Burma Law Reports 1965

BURMA LAW REPORTS
CHIEF COURT
1965
Containing cases determined by the Chief
Court of the Union of Bur~.
Index prepared by-U PE TIIAN, B.A., B.L., Adv~~ate.

U TIN NYUNT, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
Published under the authorlty of the ltevolutionacy Government of

the Union.of Burma by the Chief Controller, Central Press, Banaa,
Rangooa.
[All rights reserved:]-

BURMA . LAW REPORTS
CHIEF COURT
1965
Containing cases determined by the Chief
Court of the Union of Burma.
Index prepared by-U PE tHAN, B.A., B.L., Advo~te.

U TIN NYUNT, B.A., . B.L., Advocate..
Published lQider the authority o! th_e Revolutionary Government of

the Union of Bnrma by the Chief Controller, Central Press, Bnrma,
Rangoon. .
[~I rights reserved.]

t: oe!' C!' <' I':! ('
0(!Gj <t;G>I iCCGOO?OO'P :~:~JlU oo'P: ~e1 :UJ?:O?')C :
ou oxp:~@3:Q)Jl&G91oSro') co~:~-,6G~n81 B.L. (Rang.), J.S.D. (Yale),

LL.D. (Utrecht), of Lincoln's Inn, Banister-at-Law.
~ 0 (' ('
J ll oxp:~t:j: e:~f:roc 1 B.A .,B.L.
rll oxp:~t:j: 2:Gropee:1B.A.,
~ o C' o .
Bamster-at-Law.
~ 0 ('
911 oxp:~t:j: 2:Q)JOI B.A., B.L.
~ 0 ('
j ll oxp:~t:j: e::x>roG~I B.A., B.L.
C ~~~ 0 OC' C'
~u oxp:'"";(ej: 2:of::oc:1 'B.A., B.L.
Ot:. t: c ~ c ") t: t: t: BL
OU ~CCGO)? oxp:1j::;!Jl0 ~:~t::J:;;>JlO G3!ro<C? G<JXG~?CJ
(Rang.), J.S.D. (Yale), LL.D. (Utrecht), of Lincoln's Inn,

Ba"#ter-at-Law.
Ot: C" t: Q 01.'

9" -CCGO)? G~t;;>JtU e::::o~l B.Sc., B.L., Advocate.
~u G81rbro-:>oxr.>f1 M.A., Ph.D., D.Litt., of Lincoln's Inn,
Barrister-at-Law.
GII Q)e:~
c Q OC"
e:lfl B.A., Bamster,-at-Law I.C.S. (Retd.)
Q QO C"
'?" 2:~oro1 B.A., B.L., Advocate.
LAW OFFICERS OF THE UNION OF BURMA l>URING
THE YEAR 1965
Attorney-General
U BA SEIN, B.Sc., B.L., Advocate.
Legal Remembrancer
U KYAW THOUNG, Bar.-at-Law.
Assistant Attorney-General
U CHIT, B.A., B.L., Advocate, up to 7th June~ 1965.
U BA KYAW, B.A., B.L., AO.vocate, from 8thjune, 1 ~65.
Law Otficer to the States

U TIN OHN, B.A., (Hons:), B.L., LL.B. (Lond.),
Bar.at-Law.
Government Advocates
U TIN MAUNG, B.A., B.L., Advocate, up to 6th Mardi,
1965.
U BA KYAW, B.A., B.L., Advocate, up to 7th June, 1965.
U ToE MAUNG, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
U BA KYINE, B.Sc., B.L., Advocate.
U BA PE, B.A., B.L., .Advocate. .
U BA PE, B.Sc., B.L., Advocate.
U l-ILA THIN, B.A., B.L., Advocate ..
U TuN LWIN~ B.A., B.L., Advocate.
U TuN NYo, B.A., g.L., Advocate.
U KHrN MAUNG, Advocate.
MR. S. K. GHOSH, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
U MYo KHJN, M.A. (Cantab.), Bar.-at-Law.
DAw MyA THAN Nu, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
U HNIT, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
2
U KHIN SEIN, Advocate.
U MYA SHEIN, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
U BA THAN, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
Assistant Government Advocates

U MYo HTUN LYNN, M.COM., LL.B. (Lond.), DOCfO-
RANDUS (UTRECHT), Bar.-at-Law, from xst
September, 1965.
U WIN PE, B.A., B.L., Advocate, from 1st September,
1965.
U ZIN, Advocate, from 1st September, 1965.
U KYAW GAUNG, B.A., B.L., Advocate, from 1st
September, 1965.
Legal Draftsmen
U LuN PE, B.A., B:L., Advocate.
DAw AYE KYI, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
u SmN vV1N HLAING, B.A., B.L.
Assistant Legal Draftsmen

U HLA THOUNG, B.Sc., B.L., Dip.-in~Law (Lond-),
Advocate.
uSAN SHIN, B.A., B.L .
.Legal Research Officer

U THEIN HAN, B.A., B.L., Advocate.
LISf OF CASES REPORTED
CHIEF COURT
PAGE
Abdul jalil Khan v. Muntaz Khan and one 219

Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Burma v.
Messrs. Burma Trade Federation, Ltd. 785
Ali Hashim Mehtar and others v. The Commissioner of
Income-tax, Burma, Rangoon 789
Asha Bi Bi
A'Qdul Rahim v. The Un~on of Burma
D. N. Panday and two others v. Babu Madan Gop<ll
Bagla and others 583
Daw Chit Ngwe v. Mr. W. F. Wood and one 226
- - Choe v. The Union of Burma (Ko Kyee) 232
- - Ein Tint v. U San Hla and six others 5
- - Htai Yin v. Daw Aye Mai and five others 1001
- - Khin Kyi and oile v. Da'w MaMa 1005
- - Khin Myint and one v. U Tun Se.i n and four others 1010
- - Mya M;1y v. Daw Hla Yi'n and six others 237
- - Mya Nwe v. U Ba Yi and three others . 12
-Peggy (a) Daw_Tiri Tin. and one v. District ~agis-
tratc, . Rangoon and two others 796
--Than v. Raml)iranjan Lhila 590
-.- Than Myint and one v. Messrs. Shwe Ni Trading
Co., Ltd. 1015
..,..._Than Tin v. Daw Ma Nge 801
X LIST OF CASES REPORTED
t'AGI!
Daw Nwai v. Maw1g M~l:lllg Ohn Shein and eleven

others 80.?
- - Thaung Chit and four others v. U Tw1 Hlaing and
one 19
- - Thin Hlaing v. G. Gordhandas 594
Esoof Hashim Mehtar v. Mahmood Hashim Mehtar 253
Gulbahar v. The Union of Burma 811
Haji B. P. Musa _(a) Haji Musa Ka Ka v. Haji Abdul
Samad 259
Iri the matter of Chan Kar Li (a) U Win Maung (a)
U Kaw Li (Debtor) 1020
Ismail Ebrahim Ismail v. E. M. Gora and six 9thers . .. 815
Kasi Nath Rai (Shri K. N. Rai) v. Dr. s. L. Loomha
and one 602
Khatiza Bi Bi v. Ma Sint and six others 268
Ko Shein Gyi v. Maung Nyunt Sein 819
Kusam Bi Bi v. Maideen Bi Bi 1023
Law Su v. Naing 'Hha Paung In 823
Lee Law Shwin and two others v. Daramsin an(! two
others 280
Ma Khin Myint v. Ah Sbwe 830
- Mya Thwin v. Ko Mauu.g Than 282
-Thein Han v. U Mya Maung 26
- .Tin Aye arid one v. U San Ky-u (a) U Nya_Nindaand
one 836
Maung Ba Thin v. The Union .of Burma . .. 38
- - S~t Hta':V (a) Maung Nyein Maung v. The Union
ofBmma 841
- - Tha Aw and one v. The Union of ..Burma 46
--Thaw Ka and one v. The Union of Burma 289
. Tin Ngwe v. The Uri_ion of Burma
-- 845
. Messrs. Cathay Pacific Airway~ ttd. v. The Comm.is~
sioner of Income-tax, Burma 849
LIST OF CASES REPORTED xi
PAGB
Mes5rs. Likhmuchand Hiralal v. H . E. Jamal and

seventeen others 1026
Mrs. J. Foxwell v. The Income-tax Tribunal, Rangoon
and one 853
Om Rao Ahir v. Noor Mohamed Khan 306
P. Sooriah (a) P. Suraya Naranyana Murthy, in the
matter of the Estate of ... 310
Peer Mohamed v. The Union of Burma ... 51
Peoples' Bank No. 9 v. Messrs. National Cigarette Co.
and fifteen others 53
Plascol Syndh:ate v. The Commissioner of Incometax,
Burma 606
Ramhiranjan Ihila, in the matter of 60
Steel Brothers and Co., Ltd. v. Y. A. Ganny Sons and
two 449
Sweyada Rahman (a) Maung Tha Tun v. Ma Noor
Mahur and two others 1035
The Mineral Resources Development Corporation v.
U Ba Yone . . 856
-- State Commercial Bank v. U Khin Maung Thet and
two others 614
U Ah Kit v. The Union of Burma 64
- Ah Kyit v. The Union of Burma 72
- Aye Maung v .. Daw Aye Aye Shwe 320
- - - -- v. Daw Aye Aye Shwe 465
- - - -- v. Daw Aye Khin and ten others 75
- Ba Sein and one v. The Collector of Rangoon 323
- Khin Mautig v. A. E. Madha and one _... 80
- - - - - - v. Paik Kyain 876
- Kyaw Thein and one v. Daw Zainabi (a) Ma Hla
Kyi t~nd one ... 882
- Mauhg Maung and two others v. U 'Kyaw Thein 87 .
- Ohil Tin v. Daw Tin Mya apd Qne 1()4()
xii LIST OF CASES REPORTED
PAG!l
U San Kyaw v. Maung Maung Kywe 92

U Thein Kyi and one U Kyin Hoke
U Thein Kyi and one v. U Kyin Hoke 1046
U Tin Myint v. U Khin Myint and one 1050

- Tin Tttn v. V Shwe Htoo Yin 97
-Way Lin v. F. Mohamed .. . 1054
Union of .Burma v. Maung Tin Myint 864
- - - - - - - v. U Kyaw Lin 317
- - - - - - - v. W. T. Mcintyre and one 868
c c c c c 1"~ c~
ffi?~tx>G'):~:p'fl OOJO'f'~roqc:of';q G81 ~ :']CU Cf 00\)
c c a c ~ c c r,;c oc
O:>?']gtx>?:moxpg'Xj')gf' Tq tl~OO?CQ( ~f>G?~CC 00 ()
~o5ol
I. .
n( ~f gtr,;t
J oL.:J cl:l o
.... 00 J
o coc c ;r c
~~r<Df'1<S GS ji)O)C
( )
Q
cr,:::
_roct.:jll~O
c ~
j 00'{
0 C" 0 C" OC"
9:::D?:J?cr~ cqmJc::q: . 9'?0
c c c r,; i:- c ~c oc
~CGG')c;q tl
2GOO?C~ ~fg')~CC .... \) J ()
'1C" ~-r) a o c c c r,;c oc
(
GOIC:t.:j: G~l 2:0~g") t~ tl~OO?CQ( r:Jf>G?~CC
~
q '?~
. . '1 '1 ( -r)
G0?0101 GQI QCOC~2 rS l.:l~OO?Cot r:tj'G?~CC
c c.r,::: c c r:: c c (;";' oc
<;'{O
c oc c c r,; c
a c r,;c oc
~ro:;:o.y: ;~ roe~;~ t:J2GOO?C4l r:J'fG?tCC ??O
slo~7~ 'fG (GQT) 'Pg-;~~ .... t;oo
c c r,; c c- r,;c oc
~ro9c~q tlCGOO?CQ( l:l'fG?~CC oo~e
GS;r~CQ(UI - j ~~ 2:8~'f:GG?C()I J ....

c '1 <:-G c- C'l
(;JO
GO.;rG0')']~S OfCDJC!T.lO
G> c 0 C' oc
(3 J ~
GSJ ~f':
C' c Q~
s G:::DO j ....
7 ??9
-1" c C' C" C' Q 0 0 .,
GSI .S<lf' ~CQCGCO:~<: - e:~CI-fCO: 01 j .... oo(;~
GsTIl'~ GsTtt:Gro: qoo
J ocr,; c
GS G~0f'r:J~q
a c cr,;: '1
G.J o
2 :~f':G::r.;?Ctjll ()I j ....
1" C'C'G '1
GSI "?QJ~~S :0 0 I 2 ? 00'{
. 1" c c- ., c c c
_GS I 0?9C~ GSI(I)(J)? 2?~J0 . .... . {3-?(3
1" C C' G C' ':1 GO c C" G
GS'I SdG?OJf'~q roe:~s Ol~tr.>?Gro~s roe: .... ??.2
LIST OF CASES RE'PORTED Xtll
PAG.E
?"<1?
0J0
00'(~
000'(
(3'1?
col3
J
(39'2
0 e9
0@0
O?J
900
O?@
000@
l3~o
09@
9@9
(3~~
?9'2
?!l9
0~9
(3~@
@00
ol3?
(3(3 J
xiv LIST OF CASES REPORTED
PAGE
~??
eo?
ooeG
GGG
eJ <t
0'2?
GGe
0'20
0"20
G'2?
?G<;
OOj
:~o~
eJe
?~e
00~
@?~
~OJ
.. ?:'2<7
. 000~
(370
?~0:
O@j
?OO
?@'1
0000
LIST OF CASES. REPORTED XV
PAC:B
~0:-2
0~
@'1
@'1~
@!f@
00
Gfio
?'
(3~9
OOOJ
~JO
~~G
~Go
~J?
:-209
~OJ
~G:-2
f2e
~'~.
.9QG
~?O
~o.?
XVl LIST OF CASES RE:PORTED
PAC.
~c;~
~Cf'?
'?J '?
'?"9
eoo
oooG
~~0
0
'?CfO
~~9
~\so
~G'?
'?CfO
'?~G
JO
CfJO
c;~o
OOJG
OO?O
'?Go
0000
'?
~'?J
00?(3
'?'?0
OOCf?
.... J0 J
'??G
~'?O
c;c;o
LIST OF CASES CITED
CHIEF COURT
A. c Akhoon -and one v. Habib, .(1952) B.L.R., 236

(S.C.),. referred to 219
A.KA.C.T.V. Chidambaram Chettyar v. A.L.P.R.S.
Muthia Chettyar, (1937) R.L.R. 214 (F.B.), referred
to 590
A. Krishnaswami Ayy-a r v. Chandravadana, I.L.R.
27 Mad. 565, referred to ... 282
A,R.,A.R.A.L. Chettyar Firm v. U Sin, A.I.R. .(1935)
Ran. 398 at 399, referred to
815
A. S. Hutton v. I.M. Madha, _(1949) B.L.R. 484 (H.C.),
referred to ...
1010
AS.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar and one v.
A. Chokkalingam Chettyar, (1949) B.L.R. p. 46
(S.C.), referred to
1040
A,.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppa Chettyar v. A. Cho~alingam
Chettyar, (1949) B.L.R. p. 46 _(S.C.), referred to ...
796
AS.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar and on:e _v. A. Chokka
Lingan Chettyar, .(19_49) B.L.R., p. 46 _(S.C.), referred
to and followed 219
A. Thumbuswami Pillay v. Ma Lone and one, 9 B.R. 49,
referred to .. 282
Abdul Aziz v. G~esh, 25 C.L.J. nBs, referred t? ... 706
Ali Mealt v. The Union of Burma, (1954) B.L.R. 65
(S.C.), referred to and followed 46
Anne Venkatasubbarao v. Anne Bhanyangayya ahd
. , :. another, A.I.R. {1946)', Mad. 104, re~erred to ... . 75
Anupama Devi v. Gurudas Cheeya_r, I.~.R: 57 C~L I274, ,
: 'referred to and followed .. : . ... ...
2
xviii LIST OF CASES CiTED
.PAce
Ari:tf v. Jadu Nath, 55 Cal. 1090, referred to and
followed ..... 1015
Asaram and others v. Ludheshwar and others, A.I.R.
(1938) Nag. 33~ (F.B.), referred to and followed ...
Aung Hla v. Ton Gyi, Ma Hnin U, L.B.R. 1915-16,
Vol. VIII 264. dissented from
1131
B. R. Kamdar v. The Assistant Controller of Rents and
others, (1950) B.L.R. p. 50 (S.C.), referred to and
followed .. . 830
B. Titus and others, A.I.R. (1941) Mad. 720, referred to 89+
Babu Ram Das v. U Maung Gyi and four others, (1959)
B.L.R. (S.C.) p. 179, referred to 836
BakShi Nonihal v. Mst._ Ram Lubhai and others, A.I.R.
(1953) Jammu and Kashmir, p. 16, referred to ... 282
Balvantrav Oze v. Sadrudia, (1887) I.L.R. 13 Born. 485
(48-8). referred to
Baran Shanta v. Ma Chan Tha May, I I Ran. 682,
referred to 282
Bhagat Ram and another v. Ramniwas and others, A.I.R.
(1949) Ajmer 44, referred to
Bilasroy and another v. The Scindia Steam NaVigation
. Ltd., (1940) R.L.R. p. 552, distinguishe4 717
Bindo v. Sham Lal, I.L.R. 29 All. 210, referred to 773
Bishna Lal v. The Union of Burma, (19.59) B.L.R. 3
(f1.C.), referred to and followed 841
Cargo Lately Laden on board the Fehmarn (Owners)
v. Fehmarn . (Owners) (.1958) 1 W.L.R. 159,
.distinguished . . . . .. 449
Chaudhuri Mahammad Manjural H~que v. Bisweswar
. Ban~rji, (1944) I Cal., 644, referred to and followed 268.
Chhabile Ram v: Dilrga Prasad, (1915) I.L.R. 37 All.
2, referred. t-o . 583
Chandidat ]ha v. Padmanand Singh . Bahadur and.
others, 22 Cal .. p. 459, referred to and followed . ... 12
China-Siam Line by their local agents Chip Hwat v.
N~y Yi Yi Store, (1959) B.L.R. p. 270; distinguished 717
UST OF CASES CITED xix
Chhotan Hasmat Ali v. Emperor, (1935) I.L.R. Vol. LIX

514, referred to 894
Chlt Tin (a) Su Thi and one v. The Union of Burma,
(1951) B.L.R., 142 (S.C.), referred to ... 289
Cillaranjan Guha and another v. Parul Rani Nandi,
A.I.R. (1946) Cal. I 12, dissented from 449
Continental Drug Co., Ltd., Bombay v. Chemoids and
Industries Ltd. Cal., A.I.R. (1955) Cal. r6r, referred
m 449
Daw Saw Yin v. Maung Kyi, (1962) B.L.R. 227, referred
m 3 10
Dhanna Mal and others v. Moti Sagar, I.L.R. Lah. 573
(P.C.), referred to 237
Dinshaw Italia v. State of Hyderabad, A.I.R. (1955)
Hyderabad p. 203~ referred to 1070
Doddi Dorayya v. Bathula Adiharayana, A.I.R. _(1953)
Mad. 183, referred to 226
Duggempudi Ramakrishna Reddi v. Duggempudi Veera
Reddi and another, referred to 1040
Dwarka Rubber Works v. Chotelal~ A.I.R. (1956)
Madhya Bharat 120, dissented from . . . H9
Dewan Singh v. Emperor, A.I.R. _(1940) Lab. 528,
referred to . .. . 796
Dhanput Singh v. Chatterput Singh, IL.R. 20 Cal.
513, referred to 38
East and West Steam Ship Co. v. S. K. Ramalingam
Chettyar, A.I.R. (1960) (S.C.) P. 1058, distinguished 717
Emperor v; Faiz Jalib, A.I.R. _(1926) Lab. p. 317, referred
to - 894-
Eschenchund-er Singh v. Shamachuru Bhutto, Koilasunder
Singh and other~. 11 M.I.A. ], referred to 219
Et159of Ahmed Serna "v. Ismail Ah~ed Sema, ~.I.R.
(1938) Ran. 322, referred to 1023
F. Bi~ v. B. S. Dhudhuria, r8 _C .W.N. 1198 (I2oo),
1:eferred to 173
LIST OF CASES C!TED
Fateh Khan v. Muhamniad Isa, A.I.R. (1919) Lah. 198,

referred to and followed 1050
Fainzunessa v. Golam Rabhani, (1935) I.L.R. 62 Cal.
G. H. Renton & Co. Ltd. v. Palmy-ra Trading Corporation
of Panama, (1957) Appeal Cases p. 149 (House of
Lords), referred to 717
Gajadhar Ramchandra Jatia v. Rambhau Vishwa Nath,
A.I.R. (1938) Nag. 439, referred to ... 1026
Ghulam Haidar Khan v. Sardar Ali Khan, 73 {I.C.) 748,
distinguished 1010
Giyana Sambadha Pandara Sannadhi v. Kandasmi
Tambiran, I.L.R. ro Mad. 375 at p. 502, referred ~o 1001
Gobinda Chandra Pal v. Dwarka Nath Pal, I.L.R. 35,
. $37, referred to . 26
Gobinda Chandra Ghose v. Abdul Majid Ostagar, (1944).
. LL.R. 1 Cal 329, referred to 583
Gopal Ram Mohuri v. Dhakeswar Pershad Naram Singh,
~.L.R. 35 Cal. 807, referred to 1001
Gopaldas Khettry v. Puichand, A.l.R. (1946) Cal. 357,
. . distinguished 1010
Govindaswamy and another v. N. China Tambi, (1952)
B.L.R. p. 8 (H.C.), referred to 1035
Hari Ram v. Firm Maddu Mal Durga Das, A.l.R. (1938)
Lah. p. 12, referred to .. . 815
Harilal (a) Harilal Dhanuka v. Tin Tin U, (1958) B.L.R.
. . . (H.C.) 268, ref~rred to and followed 92
Harendra Nath Chandhuri v. Sourindra Nath C_handhuri,
_ . I.L.R. _(1924) 2 Cal. 485, dissented from . 1015
Hemanta~J;Uar Banerji v. Manorama Debee .62 Cal.
639, referred to . ... ..; 282
fleroanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zanmindari Co.,
. A--!R (1919) Priv)r Council 79. re~err~d to 26
Hdosen Kas~m Dada-(India) Ltd. v. Motilal Pada~pat
Sugar Mill Co.. Ltd.; A.I.R. (1954) Mad. 845, referre4
;:_... to and followed .'~ . ... ... 449
LIST OF CASES CITED XXI
PAGE
Hwe Eye Hain and one v. The King, (1948) B.L.R. 40,
referred to -and followed . . . 92
In re Sabnia, Goregaonkar and Senjit, Shivramdas and
others v. B. V. Narurkar and others, A.I.R. (1937)
Born. p. 374 at 378. referred to 80S
- - The Kaladan Sooratee Bazaar Company, Ltd.,
Moulmein, 10 (L.B.) rulings 309. referred to 789
Indar Dass v. State, Criminal Law Journal, (1952} p. 28o,-'
referred to 1108
Indu Bhai v. The Union of Burma, {1963) B.L.R. 384
(C.C.), referred to 841
J. Huie v. L. K. Aiyayoonaidu, _(1951) B.L.R. (S.C.) p. 81,
referred to S17
Jaganath Malwari v. Kalidas Raha, A.I.R. (1929) Pat.
Jagat Singh v. Sangat Singh, A.f.R. (1940) {P.C.) 70,
referred to and followed ... 1050
Jaggeswar Dutt v. Bhuban Mohan Mitra, I.L.R. 33 Cal.
jambapura:rn Subhama v. Jambapuram Venkala Reddi,
A.I.R. (19.5.0) Mad. 394, referred to ... 282
Jivraj Gordhands and another v. Messrs. Gaganmal
Ramchand a Firm, I.L.R. (1953) Born. n68, referred
to ... 60
John William Cree .v. Violet Elizabeth Cree, B.L.R.
(1952) (H.C.) p. 53. referred to 836
Kali Mutu v. The Union of Burma, (1962} B.L.R. 51
(C.C.), referred to 841
Karchanlal v. Ha'ri Prasad Dadu Khadak Singh, A.I.R.
(1959) Nag. 379, referred to 1026
Khatoon Jannet Bibf v. Syed Walt Ullah and another,
A.I.R. (1949) All. p. 310 at 315, referred to and
followed 805
Khandesh Lakshmivilas Mill Co. v:. Vinavak. Atmaram
Kaurkar, (1935) 156 (I.C.) 277, referred to 449
xxii LIST OF CAS.E S CITED
I'AGB
Khaw Taw. and one v. The Union of Burma, (1948)

B.L.R. 310 (H.C.), referred to 289
Khem Chand Mo.t umal and another v. Bherumal
Cularbrai, A.I.R. (1955) Ajmer r, referred to 594
Khosh Mohamed Sirkar v. Nazir Mohamed, I.L.R. 33
Cal. 352 (F.B.), referred to 38
Kidri Prasad and others v. K. R. Khosala, A.I.R. (1923)
Lab. 425, dissented from ... 449
King v. Nga Myo, (1938) R.L.R. 90 (F.B.), referred to
and distinguished 46
Kir Mohamed Khan v. Mt. Janath, A.I.R. (1940) Lah.
359, distinguished 1026
Knightsdale Estates v. The Commissioner of Income-tax,
(1955) 28 I.T.R. 650, referred to 789
Ko Ba Yin v. Ko Thein and one, (1958} B.L.R. 6r6
(H.C.), referred to and followed 259
- Kyin. Wa~n v. U San Myint and one. Civil Reference
No. r of 1960 decided by the Chief Court on
12th October 1962, referred to 823
Lambarr v. Prafulla Chandra Palakkar and two
others, C.N.A. No. 12 of (1962} of the Chief Court
- Maung Tin v. U Gon Man, R.L.R. (1947) p. 149 at
- Po Maung and one v. Ma Mein Gal~, I.L.R. {1923)
Vol. I (R~gdon series) 562, dissented from 1131
- Yan and another v. Ma Mai Wi, I.L.R. (1932) Vol. X
(Rangoon series) 529, dissented from 1131
Kuthwar Lim.e and Stone Co. Ltd. v. Secretary of State, .
A.I.R. (1937) Pat. 6,. referred to 1022
Lahore Ice Factories Association .v. Commissioner of
. Income-tax,. A.I.R~ (1935) Lah. no, distinguished 789
Lal Bahadu~ V. Emperor; 39 CLJ. 527, referred to ... 796
- Singh v. I-{ir;:t Singh, . A.i.R. (1921) Lah. 242"
distinguished 1026
LIST OF CASES ClTEQ xxiii
PAOli
i:alji Hari v. The Emperor, (1919) Vol. 21 Criminal Law
Journal, Pat. p. 226, referred to and followed ... 92
Lakshman Bhatkar v. Babaji Bhatkar, (1884) LL.R.
8 Bom. 31, referred to ... 950
Lim Chin So v. Lim Geoksoo, _(19.56) B.L.R. 248 at P. 26o,
M. J. Kadri v. Khubmiya Mahomedmiya, A.I.R. (1939)
Born. 388, referred to 583
M. V. A. L. Viswanathan Chettyar v. Ma Aye and three
others, I.L.R. 4 Ran. 214, referred to 614
Ma Kyaing v. Ma Ohn Kyi and four others, r1963)
B.L.R., p. 184, referred to and followed 237
- Kyway v. Ma Mi Lay and another, (1928) I.L.R.
6 Ran. 682, referred to and distinguished 310
- Nu v._Ma Gun, (1924) I.L.R. 2 Ran. 338, referred to 310
- Pu v. Daw Aye Mya and others, (1948) B.L.R. 19
at p. 26, referred to and followed 237
- Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Naung, 4 U.B.R. 30,
referred to 1010
- Than Yin v. Tan Keat Khang (a) Tan Keit Shein~
B.L.R. (19.51) (H.C.) 161, referred.to ... 882
- Thaing v. Maung Chet Ohn, 7 Ran. 140, referred to 1010
- Tin U v. U Shwe Kyu and four others, (19.50)
B.L.R. 128 (S.C.), referred to 614
Malojirao v: State of Madhya Bharat, A.I.R. (1953}
M.B. p. 97, referred to ... . ... . 1070
Marian Bee _v. Ismail Ebrahim May-a th and others, ..
6 B.L.R. p. n9, referred to and followed 12
Maung Aung Khin v. Ma Shwe Hla, (19.58) B.L.R. 3u
(H.C.), referred to and followed 465
--BaHia~ The Emperor, _ (1917) Vol. l .8 _Cri~al
Law Journal p. 331, referred tO and follow~d .. . 92
- - Daw Na and another v. Maung Wa Maung and
others, R.L.R,. (l:941) 7o6,- dissented from 1131
- - Han and others v. The King, (1947) RL.R. 371,
referred to 289
xxiv LIST OF CASES CITED
PAGe
Maung Hmat v. Maung Htay, I Ran., p. 258, referred to 226

- - Kyaw Aye v. The Union of Burma, (1953) B.L.R.
p. I I4 .(H. C.), referred to 796
- - Pan Ohn and another v. Maung Tun Thein,
(1961) B.L.R. 280, referred to 38
- - P o tu v. The State, I Ran. p. 397, referred to '1054-
- - San Myaing v. U Pon Gyaw, I.L.R. 2 Ran. 106,
referred to 614-
- - Shwe Kyu and four others v. Ma Tin U, (1948}
B.L.R. 6o6 at 6o7 .(H.C.), referred to 614
- - Shwe Ba v. Ma Thein Nya, A.I.R. :(I939) Ran. 95,
referred to and followed ... 282.
Messrs. Bharat Line Ltd. v. The Income-tax Appellate
Tribunal, Rangoon, (1963) B.L.R. p. 31. (C.C.),
referred to 849>
--Burma Corporation Ltd. v. The Union of Burma,
(I953} B.L.R. (H.C.), p. 403, referred to 836
- - Nanigram Jaganath v. K. A.M. Sheik Mohamed
and others, (1947) R.L.R. 478, referred to and
followed 1015
Mouli Durzi v. Maurangi Lall, 4 C.W.N. p. 35,
referred to 92
Mrs. Constance Minoo Writer v. A. M . Khan, {1951}
B.L.R. p. 196 (S.C.), referred to
--D. M. Singer v: The Controller of Rents and three
others, (1949) B.L.R. p. 143 (S.C.}, referred to ...
. Mst. Khedani Rajwarin v. Legan Singh, A.I.R. {1921)
Pat. 379, referred to ... 282.
.Mt. Ali Began and others v. Badrul-Islam Ali Khan and
_o thers, A.I.R. {1938) (P.C.) 1~4, referred to 583-
."-- Amir Bi v. Abdul Rahim and others, A.I.R. _(1928l
Mad. p. 760, referred to ... . 1040
- Samiunnissa v. Mt: Saida Khatun, A.~.R. (1944)
All. 202, referred to and .f91lowed ... 1035-
Muiji Tejsing v. R3nsi Devraj, I.L.R. (19IO) 34 Bom.
13, dissented from 449-
LIST OF CASES C1TBD
PACB
Munnu Chamar v. Hari Narain, I.L.R. (1946) All.

p. 856, referred to and followed 268
Musa Ji Lukman Ji v. Durga Dass, I.L.R. .(1945) 26 Lab.
(F.B.), referred to and followed 449
Muthaya Chettyar v. A.R.M. Chettyar Firm, ,(1948)
B.L.R. 855 .(H.C), referred to 1010
N. A. Anamalai Chettyar v. Mohamed Yava and two
others, (1954) B.L.R. 86 (H.C.), referred to 614
Nao Rang Singh v. A. J. Maik, A.I.R. !1923) Mad. 41,
referred to 1026
National Petroleum Co., Bombay v. F. X. Rebello,
A.T.R. {1935) Nag. 48, dissented from 449
- - - - - - - Ltd. of Bombay v. Meghraj, I.L.R.
{1939) Nag. 614, referred to 449
Naravan Deo v. Hanumantha Rao, A.I.R. (1950) Orissa
p. 241, referred to 856
P. C. Ray and one v. The Union of Burma, (1961)
B.L.R. I. .(S.C.), referred to 868
P. M. Chettyar Firm v. Ma Shwe Pon, 5 Ran. I 14,
referred to 1010
P. K. Dut.ta v. Superintendent, Central Jail, Ral)goon,
{I953') B.L.R. 83 (S.C.), distinguished 841
Pethu Reddiar v. Chidambara Reddiar, A.I.R. _(1931)
Mad. 533, referred to 1010
Poniatha Kathoot Parameswaran Munpee v. Moothe-
dath Mollisseri Illath .Narayanan Mambodri, {1916)
J.L.R. 40 Mad. uo, referred to 583
Pragi Lal v. Maxwell and others, 7 All. 284, dissented
from 1015
Province .(State) of'Madras v. I.S. & C. Nandhado, A.I.R.
(1955) Mad. distingUished .. ,. 717
Public Prosecutor, Andhra v. Shaik Dastagiri, A.I.R .
. (1957) Andhra Prad~h p. 532, referred to 894
,.......__ _ _ _ _ v. India-China Lingiah and others,
(1954) Cr. Law )ournal, s83, referred to 317
xxvi LIST OF CASES CITED
:Pun Za Cin (a) P. Khup Za Cin v. The Financial Com-

missioner .(Commerce) and two others, {1960)
B.L.R. 142 (S.C), xeferred to and distinguished . . . 64
R. T. S. Khoondoo v. Hussein Buksh, I.L.R. 3 CaL 785,
referred to and followed . . . 1050
Radha Kishen v. Bombay Co., Ltd., A.l.R. {1943) Lah.
295, dissented from . 449
Krishna v. Radha Ramana Swami, A.I.R. (1941)
Orissa .I, distinguished .. . 1026
- - Kishun and others v. Chyam Das and others,
A.I.R. (1939) Pat. p. 671, referred to 1131
Raja Annada Rao v. Ramdua Daduram and others,
(1929) l.L.R. 48 Cal. 493 (P.C.~, referred to 583
- - Balu v. Krishna Rao Ramchandra, 2 Born. 273 at
Rajappa v. Nilakanta Rao and others, {1962) Criminal
Law Journal p. 441, referred to 92
Rahimadulla Sahib v. The Emperor, I.L.R. 31 Mad. 140,
Ram Gulam and another v. Shyan Sarup and others,
(1934) I.L.R. 55 All. 687, referred to ... 583
- - Krishna Shukla and o.thers v. Thakur Sri Ram-
janki, l.L.R. 35 Pat. 986, referred to ... 1046
- - Nath Singh v. Chandrika Prasad and one, 1963)
B.L.R. 370 (C.C.), referred to 590
- - Sarup Rai and others v. Charitter Rai, A.I.R.
(19.27) All. p. 338, diss~nted from 1131
Rammamurthi v. Spl. Dy. Collr., Vizag, A.LR. (1929)
Maa. p. II4, referred to . 1070
Ramkhelawan Sahu v. Bir Surendra Sahi, (1937). x6
Pat. p. ]66, referred to . . . 882
Robert Fischer v. The Secr~tary of State for India in
Council, I.L.R. Mad. p. 270 {P.C.), referred to and
distinguished : .. 268
:Sarju Prasad V: Emperor, A.I.R. (1941) Oudh. 262,
rclerred' 'to 289
LIST OF CASES CITED xxvii
PAGE
Sashi Bhusan v. Tulsi Charan, A.I.R. (1950) Cal. 107,
referred to 1010
.Sathi and two others v. Ramandi Pandaram, 42 Mad.
Satish Chandra Panday v. Rajendra Narain Bagchi,
J.L.R. 22 (1895' Cal. 899, referred to 38
'Savad Pir Mohi-ud-Din Lal Budshsh v. State, A.I.R.
(1938) Lah. p. 762, referred to 1108
Sayed Muktar Ahmed v. Rani Sunder Koa, 17 C.W.N.
Sbadeo v. Mahraji and another, II Ran., p. 569,
referred to 226
Sheo Narayan v. Ram Prasad, A.I.R. (1923) Nag. 241,
distinguished 1010
'Sheoparsan Singh v. Ram Nandan Prasad Singh, I.L.R.
43 Cal. p. 694 (P.C.), referred to and distinguished 268 .
Shio Karan Singh v. Surya Nath Singh and two others,
(1959) B.L.R. 207, (H.C.), referred to and
followed i9
Sharif Ahmad v. Qabul Singh, I.L.R. 43 3ll. 497,
referred to 232
.Sidheswari Dabi v. Abhoveswari Dabi, 15 Cal. p. 818,
:Sin Tek and another v. Lekhaung Bros., .(i952~ B.L.R.
p. 180 (H.C.), referred to and followed 830
Siva Dass Dey v. Ashabi and one, I.L.R. 3 Ran. 471,
referred to 1046
SM. Purnasasbi Devi v. Nagendra Nath Bhatahcharj-
yee, A.I.R. (1950) Cal. 465, referred to 282
Sobhraj v. F. 0. Variomal, A.I.R. (1942' Sind. 4,
referred to .. . 1010
Sooniram Ramriiranjandas v. .S.A.R.M. Chettyar. Finn,
I.L.R. 12 Ran. 64, referred to 60
. . .
Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-
tax; Mao., (1957} 31 I.T.R. p. 28;referred to 785
xxviii LIST OF CASES CITED
Srimati Raj Lakshmi Dasi and others v. Banamali Sen

and others, A.I.R. (1953) .(S.C.), p. 33, referred to 226
S. S. Mohamed Hanifa v. K. 0. Mohamed Kasim, (1950)
B.L.R. 26 rH.C.), referred to .... ... 1046-
State of Bihar v. K. Singh, A.I.R. {1952,1 (S.C.) p. 254,
referred to 1070
Sukdeo Singh v. Corporation of Calcutta, _(1953} C.L.J.
196 Cal., referred to 72
Sulaiman and two others v. Ma Hla Bi, Civil Second
Appeal No. 56 of 1953 of the late High Court
referred to 5
Sultan Ahmed v. Nasara Jaman, _(1950) B.L.R 369
(H.C.), referred to 1046-
Surendra Nath Roy and others v. Krishna Sakhi Dasi
and others, 15 C.W.N. 239, refen:ed to 1001
Swale v. Swale, 5i E.R. 1233, referred to 815
Syed Abu Mahomed Barakat Ali and others v. Abdul
Rahim and others, A.I.R. (1925) CaL 187,
referred to 583-
T. Kanniah Naidu v. Rajammal, A.I.R. l1941) Mad. 685,
referred to 282
- Motandas & Co. v. L. Hakumat Rai and another,
A.I.R. (1955) j and K 26, referred to and
followed 449
Tan Swee Kyu v. Chan Chain Lyan, (1947) R.L.R. 107,
referred .-to 17>
Tarab Ally v. MohamedAyub, {1950) B.L.R.-361 (H.C.),
referred to 1010
Tarachand v. Abdul Ahad, 67 I.C. 894, distinguished 1010
Ti.ka Sao v. Harilal, A.I.R. ~1949) Pat. 276, distinguished 1010
Tin Shwe v. The Union of Burma, (1954) B.L.R. (H.C.)
358, referred to 92
The American International Underwriters lBunna) Ltd.
v. U Maung San, (1961) B.L.R. 41 {H.C), referred
to and followed 449
LIST OF CASES CITED XXIX
PAOli
The Commissioner of Income-tax, Burma v. Suratee

Bazaar Co., Ltd., 9 Ran. p. 154, referred to 789
--Consolidated Tin Mines of Burma v. Maung Tun E.
J.L.R. Ran. series, Vol. IX (1931;} p. 1.18, referred to 819
- - King v. Hla Maung, (1946) R.L.R. 102, referred to 289
--State v. Jshwarlal, A.I R . .(1950) Nag. 231, referred
to and followed 282
Tekchand Partabrai Bhavanni v. S. H. Kalavantibai
Tekchand, A.I.R. (1941? Sind. 214, referred to ... 282
Tirathdas Dharamdas and another v. Sh. Parinesh-
waribai wfo Kundanmal, A.I.R. (1943) Sind p. 223,
referred to 805
U Aung Dwe v. U Chan Aye, r1955). B.L.R. 360, referred
to 38
- Ba Khin .(Applicant). v. The Union of Burma, ~1954)
p. 191 (H.C.), referred to 796
- Ba Thaung v. Ma Aye, 10 Ran. 194, referred to .. . 282
- Chit Tun v. Daw Ngwe Thoung, Civil First Appeal
No. 9 of (1960), referred to 5
- Hoke Sein v. The Controller of Rents, (1949) BL.-R.
(S.C.) p. 160, referred to 836
- Kan and one v. Kalachand and one, Civil First
Appeal No.. 6 of (1962), referred to ... 5
- Maung and one v. Ma Hla Yin and seven others,
'('I954) B.L.R. 264, referred to 1035
- Maung Maung v. Ma Aye Bu, (1952) B.L.R. p. 4o6
(H.C.), referred to 1035
-~---- and one v. Maung Maung, (19_ 'i6)
B.L.R. 188 rF.B:,, referred to 26
- - - San v. The American International Up.der-
writers . (Burma) Ltd. Rangoon, r1962) B.L.R. 191
(C.C.), referred to and followed . . . 449
U ..San Pe v. Ma Thin Kyi and one, (1955) B.L.R. 137,
referred to 237
- Than Tin :v. M. Ba Ba, (1953) B.L.R. p. 9 (S.C.),
LIST OF CASES CITED
U Thint and one v. Daw Chit Pu, (1962} B.L.T. 329

(C.C.), refc;:rred to
104(}
Union of Burma v. Ah H1a (a) Maung Hla and .two
others, (1958) B.L.R. 29 (H.C.), referred to and
distinguished
46
- ' - - - - - - - v. Ah Hla .(a) Maung Hla and two
others, (1958) BL.R. 29 (H.C.), referred to 289
- - - - - - v. Saw Thein, {1958) B.L.R. p. 47,
referred to 894
- - - - - - v. U Po Chein, (1963) B.L.R. p. 1 n,
referred to 801
Upendra Narain Roy v. Janaki Nath Roy and others,
A.I.R. (1919) Cal. 904, referred to and followed 105(}
V. G. Venugopal Naidu v. Lakshmi Ammal and
another, Mad. 59 p. 392, referred to . 55+
V. R. A. Veerappa Chettyar v. U Po Nge, B.L.R. (1949)
(H.C.), p. 553, referred to 1131
Vaijappa Shivalingappa Humberwadi v. Emperor, A.I.R.
(1935) Born. p. 402, referred to 894
Vasant V~nayak Bhagwat v. State, A.I.R. (1951) Madhya
Bharat p .. 104, referred to 1108
Venugopalachariar v. Chunnilal Sowcar and others,
I.L.R. Vol. XLIX, Mad. p. 935, referred to 102(}
Volkart Brothers v. Rutnavelu Chetti, I.L.R. Vol. 18,
W. L. Feria v. Anita Merlene Feria and another, A.I.R.
.~1951) Cal. p. 66, referred to 282
Wali Moh~ed and others v. Mohamed Baksh and
others, 57, I.A. .87 at p. 91, referred to 237
Williams Thomas Shipph:ig Co., -(1930) 2 ch. 368 (376),
Wilson v. Bevan, 7 (C.B.) 673, referred to 856
Woi Leellone &. Co. v. V.E.R.M.B. Chettyar Firm,
I.L.R. 7 Ran. 815, referred to and followed 60
'l C C 0
. ffiOIOOC: 7g !D~:C:)I
OC'
~::PIS~Cim?l
(C:)
9 C'
O@:JOI Vy<'UOI
C'
0').0rl
. (o<;v) 9~~t=~~ . . . . .... er5 0
LIST OF CASES CITED xxxi
PAGE'
C') "t r ::- 0 OC' (C') C' C'

(1.}'J ( ') OIQJC~1it; :::kl~:') G::tli~Cit.>;r:> 9 I oe~fll Of'OdUI O?c
C' C' C'
9221t:~e:: .... (;eo
0 'l G '1 C" '1 'l
C' G C' OC'
())9!0J::tY:> Go:;p;.;t
'-
::tl~I'J;
v
~C
J o
ru::;t;;>IC\XDQ 0::.S:>~I
-r 1 1 G931 !nCI
L
c C'
GA:> ('JJ I Oej? g-:;c,;.;l O:> OOCf Cl( 'Jci?lf::l:iC
~ C' 0 C'
~'2J
0 C'
ot~t=G~:>c~<? c:~tg:>~cc O@j1'c:~rQ:>~ccq;9c~:
C' f.:C' OC' o f.:C' OC' oQ C" ( C' C')
<y.Go:>:>
C' C" C'
J'? 92i?lf':0:.2 .... .... .... .'2Cf0'
C' G 0 C' C' G QO C' C' OC' C' Q ~ OC'
ID~j[:COC:s:<o~o;'"!
0 C'
( 9C') ?Of O@Cf?l C,):>()'.f ~? jj 'Je:2lf:X2
C' C'
.... '2'
'"f' C" r C' C' ~C' OC o rc- OC' o Q C' o
GO:I GO)?~q l92:;"GOO?CO c:l~~?~CC
J C' C' ~C' ' ~
oegar ~sg?~CC
T ~
CJQCCJ:?:f
--,
0? rOO 9e:elt:::D2?, (5'20
!j C' C' 9 OC' OC' (C') OC'
;oJ~f>C'0?~<2 fU)?~OXJCf GG?I~Cig:)'J 0@?01 'J o
9_9_Cf 0? 99 0?@'
GOI '!:300c(c)
'T'~
o f>?9?~:~cc <1.CCGC??I
oc c G$;)1 o oc
S'.<CI 00? (c-) c
') I ::'>~!
"' c J ~ 0 (" ('"..
0
(" '""
m:>c\xngp:l 0:> ~Sj@ 92i?li':atmt?X2 .... .... eG'2
o~pa;rSt1i~ 9~~:91 O@jOf ~a} j~l y~~.o.<JS t:UG:J op;;J>r
C' c C'
0? OjOO 'J22l~:::D2? eJ 9-
r '1 C' C' C' f.'
o;;or8C'Ji'C'!X)~f?~S
C'
moxu:>o;.Gm?r
0
GOOI:~~cr
OC'
~?
(C)
91
r.: C' c C' c c
O@I:SO! :.r.lC'C(J.):J'...Q)I e~ 92elf:0:.2 G?G:
c 'l c(c)
Of>OISOO 0 ~C:c GOJro~
o c(c) oc f") oc-
::Jo:> 0 I G~I~CI~:> \ ') oeJ? :::O:J.>Cf
o
Joo c 1 c c t
C!i? ~:JO cr.~ 'le:a;;=O)~ .... o?e:
'1 C' (' '1 C' ')9 J OC'
GOJI :r:>:g:>: 01 94~p:~c: <:.l<.O~If::Dg?OI'JO Sdgp:1 G$1 ror;l
ro-=>(9)1 O(Ujl (~r~) JS~ en~) ')~flt:::CfS ~- .'2Go
"( ~
GOJ<.O:GO~C
':' ('
00'-l:iG:'Ds::>?<.O:>:c:~c~:r
OC'
oe~:> 0)1 Q
s::lo:> OJJ'
Jl. Jr") ( " c:')l .. , c " c-
8j?).') I oxp:~OOGQ)? 00 'i2:??lf:~2 .... .'2901
r-' C'C' C' C' C' c:
cro:pxc'<? 99c C()"'~l o~ cpeoc; . C"'f':20G..3 op.~o:>l
I...,; c 0 C' (' C'
4l? ~:> "i ~at=:::oe: .... .... .... 00~:
:l,.. c c c c: . c oc (c) r.
C"'lfa:x;.~<? ~CCO:"f>Cl G00181CI:J':J? 9 oeJ.!
c
~;v1 O:l?<Jtl
o
0 C' (' C'~ c:~
~ :l:J9 rrt '!2at=~ ~c:e:1~2 .... . .... 0\)J'
9 Q (A\ "''Q . "'
omXO<.O:>n-.r~c;p oo:xp~J;S :I :..1 Gml ~? 'IJ ~Jq)OJ-: oo~--c: @'
C' Q Q . C' 9 C'
~?li:
e-re- c .. c c c c .~ o
G~:>roet~:>ee f<Xl:' Q? ?? 'le??lt=:::oe:; ....
~:mro-:>(~)u1 S)~p~~ Gs&:.-?(oS' o1 oogp:. ~s::>r ~~ -
li. C: '-'j( C' (' c: L
. . OO? (9) I oej<tl 'fOJ?OO"-f 0~1 0?_0) '!2?lf::::OC . . ~'2($:
xxxii LIST OF CASES CITED
PAGll
"' c "'
0SI~.S 018d0J"Jg~~ XOJC:SSS!~ros: U!~~l':li
c e c- 'lo c " oc-
G3dl s:aCI !D') (c) I
Q
IL T Jc TTC" Lc tL c tl ~ -J
oe?'21 ld:..9o, G'ie 92eg;;:x~ .... .... ;zfSo
()(;my't
C G ~
.:g~;O)');QJ4:IOO:O)')g~~
C G C'( C')
:J;l.O ) OJ
C' C' G
I!PCi~J0uJ:'.l' -:>:01:1:1
C'
O(?COI
II.- L- (' ' C'G (' 0 J ( C' C' c v 7
9t~t09Ccq: {)') '2JJ '2?0) 9e;at::uc .... 0000
e o o .,c r c r~ r c e c o
G0?~::rx:c;>=~~ e=rq~GOJ:I oego ~~01 BrY')~~ 09cq:l
C' C' C'
()? ~@'? '12rl~:::x>e: oofS~
a>?:J?':I:;oc~g ~CCG~.;':II
C' C' OC o C' OC' . C( C')
U{CI !DU.: a:J I Sd') 9 1 CO'J())I 0? j00
(C') 0 .
c Jc ~ c ~
'12a;;:::o2 .... @90
c) "' c- o c ( c) o(c) . ., (c)
~ (3 81CJ?.C;>?Id~fS1:~~ ::r.lldJ?:i'<t S9C89;='y ::0 ~ 0 101 llJ I
c "' .c
oc
G8ji~..CI~?
(c) c::>?OJii?~':l:l
c c
'2te ~~y:
I O@j'21
C'
9 9
::02 99
G (C)
~r'ly;'PY9,? 9 ~~
C' G C' G
2:X-:JOC:t
C'
OJI
G
ro:,x,
C'(
XC) I Sd?
(C')
9 1 OJ
C' C' c
92~;;:::>.:>2 .... fSJo
. C' C' OC o C' C' C'G C' o C C
~GO:lldft~ ~CCGO)::ll oe9::>1 9f('Jfi'09C9:1 0? jj~ 9~j?lf:
0 c . .(' .
C$ropo:J2 .... . .... .... "" eS'2
Q {' C' C' C' C'
~0)~<? ~YP9<<? ::t;AjCc;C':'"Af~l oo 'fl~C-coo:l'fl: eoGsopfml
CD? 00\$
r. q0 C'
9~2lt:o:J2
c c
00~
e e c c e o oc r~' r c .o c
(J)I Ql GCDJ':IC~<t e::r;::::x><f:l O@j? ~I ~'fld':ljg2 09c~:ldp:1
c c c c 'r c c c .
ro~p:~ooGQ)? o 92~r:~t~?:'c:cvc::l>2 .... ??'2
c 0 C' . !:" Q c ~
roroo)::;o,~c ~0roldt?:~c
cf<.p....('"'')C:
c
G9G
c
?C: OJOJO)v
c 0 C'
cro~c
L J o &J J " o._.. ~> ,L ..L
c;;9: C
~C'););l~l
' c rc
0@.13r1 r c o '
~fld?!5J~ 09Cel?~l 0? j::>~
( jjO)
C' c; C' .
'l~Q:;;:::c2 .... @0@
COG
m.sg.s~c;:
!'
rr.:G.c l =->@jl31
C ~C'
tlfg"~2 09ccq:1
r C' G C' ( C')
~t_:oomcro? .
C
T LT J 0 C C' ~ 0 C' C' -.A
~? jO<t n1 92at=21 or_.-r.;;?x~ .... .... 00}
co<: r
m;;qcJg o .oc;
~L::x>f:l ::>e?jl
.oc-
~CI
c( c)
OXlJ .:IJ I
(<:)
!Jd') 9 i
,
rr.;~ OCI
. C' C' c
~eo q2~;;:::o2 Q?9
c G o o' r
GO)?CO)OJ: OOGOOS,C GC$')CO SSOJI ' 8.,&0) 8&<:DQ(,lJ-:l:l !J"#OJ jC'lt
C' ~ <: ~ 09 . ' :
l. LO J ~ fT ..,. :'J IL 0 6
0 c C' C'
cO? J?@ rq 'l~t?If:~e:: : .... - . O?@
oc c c ~ c c ~<' oco cc- . r ce c
m;;oc: ~<; t:I~CX)?C~ .~r"'?<'tCCI oejo Bf"'?l92otl9C<X?WP:I
C' 0 C' C' . C'
CD?Idjrop c7<;~ <Yf. 'J22lf:~2 ~OJ
~I Grol ~~OX?.S?().)?S?OOO')':i~t
r . T "
G("'ll ';)SctU
lJ ;t..T
c)l 8d'=ll?:l
OC' (C'9) 1 0.(tW1
J u
. ldS~Iol
. C' C' C'
Jj192af:::l?23
C'
1J
....
G841ntCl3:d? .'290
ooc
elooc
sccc
sccc
mxxx G3~I::> S3SV::> .!10 ~SI'J

cc6
6c0
vee
obv
G0oc
0ooc
o0b
bc0
ilOVd
LIST OF CASES Cll'EV XXXV
PAGB
C'00 C' C G C".G G '
:::o?0?9mo110':)~~ mpoJv:.;(Jr().)?J ro?roo::gp:' 8~q Jj' J@O
C' C' C'
"t~~-r=~e: '2'2~
C' (' ~e:>:x..c,c:;
o:l?C:>~j:1j>L:~~ C'
C')C
_::l@j\'1 OJI
G 8'J(1) '"CCO'") I ;.r.l'J c~
'j) I c OJ'f';
G?~
C' C'C" C'
"lOJGO)") ?I:Sc; 9~2lt=::n2
G c OC C' ~C" ~ C" G C" C
OXJ?OJ?f?~C: <tCCCO)"JI oe901 ~f(J?(92:" ID'}Csq:<Jp:t 0:> I:S:J
0 ("
(JO)(J;.\)'J
l
~ C' ("
' e9
("
~AJCOC:r:!OJ~~ <J~f
C' C'
Ul'1 0 j1 ::OU)
C' (
ro(") I ::x>t
9
Sd"J ('")
') I 0? 0 jO
(" ..- 0:: ..- ..
'J2:i?l<j>:C\(\I:lf XD2 9?0
C" C' ~ C" C' c.- 0 C' '1 9 C"( C") 9 G
O?')C(JC:t::Jm~~ G(J?C~~9C 01 91 Cj ::x>i !)j(l) 00 I 0)1 Ul ::lO
0 C' ("
C\(m;>:>~~ 9?0
'1 9 C" Q C"
G::WIO:t=j~JIDCf.J:~c;
Q Q
ID:y:u:_'J:<:lJIDO):t GS'JI IT{CI
C" Q OC' (C'\
W? "J) I ::i@rOI
9u, !D? :)'2 9~~;;=::nc .... ~JO
(" C' ' ("
g::.
OG C" c 9 0 r,:c- r: (" G C' ( C" C")
~l"Jf1';; r.:~~:l 0@-J~I t::lf<J?t:lc IOCJCO::::C:>p: axp:~OJGO)?
c 0 (" (" C'
0 "=> jllj ''t 922lfn~2 OOJ
0 <" ~ - C" C' r:~ OC' ~C' ~ C"Q .(" o
~:G~?~~ lj~GOO'JC~ t::li'<J:>~CCI O@jj ~I r:lfg"J1.9~09C9:
0 C' C" C'
gp:t f'2@ ; )'L CJ2i?lf:X12:? .... 0@~
c
XCOJC:>CGe:c:m?:
C' Q (
G<;l
'l") C'
G<J?COJCOC~~': tj~OO?C~
C' C" c ~ (" C' ~("
r:lfg")
ocrc- ~ c-o c c ( c ~
tCCI O@jjl ~f(:)?t:J~CC'JC~:gp:1 O<fi:S 0)9?:~GC?:>)
C' (" ("
"J221;>:0J~ e~~
\ 0 '1 C' 0 0 .... oc (~
o:>rom:>:~p: Ul 0 ~~ 'f>C:>'J~:>C:>CXf'f?: v! :JI Gmt ~CI tr.l? \ 'jJ'
(' (' (' ('
O@r@l <JU9UI O@<f 9~2lf:X12 . '2'2~
C' 0
O).SOJ:>CJ?C c C' oc (")
~c c:;~J GSdiSdCISd? Q 1 oaca ~.;.01 UOJ.S?J
C"
AT J. ... ----r~
t'- L -~ C7C a.J ooT
c 0 C' C' C" ('~ ('
0? ~S<t ~ 9c~f:1lc:roc:C10J~ .... .... O?J
OC' '1 c.- . 0 C' .C' Q 0 C' C" C
0Cf Ul 0 ~9 em'J~C<JI S'J:J.>J GOJI 0)1 j@ n:z 'J~i?if:xe:: :ftlO
c co ~c oc.- a c c c
<JG~:;~ OOJCe:l O@j?l r:lf<n.~CC ID'JC'xt:l roy:~OJGOJ?
0 C' C' ('
j@ CJt 'J2:?i?lf:o.?~ .... .... .... ?'29 .
C"O '1 C'
(JSOOG()I~C
0'1 C'(C") . . OC
(.'uiSO) 0 I ;:)a:">CI GSdl :Y.JCI Sd? (;) 1
(")
c~-:?()j:l
0
l J (I Jl Go\ 7 L I L
C' C' C"
G? 00j 'J~~f:~">2 .... . .... .... '2?9
C" C' o C' . C"
G~f:G"~C: G<J:>CID~'f':l
C'
C'
oeroi 'Jf<"'if<%JC<:q:t 0:> .JJe 'J~f:
C' C'9 C" o C" .
-OJ~ . . 007
C" C' ') C" "l . . OC" (C") .
rr.l(;)J:>:I Grol ~CI SZ? 'J I Oej91
Q ( (')
(;)fC\J? ro ~~ '?fOt~p;:x:oro;>t
.c~.CC'0 h
'2~0
. ,.$ o C"
S'J~O)_,A 0\'j up>f:><"Pd<;~l9C(:);)i .... ..
,./X.XXVl
. LIST OF CASES CITED
PAOll
<,H,~t:cr,,tt:~t8
~ J
GCJ?tc-t Indian Cases, Vol. 31, p. 875 (9
B.L.T. 35) 'lt~.f:::D~ . eo~
C' 'l c e 0 G Q GO C OC' ((')
CJG~l:')C U! j .l:tC OJI lJJI ~? 9~ar:~~
(i)') @?
c c
CJ::l."~f:9c~s
<'
O)f<,j~tC
cooc (
G01
'~') cooc
O)fQ0fl
'
O@:J::JI ::DI
e 8:JWc((\)c) I
!J"J? (9c) I (ro;,p:':ic:>GO')?
c c) 0\SO
c 'Jc~i'::x>i::!
c c c
.... G?G
OC \ C' C C' cG C' o '\ 0 c c c
CJ:x>r;~ o !SG!c>?C~'I 9 f<Tf(JC~:Iooq '-21 <&':> <fjO rq 'lc~r:::u2 ~~ c;
CJ:.D':>OJOI
G ') C'IG <'
OC' (C) C
8?0J?~S c;1CJc...:t91GB<li~C IOJJ ,"j I :;eCf~l 8?<.."\:>U)::J;O)I
(' ('
Jj) 9~tf::l.'2:? 7Cf 0
0 (' (' c :: oc. c oc ((') 0
0G:JfOOC')i'fOO?~~ tCCGOYJI GU"JI~CI!Jd') 9 I ::>~?Cit C\J'X.J~I
0 c
?S?. 0C1:frop .... .... .... @137
0 (')(' '1 c (' (' ('
(,/0)')(\)? CD OVG~t:))') ~C G:Y.>':>OIQ)'Xp O<J.JCC[.;0)0>9GJ(.lf'J'f'~C
L U O (' ; o ( (')o ol (' Jo C JC o
OJI:lJ'J:I G\DI !:ltCI s:?'J 9 I O@<frl (,/[:901 <f'2 92~f:
0 c ('
C''iCDf'J::02:? 7713
0 C' ~ 0 <' G(C) C 0 00 o C
CJ<J)'JI:I(I)t),(\)()GO'Jg ~C O;> <D GO<>Clo:>~:Y.l'=l,1i>l D';).l>W QJQCCC:
l J ... Jl LO ~ --. L
cc' o:-c c
(,.)J?:I 9r''lr G:Jq 0 9' 4)? ?<11 C'J1 92:?~-r=x~ 0?@
o c c (c) c c cr c '
<oJ.Ui:>~:~ax:J)O'J v T~ :J~<qc~:>c:!::lm' Of9JI 9::co:> f:OG..:
c
op.jiw
\ c c (' (' :: .
8~<Jt r\SI O?I:SO 9221y::.DC .... .... GGe
0 C' c C' C'Q C' C C' Oc (c)
'{O:.O::CO'JCD~<? GW?C00C ~C001JlUI ~8:}1 :YtCI 8'<1? 9 I O@<fj
") J 0 (' C' 0 C" C"
f ( 0 ~1 <D? Jj] Clf 9~2lt=otm.p::n2 .... .... ~'2J
0 c (' (' oc ((') 0
'{(.J)f(\)?~~ opQ:A;:I Gffil ~CI 00') 9 I 0~9?1 (\)')CJLI II)') 0 J).
0 C' c c
'q ')2ft:X2;? '10?
G C' G C C' C C' '1 C ~C' ~ C'
I:IW'J"J <DI Sd?l '=~t=t:q.jl8~<? m<q~8<iJ~:UI ?I 0@\Srl r:Jf<,j?t12
oD eco CCC' C'
~c~:t:p:t <D? '2~~:s 9~~r:~2:? .... .... .eJ c;
c c r,; c c r,:c o:: ~.:- ~ c
Gl:l:>Cmq~<? !32;?GCX>"JC<lt t:lf'=l-01CCI 0@90 'r:Jr'=~?t32;?
G(' (oxp:~ro?
0<qc~
(' 'C) 1~? CC C C
~~:~o 9c~r=:::o2
C
@\-!~
c c c c r c e , o ,
Gl:l?C;:')GCD:~c I:IOOQCI <DQCCO:I:lt?:t a;}O) ~l:l?!tp1 001
J "C' ('".. f c J . _,c.:, 1 l u 0
Q)') ee 92~r=x2 .... .... @O?

cr:::;:: c c c c CG C o \ 0 C C' c
G~?C..:?U.~~<:lC'llJCI'\fC'lff<D'jGat8 ::P<Jt 01 <D? <fO'J c119 ~tf:X2 ~~c;
c c c ,. 'l' c rc oc" G c o
Gl:l?CXGI:l?C~<? G:.l
t- (' C09'GI
J ,
0@9~ Ql ~fl:l?ii.CC
c ('de e 4J'jC<:x;:vp:1
<
oxp:CfGGl'JI fjC'IO 'Jcelr~~Wf?:l:>~ .... c;2G
LIST OF CASES CITED XXXVll
I' AGE
; ...
-..\ XXXVlll LiST OF CASES CITED
LIST OF CASES CITED xxxix
PAGE
xl LIST OF' CASEs CITEQ.
PAC!!
LIST OF CASES CITED xli
PAGB
(" ("
!J.):>Oq;~Clll.),_l'.~o:>~C (,)0:>:~)-;Q())
01 , I -~
("
J
("
Gi ~~
C"
GCQG
6 :>e:c (" 0
1.'1.
C'
.::nmUXJGOO')CGClg,
C
...... , .
90
O::Y())ffil Gro l ffiCI m:>
('
C" OC"
l
('")
9 I 0@~ jl CD~ 9'2 C"
')2:;2i1f:
C'
}... o:>t:; (3?(5

OC"~C'O C' (C') C'C'O C'
!J.)~o:>rr.x:x;moo:Y:>~c mcoog: ro (J)(,)(,)roox:>:Y:>~c !!~p:
r: - (' (' ('
'Jt<"r.:r CD'JCCX(~I CD:> roo
6 (' (' QJ (. Q J
0@?01 92:;~y:::D~- ~0~

0 'C' ') 0 C'
8;)8QC('J):>8Y8100~C G C' ~~?I
CDQOQJCD.S8 '" OC' 8;)(..1)1
!J.)CI C' 8;)') ('")
Cl I
.L-f IL J ---t:l-roT l. -1
~~Jf5
C'oQoo C' C' C
<j@l YO')U ~2:;~~:1 {;') '2f' ')~~f:OJ~
C
tY:>~
0 C" C'G C" C' C'
GrGOO()):lJ~('J)())())~C rGtJ30Cll!)l OO~"l ;::.~1!)1
6 0
0
J
(' ('
t' ~
('
1:: (' C, ...J LJ
CDCJC<l?:l I!)') J99 9~~y:OJ~.... ~0()~

('((') (' 00 (' (' (' <)(' ((') r:
mm CD I mf~f~~ <S9'fOOm:>OJ:>I G!J.)I ~18;)") 'J I ~@~j <(I
(' (' (' ('
(,):S')~ll C!)') ?09 9~2lt=OJ~ .... (5 jO
C' ')
!J.)CC 1: 01 OQ
') C'
~~
C' C' ~ C'
~coc:t::lO?I '2 0
O'JI rom (\) I
C' ( C')
8;)? \
(C)
'J I
0 (' (' 0 (' ('
ID? ?<;<; cq '122lr=otro;;'JO,)~ 9?~
C' C' C' ~ OC' (C') C' C'
~ffi'}C~~ OOJCIDGIDJ:>IG~I~I8.;')
(' (' ('
9 I oerjl 'JfrJ:?1 ill') j9
'122lt:OJ2 .... ~00~
(' ~ ') ('

~{.)0)?8()) I!) e:1~000p11>~GCI~~
(' ((') (' " ::
UO:>J:8XJ)l;;(J)()ICOQ');;l:3'JJOI
(' ')
0 . (C' .t-lJ '"c --Tl( .TJJ c C'

?,I ~~I ~81 ~? 9) I 0@9jl yO~ ( 9) I 70 C.C) ")2 2lt:
0,)~ ~90
C' OC' C' r,: C' C' t;;~ OC' C G C' ( C')
G!J.)JC::Df:'~ ti2GOOJC~ t::l'f(,)'j~CCI Oe:J~I OJI !J.)U) (\) I
(')
~') ('l I C!)') o 'lceir=O,)~
(' (' ('
.... G~o
OC" ')
!J.)CGOO:IJI ::> ,!iiC :DGOOJCCD
C' C' . C' C'
.S(,)'J,!iCC
OC' o
~f.?"lOI
C'
.S.{.)?~CC
OC' 0
Q)QIC
C'
, ~ fJ c.- t Tel c c'-..J'c T L
CX(:Yp:1 o?9 (oc;o) rocp:~1 92:;2l;;::n2 .... G~o
r,:c OC'
e:Grop~c; r::JfY':>~CCI Oe:l<jl 0)1 ~ 00 I ~') 'J I ~
G C' 0 ('
C'( C') (C') ( C' L
(') (' (' ('

G(J)') Jj@ 'J22lf:X2 .... .... ... ~90
o :: o " c c r;-s c c
2:G~~ e:Goo: Gl jl O@l:sj ~JCDI
(' C' (' .
OXf>:Y tt-OOC~ rr'""JO? jj
9t:;~.p::ne:; .... ~~~G
:nGOOXCD .C
.
G GO C' C' C' C' OC' o C' C'
2:CD~?:1XliC
3 ---,J
. c.:,_
-
(' ('
l
.sg:>~CCI oa~::> Q~~"JI
('
T ('
" c r t.J
~cx;:mcrcro
''" -c-
m~~~o:>? 92~f:o.:>e:; .... ... ~0~~
9 C' C' C' C'O C' o C' C' C'
e:roct~ OOGOO:I oe<pl 'JrC'qt4XiC<Xi'~ll!)') O<:jO 'J2:;ely:Xt:; 00~
~ 0 OC' r,: C' C 0 C' (C') C' :: C' C' '
e :a~rof~ ~coc:r::Jo:>l GOOI~IOO:> 'J I oere1 9fC'qf1 ~
OC'C' C ..
. oJO q 'lt:;at=:n~ : .... .... ~~~
oob
bc0
rc r
IOV.r
03.Ll:::> S3"SV:) .!10 .LSI'l

INDEX
CHIEF COURT
AC'rs:
ARarrn,\TJON Acr.
llUDlllliST \IVOMEN's SPECIAL MARRIAGE A'ND St'CC'F.SSJON ACT.
HUIIMA lNCOJ\1-TAX ACT.
CIVIL PROCEDtJRB CoDE.
CoNTEMPT OF CoURTS ACT, 1926.
CoNTRAcr ACT.
CoURT FEES ACT.
CRJMfNAL PROCEDURE Coo~.
EVWENCB ACT.
FoREIGN EXCHANGE REGut.ATJON Acr.
FOREIGNERS REGISTRATION ACT.
GuARDIANS AND WAIIDs ACT.
JAPANESE CURRENCY (EVALUATION) Acr OF 1947
L.u-ro AcQUISITION AcT.
LtMITATJON Ac:r.
NATIONAL HOUSING AND DBVLOPMI!NT ACT.
PENAL CopE.
PUBLIC PROPh'ltTY PROTECTION ACT.
RANGOON Crrv CtVIL CoURT ACT.
RANGOON TOWN lNSOLVBN~Y ACT..
Iu:msTRATioN Acr.
REGISTRATION OFKB1TTIMA ADoPnoN Acr, 1939.
LAw No. 13 oF 196:z.
R.BVoLtrrlONARY CoUNCIL
SFA CUSTOMS ACT.
SHAN STATE CIViL JusTicE (S'utismiARY) ORDER, 19()6-=-AMEND
MENT ACT. i:96r.
xliv GENERAL INDEX
PAGE
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT.

SUCCESSION Ar::r.
TRADil DtsPUTilS AcT.
TRANSFER OF PROPllHTY ACT.
TRUST ACT.
UNioN CITIZENsHtF AcT.
UNioN CoNST11'UTION.
UNION JuDICIARY Ac-r.
URIIAN RENT <;:oNTROL AcTS, 1946, 1948 AND t96o.
WoRKMEN's COMPENSATION AcT
ACT OF lNSOLVENCY-WHI>l~ IT 11'1 DEEMED TO llll COMMITTED UNPER

s. 9 (e) OF TRE RANGOON TOWN lNSOLVI?NCV AcT-
CoNTINUATlON OF ATIACHMENT NOT CONTINUOUS ACT OF INSOLVEN
CY-RIGHTS OF DEBTOR TO Al'l'LY FOR ANNULMENT OF ADJUDI
CATION-POWERS OF REVIEWS- 6o
ADMINISTRATioN sun-Court should not embark 011 en.7uiry as to the

disputed items at the time of pas-:ing of preliminary decree functi-011
of of]i:i~l Referee. He'd: In a suit for accounts and administration
the Court should bear in mind the two stages contemplated by
the Code of Civil ProcedUte, vz. the passing of the preliminary
decree, and then embarking on an enquiry relatin_~ to disputed
items of accounts. At the sta;<e of the preliminary decree, it
should not embarh on an enquiry as to whether the disputed items
did or did not form part of the estate of the deceased A much
more satisfactory result will be obtained if a detailed enquiry
regardin~ the matter is made by the Official RefereC'.
I. u MAUNG MAUNG I
2. DAW TIN NvuN'rj~ v. U KvAw THEIN ... 87
3 O~>,WSBIN NYUN
ADMINSTRA'riON SuiT-ITS NATORE--HOW IT DIPPERS FROM PARTITII>N

Sull' 1040
ADOPTION-by ailing aunt before death-whether obtained by undue

influence. Courts not to make out a case different from the pleadings.
Contract Act, s. x6(3)-presumption as to undue influence-when
arises. Concurrent findings by lower courts as to "undue influence"
not question of fact but that of law-power of High Court to disturb
such finding. "Lack of publicity" in adopti~hether re{evant .
Contractual nature of adoption under the Registration of Keittima
Adoption Act. Held: Where the plaintiff had alleged that the
Deed of Adoption in favour of th.e defendant by an ailing, deceased
aunt shortly before her de;~th was void as it was obtained by
" undue influence" it is not open to the Court to llUggest that:the
deceased was more or lesll senseless at the time of execution and
did not know what she was doing. Such a finding would mean
that it was null and void on that account alone, and no question of
~undue influence" would arise for consideration. 1t is not for
the Court to make out a case different from the one set out in the
plelldings. A.S.P.$.K,R.K. Karupan Chettyar <md one v. A;
Clwkkalingam Chettiar, (1949) B.L.R. p. 46 (S.C.); U Than Tin .
v. M. Ba Ba, (1953) B.L.R. p. 9 (S..C.) ; referred and followed.
Held further ; Assuming that the Defendant, as the niece of t.he
deceased and living in the sarne bouse and looking after her, was
GENERAL INDEX xlv
PAGB
in a position to dominate, there is no evidence to show that she
used her position to obtain the execution of the Deed of Adoption.
The presumption in s. 16(3) of the Contract Act as to undue
influence by a person in a position to dominate the will of another,
will arise only if the transaction appears on the face of it or on
evidence adduced to be unconscionable. In this case, there is
nothing unconscionable in the Deed of Adoption. Held also :
The concurrent findings of the two lower courts that the Deed of
Adoption was invalid because it was obtained by "undue in-
fluence" is not based on pure questions of fact. It depends upon
legal inference from proved facts, and this is a question of law.
Accordingly, the High Court can disturb this finding on Second
Appeal. Dhanna Mal and others v. Moti Sagar, I.L.R. 8 Lab.
573(PC); U San Pe v. Ma Thin Kyi and one, (1955) R.L.B. p.
137; Wali Mohamed and others v. Mohamed Bahsh and others,
57 I. A. 87 at p. 91 ; referred to. The question of lack of
publicity " has arisen in cases of adoption made before the
Registration of Keittima Adoption Act, IC()39 When a Deed of
Adoption is duly executed and registered ln compliance with the
Registration of Keittima Adoption Act, the Deed itself is a clear
and sufficient proof of the adoption. Ma Kyaing v. Ma Ohn Kyi
and Four others, (1963) B.L.R p. 184 ; Ma Pu v. Daw Aye M:va
lt71d others, (1948) B.L.R. 19 at p. z6 ; Lim Chin So v. Lim Geoksoo,
(1956) B.L.R. 248 at p. z6o ; referred to and followed. Held
furtl~r : An adoption under the Burmese Buddhist Law is
a contract. It is all the more so a contract under the Registration
of Keittima Adoption Act. Accordingly, unless such a contract
can be avoided as proof of undue influence, fraud, etc., it remains
~alid in law.
DAW MYA MAY v. DAW liLA YIN AND OTHERS 237
AGREI!Ml!NT IN WRITING--ITS CONSTRUCTION-CARDINAL PIUNCIPLE-

INTENTJON OP THil PARTIES AND SUBSEQUENT EFFECT-CONTRACT
ACT SECTIONS 2II AND 212-BURDBN OP PROOF- 8s6
Ml!NDMENT OF PLAINT AT HEARING OF APPEAL-WHBN TO DB ALLOWIU>

--<>NL YIN SPJlClAL CARES
AMENDMENT OF PLAINT--<>N WHAT PRINCIPLES TO DB ALLOWllD OR

DBNlED--DIFFERBNT SUI'l'S TO Bll BROUGHT POR DIFFERENT CAUSES
OF ACTION 1010
APPRAL AGAINST TKS ORDER OP ACQUlTTAL-<lOnviction under 8. 380/

109 P.C. Held :It is settled law that in order to convict a p erson
of abetting the commission of the crime it is not only necessary
to prove that he has taken part in those steps of the transaction
with are innocent but in some way or other it is absolutely
necessary to connect him with those steps of the transaction
which one criminal. There is no shred of evidence to ehow
that the respondent was aware of the absolute ownenhip of the
properties by the comp18inant.
ToE UNION OP BURMA v. MAUNG TIN MYINT
APPOINTMENT OF 'RCBJVJ!R-apprehension t/wt the IIIQkj prope1 ty to

be in jeopardy-trustus disputing each other's authority-C.
XL, R. 1, C.P.C. appointment of Receiver ooer property not sub-
ject-matter of pending suit. Held: It is clear from the certified
copies of the judgment and the plaint filed in this case and
' xlvi GENERAL INDEX
activities of the applicant in other connected cases that after

emausting all his efforts to wreck the Wakf itself he has now
come forward as co-trustee in the present proceedings and
challenged the authority of respondent No. 1 who claims to be the
Managing Trustee of the Wakf. Under these circwnstances it
would be .but natural for the original Court to apprehend that
the Wakf property is in jeopardy unless a Receiver is appointed
to take charge of the rents for the benefit of the Wald and its
bene5ciaries. It must be pointed out that the Wakf p roperty
is in act~al possession of the tenant and the question of injury to
anyone oi the parties cannot therefore arise by appointing a
Receiver to collect the rents. It is, in fact, in the interests of the
Wakf and of the persons interested in it that the Court should
take charge of the property when the trustees themselves have
been disputing each other's authority. Swale v. Swale, sz E.R.
1233, referred to. Heid further :There is nothing in tb.e wording
of Rule (x), Order XL of the Code of Civil Produedure to forbid
the Court from appointing a Receiver over the property which
is not the subject-matter of a pending suit. A.R.A.R.L.
Chettyar firm v. U Sin, A.I.R. (1935) Ran. 398 at p. 399 ; & ri
Ram v. Firm Maddu Mal Durga Das, A.l.R. (1938) Lahore, p.
12, referred to.
ISMAIL EBRAHIM I SMAIL (DECEASED) BY HlS L/R MR.

HASHIN l SMAILv. E.M. GORA AND SIX OTHERS 815
APPOINTI\fllNT OF RECEIVER-CoURT WILL NOT INTERFERE BY APPOINT-

ING A RECEIVER WH.ERE A RIGHT IS ASSERTED TO PROPERTY IN
POSSESSION OF DEFENDANT CLAIMING TO HOLD lT UNOER A LEGAL
TITI.E UNLESS A STRONG CASE IS MADE OUT U
ARBITRA'fiON ACT, s. 33-Applicati011 challenging validity of t he award--

payment of Cuurt Fees-Article 1 (b) 2nd Schedule, Court 1/ees
Act- Limitation Act, Article 158, Non-maintainability of
" r,bjection" imtead of AppliLation. Held : Under s. 33 of the
Arbitration Act, a party to an arbitration agreement desiring to
challenge the validity of an award, should do so by mal<ing an
11pplication to the Court. The said Application should be
stamped according to the general Article 1 (b) of t he Second
Schedule of the Court Fees Act, as it is not els~where specifically
provided for. A petition to set aside the award on which, Court
:Fees hasnot been paid, should not have been allowed to oe filed,
by virtue of 8s.4 and 6 of the Court Fees Act. Anne V enka-
tasubba Rao v. Anne Bhujangayya and another, A.I.R. (1946)
Mad.I04, referred to. Moreover under Article 158 of the Lirntia-
tion Act, an application. to set aside an award shoul d be made
within 30 days from the date of service of the notice of filing the
award. An application made over 4 months after. servi ce of notice
is !larred by the Law of Limitation. J olzurimull Jugalkishcre v.
Kashiprosad JlzajluJria, I.L.R. (1942) 2 Cal. 16o, referred t o.
Held allo : Wliere an " objection " instead of an application is
filed, it must fail 'by reason of. s. 33 of the Arbitation Act. Man
ghoo Ram v. Firm Girdhari Sal-Ram Chand, A.l.R. {1945) L ah.
' 951 ; GadirajU Angarayya and an6ther, v. Gottemukkula
Ramabhadriraju., l..L.R.. (1948) Mad. 123, referred to and
~stinguished.
U A"\'E.MAUNG v. DAw AYE KmN AND 10 OTHERS

75
GENERAL lNDEX xlvii
PAGlt
ATI'ACHMENT OF A CARDEN LAND-WHEN IT IS PERMISSlJlLll 590

;< ATTE!Yll'T-attempt to smuggle Burmese Curumcy-Foreign Exchange
Regulati(m Act, ss. 9 (r) and 24 (1) and 24A-Sea Customs Act
s. r(y;B-not relevant/or purposes of Foreign ExciUJ.nge Regulation
Act. The Applicant, a resident of Myawadi (a border town
separating Burma and Thailand), was arrested on his way from
Myawadi as the sum of K 9o,ooo was found, secreted in the gear
case of his jeep. The Applicant's 6nal explantion was that this
sum of K 90,ooo was carried by him from Myawadi to Kawkareik
for the purpose of enabling him to make a bid at the auction sale
for excise licenses, and that it was being brought back to Myawadi
because the auction sale was postponed. The trial judge rejected
the defence story and accordingly convicted the Applicant ; the
conviction was upheld by the Sessions Judge, Kawthoolei. On
Revision. Held : The evidence on record, supports the findings
in the case. There was no reason why the Applicant should have
taken K 90,ooo for paying for the excise license, if he was success-
ful at the bidding, as the excise licence was sold for K 40,ooo and
according to the rules, a successful bidder need pay only a small
percentage of the purchase price. Jleld further : S. 167 B of the
Sea Customs Act which defines " attempt" is only relevant when
action is being taken under s . 167 (8) of the Sea Customs Act.
It is irrelevant for the purposes of s. 24A of the Foreign Exchange
Regulation Act. However, the Applicant's action amounted to
more than a mere " preparation " to smuggle the currency into
Thailand, and the stage of " attempt" had been reached. Pun
Za Cin (a) P. Khup Za Cin v. The Financial Commissioner (CQT/1-
merce) and two others, (1960) B.L.R. 142 (SC), referred to and
distinguished.
U AH KITv. THE UNION OF BURMA 6~
"/.. llllf>J)HtST 'NoMEN's Srr:ctAL MARRI:\Gll AND SuccESSION Ac:r, 1954, s.

zo (i).-wl1et1 a couple living together is deemed to be husband and
wife. Photostat copy of deed-when inadmissible. Second wije-
right.to grant <-f Succession Certificate. Provident Fund moneys-
uomi11atio11 of first 1rnfe by deceased-when i11valirJ-ejJect of
provisions of t.he Buddhist Women's Special Marriage and Suc-
res;ion Act, t954 The Applicant, a Burmese Buddhist woman,
had npplied for a Succession Certificate in rcrspect of the est(tte
of the deceased, her husband, nnd which estate was comprised of
Provi~ent Fund, balance salaries and other moneys. Tl:ie said
deceased was an Indian Hindu who had died at .Rangoon on 10~h
Apri11964 and also had an Indilln widow in India. The Applica-
tion was' contested by the mother (and agent) of the said Indian
widow, on the ground that that the Applicant in any case had be'en
d.ivorccd from the deceased, as per photostat copy of a deed dated
3rd December I962. Held: As there is evidence on record to
show that the couple had lived together as husband and wife,
an!i had been recognised as such according'to Burrnese Buddhist
law, they must be deemed to be husband and wife tinder s. 20 (J)
or the Buddhist Wo11;1en's Special Marriage and Succession Act of
1954- Regarding the question whether there was a divorce by
mutual consent, there is no proof that the thumb impression on
the deed is that of the Appli~t. The photostat copy cannot be
as
admitted in evidence, the original deed .was not produced, and
no evidence ''<as given under s. 6s (c) of the Evidence Act to
show that it had been destroyed or lost. Marmg Thein Zan and one
v. "The Ut1ion of Burma, (1956) B.L.R. 303, H.C., referred to and
followed; The Applicant must therefore !be deemed at least to
xlviii GENERAL INDEX
PAon
be the second wife of the aeceased, and has prima .facie a clear title
to the succession. The question as to who has a superior title
will have to be established by a regular suit. Held further :
Regarding the question of the nomination of the widow in India as
t;he recipient of the Provident Fund Moneys, the said nomination
appears to be valid under s. 5 of the ~rovident Funds Act, 1925,
but it can have no effect in view of the relevant provisions of the
Buddhist Women's Special Marriage and Succession Act, 1954.
Under the latter Act, the Burmese Buddhist law is made applica-
ble to cases where a Burmese Buddhist woman takes a non-
Buddhist as a spouse, regarding questions of marriage, succession
and inheritance. Under Burmese Buddhist law, such nomination
has been held to be invalid as a testamentary disposition. Daw
Saw Yin v.Maung Kyi, (1962), B.L.R. 227, and Ma Nuv.
Ma Gun, (1924) I.L.R. 2 Ran. 338, referred to Ma Kyway v.
Ma Mi Lay and another, (1928) I.L.R. 6. Ran. 682, referred to and
distinguished. A succession certificate will therefore be issued
ta the Applicant.
IN THE MATTER OF THE EsTATE OF P. SooRIAH (alias)
P. SURA YA NARAYANA MURTHY v. MA KHIN THlUN 310
BURMA INCOME-TAX ACT S. 66(t)-income from undisclosed Stmrce-
inclusion in the assessment-whether inclusion justified. Plascol
Syndicate was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year
1955-56 on a total income of K r,36,688.ss as against K t2,020.Jo,
the amount returned by Mr. B. Ghosh, the sole owner of the
firm. The difference was due to add-backs of two sums, namely
K 8o,8oI . 12 and K 37,ooo as receipts from the undisclosed sources
by the Income-tax Officer, Group C. The assessee contended
that the first sum was put in by him as his daughter's capital in
order to provide for her future. He explained that tl>is sum
accrued from an inheritance left to him by his mother who died in
Calcutta. As regards the second sum the explanation put forward
by Mr. Ghosh was that it was in fact a surplus returned to the
capital after he had, at one time, withdrawn a bigger sum from
the original capital. The Income-tax Officer did not accept the
explanation, and instead made the assessments. Thereupon, the
assessee took his appeals to the Additional Assistant
Commissioner of Income-tax (appeals) and to the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal without success. Hence this reference. The
following questions have been referred under s. 66 (I) of the
Burma Income-tax Act, at the instance of the applicant~
(1) whether in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax
Officer was justified in treating the sum of K 8o,8o1.25
as income from undisclosed source.
(2) wh~ther in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax:
Officer was j\lstified in treating the sum of K 37,ooo as
income from undisclOl'ed source.
(3) whether in the .circumstances of the case the Income-tax:
Officer was justified in including in the assesssment
01:: the year 1955-56 the sum of 1{ .8o,8ox.25 as income
from undisclosed source.
(4) wh~ther in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax:
'Offi~r was jusiified in including in the assessment .for
the yeru: 1955-56 the sum ofK 37,ooo as income from
undisclosed source.
There is. sufficient material .on record to justify the finding that
the two sums of money represented income of the assessee from
GENERAL INDEX xlix
PAGE
undisclosed source. As the assessee was unable to offer a reason-
able explanation for the two entries the Income-tax Officer was
justified in adding the two S\tms for the nssessment in the year
1955-s6. Each of the four questions referred to is therefore
answered in the affirmative. T!:e Ba11k of Chettinad Ltd. v.
The Commissioner of Itrcome-tax, Bunna, civ. ref. No. 18 of 1963
of the Chief Court ; Vishnukantham Chetty v. Commissioner
of Income-tax, Madras, (1958) 34 l.T.R. 678; Lajwanti Sial and
others v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh and
Bhopal, Nagpur, (1956) 30 I.T.R 228 ; Daniel v. Commissioner
of Income-tax, Bangalore, (1961) 43 I.T.R. li9; P. Kuttikrish-
nan Nair v. Commissimzer of Income-tax, Bangalore, (1961) 41
I.T.R. 597 ; Kali Khan Moha1mnad Hanif v. Commissioner of
Income-tax. lVIadhya P-radesh and Bhopal, (1963) so I.T.R. 1,
red referred to.
PI.IISOOL Sn."DICATE v. TnF. CoMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,
RllllMA tio6
BuRMA INCOME-TA.X Acr, s. 66 (t)-refermce -whether interest an

borrowed capital allotuable deduction under s. 10(2) (iii) of the
Bunna Income-tax Act read roith Rule 33 of the Income tax Rtlles-
whether Route Development Expmditure an allowable deduction
under s. 10(2) (ix) of the Burma Income-tax Act read with Rule
33 of the Burma Income-tax Rules-Under s. 66(1) of the Burma
Income-tax Act, The I ncome-tax Appellate Tribunal has refer
the following questions:
(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the
sum of HK$ 1,501,232 being interest on borrowed
capital, was an allowable d eduction under s. 10(2)
(iii) of the Burma Income-tax Act read with Rule
33 of the Burma Income-ta.'C Rules.
(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the
sum of HK$ 122,285, being Route Development
expenditure, w11s an allowable deduction under
s. 1o(2) (ix) of the Burma lncome-tax Act read
with Rule 33 of the Burma Income-tax Rules.
Nothing that the asscse'e has withdrawn the claim for the differ-
ence out of HKS r,sor,232, the Court would say that on the facts
and circumstances of the case the sum of HKS 1.457, 441, being
interest on borrowed capital, wns an allowable deduction under
s. xo(2)(iii) of the Burma Inco,m c-tax Act read with Rule 33 of the
Burma Income-tax Rules. Therefore, the answer to the first
question is in the affirmative. On the facts i.e. it is the general
practice among airway companies to entertain guests invited for
inaugural flights and to pay their hotel e1[Jlenses, etc., in accor-
dance with the' resolutions of the International Air Transport
Association-as stated by the Appellate Tribunal the answer to
the second question is also in the affirmative. M essrs. Bharat
Line Ltd. v. The Income-tax Appellate :Z:n1nmal, Rangoon, (1963)
B.L.R. p. 13 (C.C.) referred to. ,
MESSRS. CA~HAYPACIFicAmwAvs LTD. v. THE COMMISSIONER
OP INCOME-TAX, BURMA 849
. BURMA .INCOME-TAX ACT-whether s. 15 C applies to the facts and
circumstances-question of facts and question of law. The respon-
dent M essrs. Burma Trade Federation Ltd. hadvarious sources
of income including those froin the manufacture of umbrellas
4
GENERAL fNDEX
J'ACB
and the m:mufactur.: of umb1clla componen1: pRrts. Th<:

Company claimed and was granted by the Assistant Commissioner
of Income-tax: (appeals) "n exemption allowance from tal' under
s. ( 5 of the Inconll-tax A.;t for the <lssessme.n t year 1958-59 on the
ground that it }Uld made nn outlay to set up a plant fo.r the manu-
facture of component pmts which it had previously imported from
. abroad and assembled in Burma. The Income-tax Department
raised ' objection to the grant of the allowance. Held: 'Vhcn the
proper legal effect of a pmved fact need to be weighed 'a question
of law comes in, but when the facts speak for thcn1selves and do
not call for the assistance of legal principles and interpretation,
the facts cannot be converted by force of imagination alone into
questions of lnw. The onl y question which was before the
Appellate Tribunal in considering the assessee Company's claim
co an e;g:emption allowance wa~ whether the CompHn)' httd started
a new industrial venture. The finding that it had Wt\S one of fact,
arrived at after examination of the evidence. S1ee Me-enallshi
Mills Ltd. v. Commissiqner of Income-tax, (JIIlad.) (1957)
Jl LT.R. p. 28, referred to.
AoorTIONAL Co.MMJ~lONER OF INcoM-'tA..x, BuRM.o\ ~'.
l\11sssas. Bl.ri\MA TRADE FF.DERA"f!ON LTn. 783
BURMA INCOME-TAX ACT-assessment to Income-tax un capital gai11s-
Whether travelling expenses be constmcd as perscnal expe11ditt1re
.&r expenditure deductible under the Income-tax Act. Tbe
applicant has been assessed to income-tax on '' capital gains"
earned by her for sale of n certain property. She was
resident in London and came to Rangoon on n visit during
which the sale was made. Her appeal was dismissed by the
Income-tax Appellate TribunaL Held: Whether the travel-
ling expenses incurred by the assessee to be present before the
Chief Court at Rangoon to take measures to make the property
under sale transferable must be construed as personal expenditure
or expen<iiture deductible under the Income-ta'K Act is purely
a question of 'fact and no q\testion of law is invohred.
Nlns. J. FoxwTU.L 11. rrrE INco;-.m-'l'AX APPI,LLNrn Tnnn.:NAL,
R\..~COON .'\NI> ()N" g 53
BnR\CH OF CoNTRACT-mi t. for refund of the co11tract price-jurisdic-
ticm to ft) tile suit 011 accouut of the agrem11mt bettu.een the pmtiet-
whether such agreement is against. the public policy-under s. 23 or
rorttrll'Ty to s. 28 of the Cont1act Act-Civil Procedure Code, 0.
49, R 3- The plaintiff sued the defendail.ts for the reft1nd of
K 6o,6o&.39 being loss suffered b y the plaintiff as :t result of the
defendant's breach of contract. Tile contmcts were signed in
E1)gbnd by the plaintifl' as huyc~ and in R:mgoon by the defen-
dants as scUers. lt is aUcged that ns the defendants reside md
cart5' on business in Rangoon the Ch.ief Court has thejurisd~ction
to trv the suit. The defendants contend that i n view of the
claus~S 26 and Z7 of the contracts by which the parties agree
that proceeding either legal or by arbitration are to be within
exclusive j~isdiction of the Courts .of England or arbitrators
appointed in England the Chief Court has no jurisdiction to
entertain the suit. Reid: The law on the poio.t is now well-
settled in. India as well as in Burma. When the English Coqrt
and this CoUrt are competent to try the suit it is open to the
parties to a contract to agree that dispute in respect there<i
should be adjudicated upon by one of them and such agreement
is perfectly legal and not contrary to s: z8 of the c~mtract
GENERAL INDEX 1i
PAGB
Act nor is it a~ainst public policy under s. 23 of the said Act. The
present case is not a cas~ of abr.olute restriction but of partial
Q ';) Q .0(' 0 ( (' 0 C' ("' 0 00 ('
rcstncuon. ".!~<l~l3:l.cQ"t(U(,)~Xl?OJ? ~q :Y.ItKp(J)C 'l~~~C8X.'\)I;I()')(I
(r962) n.L.R. 152 (CC); 1'/:e National Petroleum Company Ltd.
of Bmnl)ay v. Meghraj, I.L.R. (1939) Nag. 614; Continental Drug
Co., Ltd., Bmnbay v. Chumoids and Industries Ltd., Calcutta,
A.l.R. (1955) Cal. x6x; Klzandesh Lakshmivilas Mill Co.
v. Vinarah Atmaram Kaurkar, (1935) 156 I.C. 277; B~agat
Ram and another v. Ranmiwas and others, A.l.R. (1949) AJmer
44, referred to. Mus,;Ji Lt~kmanJi v. Durga Dass, I.L.R. (1945)
26 Lah. F. B.; T. Motandas (lnd Co. v. L. Hahumat Rai and
another, A.I.R. (1955) J. & K. z6; Ho11sen Kasam Dada (India)
Ltd. v. Motilal Padamp"t Sugar Mill Co., Ltd., A.I.R. (1954)
Mad. 845; The American International Underwriters (Burma)
Ltd. v. U MaW!g San, (x961) B.L.R. 41 H.C.; U Maung Sa11 v.
The American lnterna1ional Underwriters (Burma) Ltd., Rangoon,
(1962) B.L.R. 191 (C. C.), referred to nnd followed. Kidri Prasad
and others v. K.R. Khosala, A.l.R. (1923) Lah. 425; Dwarka
RtdJber Works v. Chote!al, A.I.R. (1956) Maddhya Bharat xzo;
Radha Kishen v. Bombay Co., Ltd., A.I.R. (1943) Lah. 295, dissen-
ted from; National Petroleum C<J., Bc.mbay v. F.K. &bello, A.I.R.
(1935) Nag. 48; Chittaranjan Gttlza and another v. Parul Rani
Nandi, A.l.R. (1946) Cnl. u2; Mulji Tejsing v. Ransi Devrai,
I.L.R. (1910) 34 llom. 13, dissented from. Cargo Lately Lachn
(nt Board the Felmzarn (Owners) v. Fehmarn (Or.oners), (1958)
l.W.L.R. 159 distinguished. Held further: Under Order 49,
Hulc 3 of the. Code of Civil Procedure the provisions of Order 7 ,
Rule 10 is not made applicable to the Chief Court e)Cercising its
ordinary original jurisdiction.
STEEL BnoTHERS & Co., l;ro. v. Y.A. GANNY SoNs AND
TWO :44~
'f. CAUSES OF ACTJON-l)1FFERNT SuiTS 1'0 Dl! UROUCII'f FOR DIFFERENT

CAlJSI!S OF ACTION .. . .. .. . .. lOXO
CIVIL Pnocnouru; Conn OnoEn I, RUI.H to on s. xsx-application by a

strat1ger to the suit to imt>lead as (I necessary de/endant-0. 34, R t
related to m<ntgage s11it. A stranger to the suit ,applies under
Order x, Rule to of the Code of Civil Procedure or under s .
. 151 of the said Code to implead her as a necessary defendant in
the mortgage suit to avoid multiplicity of suits on the ground
that the mortgaged property is her own by virtue of a registered
sale deed and that she bad been in possession of the same. The
plaintiff denies that the defendant is the owner in possession of
the suit properties and tJ?.at she is a necessary party 'to the suit.
Held. Order t, Rule 10 of the Code is general and has no
application to tlie present suit. Nor s. 151 of the Code has
. any applic;~tion, when there is an express provision of'law. The
ordinary rule is that a plaintiff-mortgagee cannot be allowed so
to frame his suit as to draw into controversy the title of a third
party who is in no way connected with the mortgage and has set
up a title panunount to that of the mortgagor and mortgagee.
Order 34, Rule t of the Code relates specffically to mortgage
suits. Jaggeswar Dutt v. Bhuban Mohan Mitra, I.L.R. Cal.
33, 425; Maung SatJ Myaing v. UPon G;yaw, l.L.R. z Ran. to!>;
M.V.AL, Viswanathan Chettyar v. Ma Aye and three others,
I.L.R. 4 Ran. 214; U Shwe Kyu and four others v. Ma Tin U,
(1948) B.L.R. f!o6 at 617 (H.C.); Ma Tin U v. U Shwe Kyu
and four others, (1950) B.L.R. 128 (S.C.); N.A. Annamalai
lii GENERAL INDEX
Chettyar v. MoJuzmed l:a,n and two others, (1954) B.L.R. 86

(H.C.); U Maung and o11e v. Ma Hla Yi11 and seven <()thers, (1954)
B.L.R. 26..4-, referred to.
THE STATl~ CoMMilrtC'IAL B.~NK , . U KHm lVIAUNo TlmT AND
TWO OTI{[m~
CtTI2ENSHlP--p1'0Setllli;;m muler s. 5 (a) of the U11ion Citizenship Act

for non-renewal (lj stay permit-11ame on passport of foreigner father
while mirum-1.ohcther will divest Uni011 Citizenship. The appli-
cants were born in Burma in 1944 and J946 respectively and their
mother nnd grand-mother being of Burmese origin they were
accordingly natural born citizens. In l9S8, while they were still
minors, their father, n Pakistani national, took them to Pakistan
on his passport. On their return, the Applicants resided in
Burma under stay permits, 11nd were prosecuted nnd convicted on
the expiry of the said permits which had not been renewed. The
main q1.1estion which 11rose was whether the fact that the names
of the Applicants were borne in the passport taken out by their
father, would divest them of Union Citizenship. Held: The
names of the Applicants appeared on their father's (Pakistani)
passport, not by their volition. Nor did the children apply for
stay permits. Thus, what has happened does no'!: come within
the mischief of s. s (n) of tho! Union Citizenship Act. It is l!lso
clenr that the Applicants themselves never took out Pakistani
passports, nor registered themselves as Pakistani citizens with the
Pakistan Embassy at Rangoon. The convictions were accordingly
set l!Side. Obiter: Regarding the question of dual citizenship,
it is for the Applicants to e"amine their Ov<I'Il situations in the light
of s. 14A of the Union Citizenship Act. .
ASHA Bt Bt v. THE UNION OF Bu&MA
CIVIL PROCEDURE Coon-ORDER 2 RuLE 2 (!), aND ORDER 23, RuLE 1

(r)-RELINQUISHMF.NT OR AnANDONMENT OF PART OF CLAL>.!S-
\VfU!THEn RELINQUISHMEN1' OF 'l'HE PADDY LANDS OUT OF THE
'OllC...SED ESTATE ALTllRS nm N:\TURE OF THll APMlNlSTRATION
Sm1 1040
CIVtL PROCOtnn Coon-Onor,n 2 RtJL 2 (sull-Rur.n 3) now IT

APPLIES 1'0 AMENDJ\'IF.NT OF PLAINT TO \DD CI..AIM FOR I1AM-\OE8 1050
CrviL Pnocnnutm Coon 0.. VI RvLP. 17-causc of' action on tile

remarriage of the srnvivi11g paullt-amendme?It ofJlaint based
01l cause of acti,(,fz on the death of the parent. Hel : It is an
undeniable fact that th<- cause.of nction for the proposed amended
plaint is -quite distinct and different from th11t of the origi.I)al
plaint. The original plaint b11ses its cause of :ilction on the
remarriage of the surviving pnrent U Tun Sein to his fourth wife
Daw Myint Myint which took place some time in November.1953,
whereas the proposed amended plaint has its <:.'!use of action on the
deathofU'I'un Sein which occ1.1rred on 24th February 1965. It
is the fundamental principle of law th11t different suitS must be
brought for different causes of action. Ma _Shwe Mya v. Mau11g
Mo Naung, 4 U.B.R. 30 ; P.M. Chattyar Fmn v. Ma Shwe Pun,
s Ran. 1 IS ; Ma Thai'ng v. _Mattt!g Chet On, 7 Ran. 140 ; Muthaya
Chmyar v. A.R.M. Chettulr Fm11, (1948) B.L..R. 8ss ; (H.C.) ;
A.S. Huttc11 v. l.M. Madha, (1949) B.L.R. .484 (H. C.) Ta.ab
Ally v. MoJuzmed Ayub, (1950) B.L.R. 361 (H,C.) ; Pethu Reddiar
v. Chidambara Rtdd.i.ar, A.I.R. (1931) Mad. 533 ;:Sobhraj v. F.O.
Varioma, A.I.R. (1942) Sind 4 ; Sashi Blmsan v. Tulsi Chara11,
GENERAL INDEX li ii
PAGE
A.I .R. (1950) Cal. 107, referred to. Sheo Narayan v. Ram
P.-asad, A.I.R. (1923) Nag. 241; Tika Sao v. Harilal, A. I.R. (1949)
Pat. 276; Go,paldas Khettry v. Pulchand, A.I.R. (1946) Cal. 357 ;
Taraclumd v. Abdul Ahad, 67 l.C. 894 ; Ghulam Haidar Khan v.
Sarda1 Ali Khan, 73 I.C. 748, distinguished.
DAWK'RI N i\riYIN'l"A.t'ID ON EV. U rll.JN SEIN A.."''D l'OUROTHllRS IOJO
')(CIVIL P ROCEDURE CODE-ORDER 7 RULE 11 (d)- WHEN A PLAINT IS

TO BE REJECTED 594
CJVIL PRocEDmm CoDE-ORDER S, Rur.E 6 - SET-OFF WHE'rHER
IT CANNOT BE CLAIMED .1015
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE-APPLICAT ION tJNDER OHDilll 9 RULE
9--WHEN COMPETF.NT TO BF. ALLOWED IN VIEW OF SP!:CIFIC
PROVISION 01' S. 14(2) OF THE R<\NGOON INSOLVENCY ACT 1020
f.. CIVIL PROCEDtiRE CooE- 0/'der tf, Rule :.-:frami'llg of issues-11ot

confi11ed to pleaditzgs aIlly - -may f mme issues j1om the c011te11ts
of documents. Held : Onlcr q , Rule 3 of the Code of Civil
Procedure mentions the V<lrious materials in addition to the
pleadings on.which issues m ay be framed. The obvious inten-
tion is to provide against failure of justice upon technical rules of
pleading and to add other materials on which proper issues may be
framed. Issues arc thus not confined to pleadings only. Order
14, Rule 3 (c) of the Code provides the Court may frame issues
from the contents of documents produced by either party. . In
the instant c~e the materials are provided in the legal notices
filed in the suit for framing the preliminary issue proposed by
the applicant. It may be a very important issue on whlch the
entire suit rests its fate and it will cause grave injustice to the
applicant to shut out this legal issue or defence which goes to
the root of the suit. Gopal Ram Mohuri v. Dhakeswar Pershad
Narai11 Singh, I .L .R. 35 Cal. 8o7 ; Surendra Nath Roy and others
v. Kris1~na Sahhi Dasi and others, 15 C.W.N. 239; Giyana
Sambadh.a Paudta Smmadlu v. K.andasami Tambiran, l.JJ.R
10 Mad. 375 at p. 502, referred to.
DAW HTAl YlN v. DA w AYE !VIAl AND FI\'E OTHERS iOOI
CIVIL PRObl'DUM:CODJ;-o. 21, R 37- WARJI:\N"i: OF AltREsl FOR NON-

PAYMENT OF MONI::Y m ;cnEilD--WHE."' CAN BE .MADil- ENQlilRY
UNDERO. ZI, R . .49--CANUEMADEWITHOU'f ARREST ;.. J06
CIVIL PnoCBDUllE CoDE 0. 39 RuLE 2(3)-disobeyi-ng itljmtcti(m

order. Held: Apart.from the bare assertion of the defendant
respondent, there is so far nothing on record to testify about
the execution of t!).e will ; much less to prove the appointment qf
MustapJ'la as the sole executor thereof. In the. circumstances
Mustapha should not be allowd to take the law into his hands
and t o'fiout the order of the Court which to his own knowledge
has issued the injunction restraining the defendant from dispos-
ing of t he estat e properties. It is common ground that the
injunction order was served on Must'apha on 23rd December x964,
and that despite. the Sanle he continued to dispose of some o_f
the estate propertic11. He must therefore be held to be gililty 'of
disobeying the order .of the Court for which action should be taken
against him in accordance with the provision~ of Order XXXIX;
Rule 2(3} of t he Code of Civil Procedure. Eusouj Ahmed Sema
v. Ismail Ahmed Sema, A.I.R. (1938) Ran. 322 ; K1ichwar Lim(!
' liv GENERAL fl\.'D.EX
PAGE
fS Stone Co., Ltd., v. Secretary of Stuk, .b,.l.R. (1937) Pat.
65, referred to.
KULSAM Bt Bt v. MATDEEN Bt B l 1023
CIVIL PROCllDURE CooE--OR.OEn 40- Ht;<:~;;rVIllt-WFtli."' TO DB

APPOINTED-jUST }.NO EQUITABLe 253
CIVIL PROCIIDURll CODE-ORDER 40,RUL1! I - M I'OINTML'NT OF RECEI-
VER OVER 'PROPERTY NOT 8UBJECT-MAT1'EI't OJ' I'ENDING SUIT--oN
THE APPREH!lNSIONTHATWAKFPROPER'fYIN )EOI'ARDY 8tS
Cn'IL P~ocEOURE CooE-0RDER 43, Rut..E x (s)-onoER OF A DisTRICT
}UDGE Ol!RllCTING PAYMENT OF COMMISSION TO RllclltVllR NOT
APPEALA'BLE--CHil!F COUR'f CAN l::xF.l\CISE ITS SUPERVISORY
JURISD~CTION tJNDEn SECTION 4 OF UNION JUDICIARY ACT z8o
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE-ORDER 49, RULE 3-THE PROVISIONS OF
ORDER 7, RULE IO IS NOT M}.DI! APPLICABLE TO THE CHII!l'
COU"RT I!XCERCISING ITS ORDINARY ORI GINAL J u RISDICTION .. . 449
CIVIL PROCEDURE COOP. S. 92-ruit under-substitution of co-
plaintiffs in place of the two dropped-outs--whether application
incompetent and not mai11tainable in law 2oithout a fresh consent
from the Attorney-General. A suit under s. 92 of the Code
of Civil Procedure is instituted by three plaintiffs, who claimed
interest in a trust, with the consent of the Attorney-General
againt the defendants. The tst plaintiff applies for petmission
to drop the znd and 3rd plaintiffs who have left Burma for good
and to substitute two persons in their places as co-plaintiffs.
An important point has been raised i.n arguments as to whether t\~e
application is incompetent and not maintainable in law especially
without a fresh consent from the Attorney-General. Held :
The original plaintiff No. 1 (applicant) and the proposed plain-
tiffs iin the present suit are suing in respect of the same cause of
action. A formal amendment of the plaint or the adding of a
party , which does not alter the cause of action or the nature of
the claim in the suit doe~ not necessitate a fresh consent.
Raja Ananda Rao v. Ramduo Dadurma and athers, (1920) l.L.R.
48 Cal. 493 P.C. ; Syed Abu Mahomed Barakat Ali and others v.
Abdur Rahim and nthers, A. I.R. (1925) Cal. 187 ; Mt. Ali
Began and others" Badrul-Jslam Ali Khau and others,A.I.R.(t938)
P.C. 184 ; ChJzabile l~m v. Durga Prasad, (1915) I.L.R. 37 All.
296; Faitu:unessa v. Golam Rabr..an#, (t9Js} l.L.R. 62 Cal.
n32 ; Ponrtiatha Kathoot Pmatneswamn Munpee v. Moothedath
Mollisseri llkzth Narayanan Nambodri, (1916) J.L.R. 40 Mad .xxo;
Ram Gulam ,and a11other v. Sh;yt;m Sarup <fnd others, (19.34)
l.L.R. 55 Al,. 687 ; M. I. Kadri . v. Khulmuya Mahomednnya,
A.I.R. (1931) Bom. 388; Gobinda Chandta Ghosh v: Aodul
Majid O~tagar, (1944)l.L.R. x CaL 329, refeJ>~cd to.
D. N. PANDiW AND TWO OTHERS v. BABU M.'\DAN ~PAL
BAGLA AND OTHERS ... 583
Ctvu. PROCEDURE Cone, s. t15-tlemandiug CO!nt fees afresh-'l))lzether

revision l.ies. Held: The Additional District Judge in demanding
Court fees afresh had acted in the exercise of his jurisdiction and
,he could not h!!-ve avoided" an issue that had coo1e up before lum.
So, even if his order was wrong or contrary to law, it cannot be
said that he had acted without jurisdiction or in e,xcess of his
i\Jfisdiction, aNi ~4er~fQr.c it is .n!?t PJ?f:n to revision. Ma Than
GE:-.:E.RAL J:->DEX lv
l'AGP.
Yin,._ Tcm Keat Khaug (a) Tau Keit Shein, R.L.R. (1951) (H. C.)
161 ; RamMtelawan Sahtt v. n;,.
Sttrendra Sahit, (1937) t6 Pat.
p. 766, referred to.
u KYAW T.~-rm:?' ANU ONE tl. u.~w ZAIN:\JII (a) i'vl,\ HI.:\ KYI
,\NOONE !i8z
CIVIL EXIiCUTION-whethtt s. 3 of the Vni011 of Burmu Revclntionaty
Couucil l",O~u No. 13 of 1962 applical>le-deter111i11ation of the
Jurisdiction-attachment uf a garde" land tduUher f>e-t'missible.
The decree-holder sued the judgemct,t-dcbtor for recovery- of
K 6o,ooo ns damages for breach of contract, but obtnincd a decree
for K 33,ooo only with costs and on appeal this amount wa~
raised to K 42,900. The e:-cecution is to .realize K 46,654
made up of the amount finally decreed and costs. The decree-
holder has attached a " freehold garden land " in Thingnngyun
Town. field: As the suit was valued at K 6o,ooo s. 3 d the
union of Bunna Revolutionary Council Law No. 13 of 1962 has
no application to the present case. Heui /rtrthcr : It is a well
settled principle that it is the plantiff's '-uluation in his
pla.ir.t which prima facie dctcnnic.l':; the jurisdiction of the
Collrt and not the amou.J.t wt.ich mu" be fcund or deC'rced bv
the Court, whateYcr it may be. Since an cxecu~ion proceeding
is the continuation of the suit, this Court has jurisdiction to
entcl"tai.n the execution application. A.K.A.C. T.V. Chidam-
barmn Chettyor v. A.L.P.R.S. Mulhia Chettyar, (1937) R.L.R.
zq.(F.B.); Balvantray O:::ev. Sadrudia, (1887) I.L.R. 13 Dom.
485 (488) ; Lakshman Bhatkar v. Babaji Bhatkar, (1884) I.L.R.
8 Bom. 31, referred to. Ht'ldfurt.her : There is nothing to show
tbnt the judgement-debtor is an agricultwist or a tiller of the soil
or that the land is occupied or ordinarily utili:eed for purposes of
a,ariculture for livclihood or fo~ purpose>< subservient to agricul-
ture. In the original suit the judgement-debtor is shown as a
Marwari tc.'<tile merchant residing in the city of Rangoon. More-
over, the land in question is situnted in town and therefore it is
attachable and saleable. Ram Nath Singh v. Chandrika Prasad
a11d 011e, (r963)B.L.R. 370 (C.C.), referred to.
O,w,r THru'< v. R:\~INlRANAJN LHH..,\
COM!'RoMis.ll OECII.I!.I!..--'l!alidity of-payment ,f ( ~11:;~ )-whether

mesne profits or rent-c,eatimt of tenanc,, 11nder the Rent
Control Act.S-1WII-registraticm of leasc--wltelhllr valid- s. 17 (z}
(vi) RegistratWn Ar.t-frustration--impussibilit.:. -of pe,fomumce
--wl~t:Jt exists. The parties to the present Appeal had entered
into :o eompromise petition and a decree had been passed on it.
One of _the terms of the decree was that for '' pel'iod of 4- yeaN
th~; l'h1intiff shot1ld allow the first Defendant to occupy the suit
land on payment of K 30 a month as ( ~;:~1:;~) (ground rent).
Another term was that if the 1st Defendant w~ts able to purchase
for the Plaintiffs a piece ofland Comparable to that of the suit land
and situated .in a certain .arca within+ years from the date of the
decree, the Plaintiffs would convey the suit land to the tst Defen-
dant. The Plaintiffs subsequently applied for execution of the
decree and the said application was grllllted by the District Jud~c.
On Appeal to the Chief Court, only two points were raised by the
Defendant{Appellant: firstly, tloat as a result of the compromise
decree the relationship of Landlord and tenant h:ld been created,
and therefore the Appellant/Defc.-ndant c~n be ejected only under
the provisions of the Urban Rcn t Control Act, 1960; at\d secondly,
that the compromise qecre~ was impossible of pcrformptlc as the
lvi GENERAL INDEX
l'AGB
Defendant was unable to purchase a piece of land to the H!dng of

the Plaintiffs. Held : All the terms which had been incorporated
in the compromise decree had been properly incorporated.
U Maung Maung and one v. Maurtg Maung, (1956), B.L.R. x88
(FB) ; Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Mid11apur Zamindari Co., A.I.R.
(1919), Privy Council79; Gobinda Chandra Pal v. Dwarka Nath
Pal, I.L.R. 35,837, refetred to. Held also :What the D efendaDt
had agreed to pay from the date of the dccee was mesne profits
and not rep.t although the word ( .;;~ql:;~) had been used .
therein. A lease or agreement of lease must relate to some docu-
ment that creates a present and immedia.e interest in the land.
Hemanta Kumari Debiv. Midnapur Zami,~Zari Cc;., A.I.R. (1919)
Privy Council ; 79 referred to. Even assuming that by the
terms of the compromise decree a tenancy was created in favour
of the rst Defendant, both the Urban Rent Control Acts are irre-
levant fo.r the purpose of the present case. The decree must be
taken as a whole and it is not open to a party to a compromise
decree to take advantage of a part of it and resist its effect as to the
rest. Hemanta Kumari Debi v. Midnapur Zamintlari Co., A.I.R.
(1919) Privy Council; 79 referred to. Morevover, the lease (which
is for 4 years) would be valid nothwithstanding that it is not
evidenced by a registered document. Having been incorpOTated
in a compromise decree, s. 17 (z) (-t~) of the Registration Act
applies and no registration was necessary for the validity of the
lease. Held further : Regarding the question of frustration there
is no force in this co~tention. All that the Defendant is require'd
to prove is that she offered a piece of land in the stipulated area
comparable to the size of the suit land and that the Plaintiffs had
refused to accept the same. It is not necessary for the land so
offered to be entirely to the liking of the Plaintiffs.
MA THEIN HAN v. u MYA MAUNG ,'\.l~D ONE
COMPROMISE DECREE-whether binding on Defendants net a party ro
ihe Compromise petitim. Maintainability of a suit for Declaration
that the decree is not bi11ding-Provis(J to s. 42 Specific Relief Act-
whether applicable. Held : Where a compromise petition in a
suit was signed by one of the Defendants and her Advocate who
took care to describe himself as Advocatcdcr that Defendant, the
decree passed thereon cannot be binding on the other defendants,
in the way that it would have been binding on them, had they
been parties to the compromise. Held .further : A subsequent
suit filed by the other defendants, for a Declaration that the said
compromise decree is.not binding on them, is maintainable in law;
Such a suit for Declaration is maintainable in spite of the proviso
to s. 4z of the Specific Relief Act, as strictly speaking it is not
within the scope of that section. Robert Fischer v. The Secretary
of State for India in Council, I.L.R. 22 Mad., p. 270 P .C.; arid
Sheopamirt Singh v. Ramt~andan Prasad Singh, I.L.R. 43, CaL
p. 694. P.C., referred to and distinguished. Chau.dhuri Moham-
mad Manjural Haque v. Bisweswar Banerji, (1944), xCal. 6#,
referred to and followed. Although execution proceedings had .
been opened against the plaintiffs in the subsequnt suit by virtue
of thesaid compromise decree, a Declaration obtained by them in
the subsequent suit is bound to be respected by the eJtecuting
Cour~. In such a situatipn, nothing mOt-e than a Declaration
needs to be asked for. Held further : The object of the provisQ
to s. 4~ of the Specifu: Relief Act is to prevent a multiplicity of
suits. Accordingly, a Declaration should be granted unless it
would be futile without such further consequential relief as an
injuncti9111 etc, T\'lcrefore, ev~n ~f the pre~eJl~ s\li~ for P~clai:lltiQJl
GENE.RA!. INDEX lvii
f'.\tiE
is governed by s. 42 of the Specific Relief Act, it is maintainable

without a prayer for consequential relief, such as an injunction.
Munnu Chamar v. Hari Narain, I.L.R. (1946) All. p. 8s6, referred
to and followed.
KHATIZA BlBI v. MA StN'f ANV SIX 268
)(:CoNFESSION--retracted umfe!siun uf one accused-not sufficient to cor-
roborate confession of other accused. Heid : A retracted confession
of an accused persc n should not be regarded as sufficient
corroboration of a retracted confession of another accused s1 as
to warrant the latter's conviction. Ali Mealz v. The Union cf
Burma, (1954) B.L.R. 6s (S.C), referred to and followed. The
Unio11 of Bumza v. Mautz/! Hla (a) Maung Hla azul two otlzers,(J9S8)
B.L.R. 29 (H.C.); The King v. Nga Myo, (1938) R.L.R. 90 (F. B.),
referred to and distinguished. However, in the ca~e of the
Appellant, these can be said to be sufficient corroboration, with-
out taking into consider-ation the confession of his co-accused.
MAUNG TH.\ Aw, 1\IIAUNG NYt.1N MAUNe v. THE UNION OF
BURl\'lA .6
-,<!: CoNFI!SSlON-voluntary, though giv:m itt the hope of becomirz.g approver.

