Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 627 views

    Dadi Jagannadham v. Jammulu Ramulu and Ors

    Uploaded by

    Prem Chopra
    This document discusses the case of Fisher v. Bell regarding whether displaying a knife with a price tag in a shop window constitutes "offering for sale" under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959. The court found that merely displaying the knife did not meet the definition of "offering for sale" in the Act. The judges noted that if the legislature wanted to include displaying items under this law, they would have explicitly included language about "exposing for sale" as they had in other statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Dadi Jagannadham v. Jammulu Ramulu and Ors

    Uploaded by

    Prem Chopra
    627 views7 pages
    This document discusses the case of Fisher v. Bell regarding whether displaying a knife with a price tag in a shop window constitutes "offering for sale" under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959. The court found that merely displaying the knife did not meet the definition of "offering for sale" in the Act. The judges noted that if the legislature wanted to include displaying items under this law, they would have explicitly included language about "exposing for sale" as they had in other statutes.

    Original Title

    12-2-14

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses the case of Fisher v. Bell regarding whether displaying a knife with a price tag in a shop window constitutes "offering for sale" under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959. The court found that merely displaying the knife did not meet the definition of "offering for sale" in the Act. The judges noted that if the legislature wanted to include displaying items under this law, they would have explicitly included language about "exposing for sale" as they had in other statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    627 views7 pages

    Dadi Jagannadham v. Jammulu Ramulu and Ors

    Uploaded by

    Prem Chopra
    This document discusses the case of Fisher v. Bell regarding whether displaying a knife with a price tag in a shop window constitutes "offering for sale" under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959. The court found that merely displaying the knife did not meet the definition of "offering for sale" in the Act. The judges noted that if the legislature wanted to include displaying items under this law, they would have explicitly included language about "exposing for sale" as they had in other statutes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 7

    Dadi Jagannadham

    v.
    Jammulu Ramulu and Ors

    • AIR 2001 SC 2699


    • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order XXI Rule
    89
    • Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 127
    • P.K. Unni v. Nirmala Industries and Ors
    AIR 1990 SC 933
    • Basavantappa v. Gangadhar Narayan
    Dharwadkar & Anr. (1986)
    FISHER v. BELL

    • Lord Parker, C.J., Ashworth and Elwes, JJ


    • [1961] 1 QB 394
    • Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959
    Section 1 (1).
    A shopkeeper displayed in his shop window a knife with a
    price ticket behind it. He was charged with offering for sale a
    flick knife, contrary to Section 1 (1) of the Restriction of
    Offensive Weapons Act,1959.
    Cont…
    • "Ejector knife -- 4s."
    • Bell's Music Shop.
    Cont…
    • Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959. Section 1
    (1) of the Act provides:

    "Any person who manufactures, sells or hires or offers


    for sale or lends or gives to any other person -- (a) any
    knife which has a blade which opens automatically by
    hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device
    in or attached to the handle of the knife, sometimes
    known as a 'flick knife'... shall be guilty of an offence..."
    Cont…
    • Any statute must be looked at in the light of the general law of the
    country, for Parliament must be taken to know the general law.
    • In those circumstances I, for my part, though I confess reluctantly,
    am driven to the conclusion that no offence was here committed.
    At first sight it appears absurd that knives of this sort may not be
    manufactures, they may not be sold, they may not be hired, they
    may not be lent, they may not be given, but apparently they may
    be displayed in shop windows; but even if this is a casus omissus --
    and I am by no means saying that it is -- it is not for this court to
    supply the omission. I am mindful of the strong words of LORD
    SIMONDS in Magor & St. Mellons Runal District Council v. Newport
    Corpn.
    Cont…
    • It is very common, when it is so desired, to insert the words
    "offering or exposing for sale", "exposing for sale" being clearly
    words which would cover the display of goods in a shop window.
    Not only that, but it appears that under several statutes -- we
    have been referred in particular to the Prices of Goods Act,
    1939, and the Goods and Services (Price Control) Act, 1941 --
    Parliament, when it desires to enlarge the ordinary meaning of
    those words, has a definition section enlarging the ordinary
    meaning of "offer for sale" to cover other matters including, be
    it observed exposure of goods for sale with the price attached.
    Cont…
    • LORD SIMONDS in Magor & St. Mellons Runal
    District Council v. Newport Corpn.
    • "It appears to me to be a naked usurpation of
    the legislative function under the thin disguise
    of interpretation..."

    You might also like