates all three the offence is still only lone offence. Therefore the conviction and sentence in C.C. No. 142 of 1933 cannot stand. I set them aside and order the fine, if collected, to be refunded.

2. I see no reason to differ from the learned Joint Magistrate's finding, that the accused did not succeed in shifting his responsibility under Section 42(1) of the Act. But as I hold that the employment of the four persons mentioned in C.C. Nos. 143 to 146 of 1933 constituted one offence only and not four offences, II shall confirm the conviction and sentence in C.C. No. 143 of 1933 alone and set aside the convictions and sentences in C.C. No. 144, 145 and 146 of 1933. The fines in these cases, if collected, will be refunded. The conviction in C.C. No. 147 of 1933 is correct and the sentence is not excessive. I decline to interfere in revision in that case.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial