Privy Council(1927) 03 PRI CK 0017

Secretary of State for India vs Tarak Chandra Sadhukhan

Privy Council · Decided on 3 March 1927 · Citation: (1927) AIR(PC) 172

HON’BLE JUDGES
John Wallis, Darling, Viscount Dunedin, JJ.
CASE NUMBER
Privy Council Appeal Nos. 35 and 36 of 1926

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

4 paragraphs · 157 words

Viscount Dunedin, J.

This is really a most hopeless case for appeal. Their Lordships do not think it necessary to add anything to what was so very well said by the President of the Improvement Tribunal, who has examined the facts with great accuracy.

As far as the construction of the Act is concerned (and the construction of the Act is the only thing to be determined), their Lordships will only say that it seems to them that the epithet " permanently " is used as an antithesis to " temporarily," and that upon the facts as put by the learned President "there can be no doubt that these attachments were anything, but temporary and fall absolutely within the word " permanently." Indeed, their Lordships can only add that they wonder that such a case was appealed on behalf of the Government.

Their Lordships will, therefore, humbly advise His Majesty that these appeals be dismissed with costs.