Skip to content


Konee Subhadra Vs. Subbarayadu - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1900)10MLJ83
AppellantKonee Subhadra
RespondentSubbarayadu
Excerpt:
- section 16 (1) (c) :[tarun chatterjee & aftab alam,jj] ready and willing to perform-concurrent findings of fact on consideration of evidence on record that appellants-buyers were not ready and willing to perform terms and conditions of agreement for sale - buyers failing to pay balance consideration before agitating matter before supreme court held, concurrent finding cannot be interfered with. section 20: [tarun chatterjee & aftab alam,jj] whether time is the essence of contract held, many instance in contract which repeatedly showed that time was to be of essence of contract were specifically mentioned. clear condition in contract that purchasers would have to definitely deposit balance amount by date stipulated in contract for sale show that time was essence of contract. 1. we are of opinion that the decree of the district judge is wrong, and must be set aside. the plaintiff in the course of a quarrel with a dancing girl is apostrophised by her. the word used by the defendant was one which might-convey an evil imputation if it was used for that purpose. as used, however, in the course of heated language, it could not bear any such meaning. it was used merely as vulgar abuse. the district judge has, assumed that, if the word could in any circumstances convey an evil imputation, it necessarily must do so. that is not the law. where the words were used as in this case, it is clear that they are not actionable. we reverse the decree of the district judge and restore that of the munsif with costs in this and the lower appellate court.
Judgment:

1. We are of opinion that the decree of the District Judge is Wrong, and must be set aside. The plaintiff in the course of a quarrel with a dancing girl is apostrophised by her. The word used by the defendant was one which might-convey an evil imputation if it was used for that purpose. As used, however, in the course of heated language, it could not bear any such meaning. It was used merely as vulgar abuse. The District Judge has, assumed that, if the word could in any circumstances convey an evil imputation, it necessarily must do so. That is not the law. Where the words were used as in this case, it is clear that they are not actionable. We reverse the decree of the District Judge and restore that of the Munsif with costs in this and the Lower Appellate Court.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //