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: Penchul Reddi Kottur

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Oct 04, 1910
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/818616

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
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Miscellaneous

Case Summary

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

Forest Act (Mad, Act V of 1882), Section 21(f) - Quarrying in a reserved forest without permit--No dishonest or bad motive--Nominal sentence sufficient. -

Key legal issue
Miscellaneous

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

In Re: Penchul Reddi Kottur

Legal References

Reported In
9Ind.Cas.567a

Excerpt

forest act (mad, act v of 1882), section 21(f) - quarrying in a reserved forest without permit--no dishonest or bad motive--nominal sentence sufficient. - orderayling, j.1. the petitioner, undoubtedly, committed an offence under section 21(f) of the forest act by quarrying in a reserved forest without a permit; but under the peculiar circumstances of the case, little more than a nominal sentence was called for, for the petitioner quarried the stone for use in construction of a chavadi for which he had taken a contract from the minor irrigation overseer and it is clear from the latter's evidence (as defence witness no. 1) that whatever the petitioner did was with his knowledge and support. he says he has been accustomed to allow his contractors to quarry without obtaining permits and to deduct the seignior-age due to the forest department from the contractor's final bills. this he seems to have regarded as quite proper and legal. it is a dangerous system and likely to lead to abuse, but there is no reason to hold that the petitioner was actuated by any dishonest or bad motive.2. the conviction is upheld, but the fine is reduced to rupees five.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Ayling, J.

1. The petitioner, undoubtedly, committed an offence under Section 21(f) of the Forest Act by quarrying in a reserved forest without a permit; but under the peculiar circumstances of the case, little more than a nominal sentence was called for, for the petitioner quarried the stone for use in construction of a Chavadi for which he had taken a contract from the minor Irrigation Overseer and it is clear from the latter's evidence (as defence witness No. 1) that whatever the petitioner did was with his knowledge and support. He says he has been accustomed to allow his contractors to quarry without obtaining permits and to deduct the seignior-age due to the Forest department from the contractor's final bills. This he seems to have regarded as quite proper and legal. It is a dangerous system and likely to lead to abuse, but there is no reason to hold that the petitioner was actuated by any dishonest or bad motive.

2. The conviction is upheld, but the fine is reduced to Rupees five.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial