THANKAPPAN PILLAI Vs. PURUSHOTHAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the Sanitary Assistant of the Quilon Municipal Council against the order passed by the Court of the Honorary 1st Class Bench of Magistrates, Quilon acquitting the respondent. The charge against the accused was that on 1 -1 -1959 in his shop in palace Ward, Quilon he stored gas and manufactured aerated waters without obtaining the requisite license. Under Section 261 of the Travancore District Municipalities Act -Act XXIII of 1116 the Municipal Council may by notification in the gazette prohibit the use of any place within the municipal limits for any one or more of the purposes mentioned in Schedule III without the license of the Executive Authority and under Section 342(2) a fee may be charged for every such license at such rate as may be fixed by the Council. In exercise of these powers rates of fees were fixed. Item I prescribes a fee of Rs. 6/ - for aerated water manufacturing and item No. 53 prescribes a fee of Rs. 12/ - for storing gas.

(2.) ACCORDING to the accused he is manufacturing aerated waters for which the fee payable by him is only Rs. 6/ - and that he has stocked gas only for the purpose of manufacturing aerated waters. There was no case for the prosecution that the accused was storing more than what was actually necessary for the manufacture of aerated waters or that he was storing it for sale or for any ether purposes. It is conceded that aerated water cannot be manufactured without gas. In fact only one cylinder containing gas was found in the shop on inspection. The learned 1st Class Bench of Magistrates found the accused guilty and convicted him for manufacturing aerated waters without a license but acquitted him of the offence of storing gas. According to the prosecution the accused is bound to take out license for each of the purposes mentioned.

(3.) IN J. C. Thomoson v Equity Fire Insurance Company (1910 Appeal Cases 592) their Lordships had to construe the precise signification of the words "stored or kept." That was a case where Thomoson the owner of a building had insured against fire with the Equity Fire Insurance Co. The building was burnt down and the question was whether the policy was avoided by the reason of the presence on the premises at the time of the fire of a small quantity of gasoline. The statutory condition which the Insurance Company relied on was that the company is not liable for loss or damage occurring while gasoline. is. stored or kept in the building insured. The only storage of gasoline was that which was contained in a stove. The question was whether that Would come Within the meaning of the word 'stored.' Their Lordships stated: