High CourtsDivision Bench(1892) 10 MAD CK 0013

In Re: Ponnammal

Madras High Court · Decided on 14 October 1892 · Citation: (1893) ILR (Mad) 234

HON’BLE JUDGES
Handley, J · Best, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 102 words
1.

We are of opinion that the District Magistrate is right. Section 20, clause II of the Court Fees Act has reference only to fees for processes

issued in the case of ""offences,"" and it has been held that an order for payment of maintenance is not a conviction for an "offence" see Queen v.

Golam Hossein 2. Chowdhry 7 W.R. Cr., 10; cf. Reg. v. Thakur Ira 5 Bom. H.C.R. 81.

2.

We, therefore, set aside the Head Assistant Magistrate's order dismissing the application and direct the Magistrate to proceed with the inquiry

and pass an order in accordance with law.