Exrulpatory Statenwnt- no cotifessioZL. Retracted confession-re-
quirement of corroboration-110 hard atzd fast rule as to amou11t of
corroboratiun req~tired. Diroergences betweell ~culpatory statement
and i11C11lpatory confession-effect of whtt1 a confessiun of one accused
can be taken into consideratiun in respect of another accused. Abettor
of crime-an unwilling spectator of a crime rwt an abet.tor. Held:
A confession may be entirely voluntary in nature, although it is
quite possible that the person giving the confession may have
hoped that by giving a full confession, he would become an ap-
prover in the case. It is settled law that no statement which
contains exculpatory matter can amount to a confession, if the
exculpatory statement is of some fact which if proved would
negative the offence alleged to be confessed. Maung Han and
others v. The King, (1947) R.L.R. 371 ; Chit Tin (a) Stt Thi and
cme v. The Uniun of Burma, {1951) B.L.R. 142 (S.C.), referred to.
The statement of a person that he was the unwilling spectator
of a crime which he did not approve of, is no confe.ssion at all,
as an unwilling spectator is not an abettor of such crime.
Sarju Prasad v. Emperor, A.I.R. (1914) Oudh. 262, referred to.
Heldfwther: It is settled law that the ordinary rule of prudence
is that some kind of corroboration is necessary in the case of a
retracted confession unless the circwnstances are exceptional.
The King v. Hla .MaU?tg, (1946) R.L.R. 102 ; The Union of
Burma, A!z Hla (a) Maung Hla and two others, v. (1958) B.L.R.
29 (H.C.), referred to. It is however impossible to lay down any
bard and fast rule as to what constitutes sufficient corroboration
of a retracted confession. It mu,t depend on the peculiar
. circumstances of each case. Held also: If two confessions
which are entirely inculpatory in nature in so far as the confessions
are concerned, are diver~ent in material particulars, it would be a
matter for serious constderation whether one or the other, or
both these confessions should be rejected as untrue. However,
where the so-called confession of one accused is entirdy
excuJpatory, while the confession of anothr accused inculpates
not only himself but his co-accused, it will be surprising if there
are no divergencies in these statements. Held further : Although
the confession of an accused person is good evidence as far as
he himself is concerned, it can only be taken into consideration
against his co-accused, if the other evidence on record is sufficient
lviii (~Ei\'ERAL INDEX
to establish pri111a facie that such co-accused also conm1itted

the crime. Khaw Tato and ouev. The Uni<nt of Burma had (1948)
B.L.R. 310 (H.C.) ; Union of Burma v. Ah Hla (a) Mcm~g fila ,
( 1948) D.L.R. 2.9 (H.C.), 1efe.rred to . \Vher~; the evidence againSt
the co-uCC\tsed is his own exculpatory stuten<ent, and the
s tatement of his wife which is by itself insufficient to impli(;<lte
her husband, a prima facie case of murder c3nnot be said to
be established.
MA1.1NG THAW KA AND ONE v. THE UmoN OF BuRMA ~89
CoNT"Acr AC1.'-s. x6-(3)-PR.ESU1\.1PTION AS ro " LJNDUI; 1NFLUllNCE "

WHEN ARISES-" lNFLUENCll"- NOT QUES'flON OF FACT-:SU'l' THAT
OF LAW-POWER OF HIGH COURT FOR L'<TI'R.FERENCE-LACK OP
l'UBLlCITY IN ADOPTION- WHEN Rl!LJNA:NT . 237
CoNTR.~cr Acl'-sEC'riONS zu AND za-Duno.cN Ol' !'ROOF -NON -

ouSERVANCB OF 'fHE DlRllCTlON OR NEOLlGE!'<CE TO DlSCit.~!{GE THP.
nmn:s 8s6
CoN'J'EMPl' oto' COUR'l' Ac>r, 1926-publicati'oll ln a daily new.papr.w
un tlte conduct or status ~>f 01ze c.f the parties-matter sub-judice.
Held: The ooject of proceedings in contempt of this nature is to
ensure that every litigant in a CoUl"t of Justice has a fair and un-
prejudiced hearing at the trial on the merits of his case. Public
confidence in the ability of the Court to administer J ustice mru;t
be n1aintained. The article complained of is a reflection on the
applicant who is a defendatlt in the suit. If the ctiect of the
publication of the article is to create prejudice or to interfere
with the course of justice absence of iutent is irrelevant.. The
publication of the resolution in the case does cr(.>ate a real
tendency to interfere with the due course of justice and does
create a substantial prejudice against the defence of the applicant
in the suit. The Wiliam TJu,mas Shipping Co., (1930) z Ch.
368 (376), referred to and followed.
KAslNA'l'HRM }
St:!RI KASI NATH ll~r ~ Dn. ~.f.,. LoOMilA ,\ND ONli 602
CniMINAL PROCJIDUlU> CooH, s. 146 (t)-PowER OF Dss-rruc'l' lVJAors-

TRATE TO WITHDRAW THE ORDER 01> ATTACHMI!NT ISSUI>D BY THE
TOWNSHIP MAGISTRA'Cil AFTilH DUE P.NQU!RY 38 .
CRJ.'MINAL PRCllDURll CoDE s. 436-W!iL"< TO BE ORDEIUID A>'<D How TO

BEUSRD 801
CRIMINAL PROCEOURI:: COD!l, s. 476--\vHF.N CAN AN APPLlCA'l'ION T;,

HOLD Al'~ ENQUIRY FOR G1VlNC FALSE EVIDENCE lN A CIVIL SUIT. '1"0
BE MADE-CONDONATION-MODE OF PROOF 92
CRIMINAL P RociiDulffi CODE- s. 488-MAINTENANCE-WHEN" FATHER

IS TO MAINTAIN HIS 'CHILD AFTER ATTAINING MAJORITY-AMOUNT
OF EDUCATION TO DE PROVIDED FOR BY l'A'rHl!R;_l'ATHErt'S lNC0~1.!::
' J"(,l BE CONSIDfRED . 7.8~
CRli\UNAL Pnocoou"RS CODE-s. 517.:...aisposal of property reg(l1di-izg

which ~(fence Juu bee}l cominitted-Sale proceeds of stolen p~opet'ty....:.
vAJhet.her stolen property- &. 410 PC1wl Code. -The respondent .
who had bought cc1'taiu stolen gold bars had converted the said
bars into jewelleries had and sold them after such conversion.
GENERAL INDEX lix
The proceeds of the sale of these jcwelleries were later seized by

the police with other stolen property. The money seized was
returned to the complainant. Held : The money which was
seized and returned to the conplainnnt could not be considered us
stolen property, as money obtained by the sale of stolen properties
cannot be considered to be stolen property as defined ins. 410 of
the Penal Code. The learned Judge h~d no power to order its
disposal under s. 517 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which
only deals with disposal of property regarding which an offence
has been committed. PubHc Prosecutcr v. India China Liugiah
and others, (I\154) Criminal Law Journal, 583, referred to.
UN! ON OF BURl'VIA v. u K YAW LIN
CtUMJI'<AL PROctiDURE CODE s. sz6-application for transfer of case-
whether co1ifrrmtation of a toitness vnth his previous statements to be
recorded or not-disallowing questions in cross-eY-amination no.
ground/or transfer of case. Held: It is nowhere laid down tbat
when a prosecution witness is confronted with his previous
~:tatcments made to the police during the courseof the investiga-
tion tlus fact must be recorded either in the diary of the pro-
ceedings or elsewhere in the record. Heldjurthtr: It has been
held in m;.ny cases that the mere fact that the trial Magistrate
disallowed questions as irrelevant is no ground for transfer of
the case; and that when the Magistrate in disallowing question in
crosscl'amination did not make a note of the same it was
held that such omission is also not a ground for transfer of the
case under s. 526 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Abdul Aziz
v. Ga11esh, zs C.L. J. u8s ; Lal Ralwdur v. Emperor, 39 C.L.J.
SZ7; Dewet~ Sifi/Ih v. Emperor, A. T.R. (1940) Lab. sz8, referred
to ; Maung Kyaw Aye v. The Union of Burma, (1953) B.L.R.
p. 114 (H.C.) ; U Ba Khi11 (applicant) v. The Union of Burma,
(1954) p. 191 (H.C.), distinguished.
DAw PEGGY (a) DAW TIN TIN AND ONE v. DisTRICT
MAGISfRATB, RANGOON AND TWO OTHllRS .. . 796
..;-:._ CusTODY Ol' MINOR cHtt:OREN APP"LIED BY FAHTER-s. zs G uAIIDIAN

ANO WA!tOS AC'J'-WHEN MAINTAINABLE ... 320
CUSTODY OF MINOR CHI LOREX- Paramount consideration is the interest

of the child, rather than rights qf the parents-who is a fit person
for guardianship .. . . .. . .... ... 465
't- DEFAMATI.ON_.;tse of the r~;ord "3:1100~'' (servant)-whether defa-

nzatory-Penal Cede s. soo. Where the complainant was an
employee of the Municipality and the accused had referred to
hirn as "3:1100~" (servant) of a certain person, when he was his
tenant. Heid : The accused had used defamatory words in so
calling th'e compfainant. It is not an act causing,slight hann, but
a serious imputation. Shczri..f Ahmad v. Qalml Singh, l.L.R. 43
All. 497> refcrre.d to and distinguished.
SAw CHoE v. THll UNioN oF Bunw {Ko KYill!) 232
DlSPOSAL. OF PROPF.RTY-s. 517 CRlMINAL' PROCEDURE CODJ!-sALE

PROCEED$ OF STOLEN PROPERTY-s. 410 PENAL CODE-WHETHER
STOLEN PROPF.RT 3 1;
lx GENERA!, INDEX
PA<.;E
~EVIDENCE AC'I'-Rl!TR...CTEO CONFl!SSION-JlXCULPATORY S'l'ATEMENT-

y wHAT AMOUNT OF COt.LABORATION REQUIRED-BF.I'EC1' ON THE
CO-ACCUSED 289
'--!-- EviDENCE AC1'-RETRAC'l'BD CONFESSION' 01' ONE ACCUSJ3D NO'l SUl'l'lCIENT

TO CORROBORATE CONFESSION OF WO'fHER J\CCUSED 46
EVIDENCE AcT, s. 9z--oral evidence admissible to p1-cme real tramaclion.

Sham tkcument-jlroof of-by oral e-vidence. Held: Oral evidence
is admissible to prove the real nature of a trl!nsaction. S. 92
of the Evidence Ar:.t does not stand in the way. Then, where the
heading of a document showed that it was an agreement to sell
immoveable property, and the boc\y of the document was drafted
as if it was an outright sale with possession, it was held that it was
a sbnm document intending to cloak the real transaction, namely
the mortgage of the property. Shio Karan Singh v. Sut-ya Nath
Singh and two others, (1959) B.L.R. 207 (H. C.); Asara-m and others
v.Ludhshwar atzdothers, A.I.R (1938) Nng., 335 (F. B.), referred
to and followed.
(x) DAw THMJNG CHIT, (z) MAUNG KYI MYINT, (3) MA Kvu
K>'U, (4) M ...uNG ToE MYINr, (5) MAuNa- KYAW MYINT. v.
(x) U TuN HLAING (z) Dllw MYlNT AYE 19
1"-EviDENCE ACT-s. 65 (c)-PHOTOSTAT COPY OF DEED-OF DlVORCB-

WHEN A.Dl\USSIBLE-NO l!VIDENCB 1'0 SHOW 'IH/\1' IT Hi.S DEilN
DESTROYED OR LOST 310
FAL<;n EVIDENCE-ApplicatiOtz under s. 476 of Code of Criminal Proce-

dure-when to be made. Aleged false evidence in civil mit which
was withdrawn unconditi.Jtlally-cond(}nation. Handwriting-as a
nzode of proof. Where the Applicant made an application under
s. 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to hold an enquiry
agamst the respondent (his own son) for giving false evidence in
a civil suit before the Chief Court .filed by the Applicant ; and
which suit was compromised by the parties and was dismissed as
withdrawn by the Applicant. Held ; Ordinarily, and order under
s. 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be made during
or shortly after the conclusion of the proceedings. In the
present case, it was made nearly z months after the compromise,
and no explanation llils oeen given for the delay. MPung Ba Hla
v. Emperor, (1917) Vol. XVIII, Cr. Law Journal, p. 331 Rahima-
dulla Sahib v. Emperor, I .L.R. 31 Mad. r4o; Hwe Eye Hain Gtul
o11e v. The King, (194b) B.L.R. 40; l.alji Hari y. E111peror, (1919)
Vol. X..X, Cr. Law Journal, Patnu, p. zz6 and. Harilal (a) Hiralal
Dlulnuka v. Tin T.in u, (1958) B.L.~. (H.C.) z6t>, referred to and
followed. Held also : Even if the Defendant gave false evidenCe,
it was condoned by the Applicant, as the suit was withdrawn
unconditionally. M(}rlli Durzi v. Na11rangi Lall, IV C. W. N.
p. 351, referred to. Obiter: A comparison of handwriting is
an inconclusive mode of proof. A handwriting ex:pert should
observe not the extent of similarities but .J:hc extent of dissimila-
rities. t:in Shwe v_. The Unicin (}f Burnuz, .(I9Sf) B.L.R. (H.C.)
358 ; Ra;appa v. Ntlakanta Rao and others; (J96z} (x) Cr~ Law
J ornal. p. 441, referred to,
U SAN KYAW v. 1\t..uNG MAUNO KvwE

GENERAL INDEX lxi
FtXA'IION OF STANDARD RENT-STtu~DARD REN1' FIXED UNDER 1946

ACT-WHETHER VALID DURJNG THE LIFE-TIME OF SUBSEQUENT
ACTS-RATE AT WHICH RENT TO BE AWARDED FOR DIFFERENT
PERIODS 259
FoRnrcN E~tcHANcr. Rm:~tJ.A1'IO:-~ ACT OF J9~i-SS. 6 (r} AND TI(t}-

:\ND PflNAI. Conr;- !'. rzo uow '10 tNTflHI'Il.F.T LIIWs-rmvrs!ON
AGAINST Tfll> OltiHill OF mSCHARm; 868
FoREIGN ExcHANGE RrlcuLATION Ac:r, ss. 9 (r} AND s. 24 (x) AND 24A
-IRRELEVANCY OF 1\c:riON TAKEN FOR" ATTEMl'T" THEREUNDER-
IT saou1.n BR nm.EVANT ul'<"DER s. 167 (8) OF SM CusTOMS A~r 6-4
FOREIGNRR'~ Rl'c:tSTR.\'fiON ACT s. 5 (z)-applicant and t111cesllm in

Burma for 3 generations-a citizen within the meaning of s. 4(2) of
tlze Unimz Citizenship Act. Held : Ordinarily no application for
revision will be considered if filed more than 6o days after the date
of the last order passed unless 'it is accompanied by the
cxplantion of the delay and the necessary affidavits. Although
the Sessions 1udge's record did not show that any order was
passed in re~pcct of the delay in filing the revision application,
it appears thut he <xercised this discretion in condoning such
dclny in ;1dmitting it. Held further : The npplicant and her
>lltce~tors h>WC been in Burma for 3 generations, and the applicant
us well as her: parents were born in Panmaraung (Panmyaung)
which is in Minbya Township, Burma proper. The applicant
cannot, therefore, be deemed to be a foreigner and as such it is not
necessary on her part to hold a Foreigner's Registration Certificate.
In other words, she must be deemed to be a citizen within the
meaning of s. 4 (2) of the Union Citizenship Act.
GULBHAR v. THF. UNION OF BtJRMA 8u
FoRllJGNFJtc; RrrSTniiTION ACT, s. 5 (x)-ncin-renewal of certificate-

Union Citizenship Act, s. 4 (z)-not i11Cll111bent to produce certificate
under s. 6 (2). Held : There seems to be considerable confusion
in the mindl: of some magistrates regarding the certificates granted
under s. 6 (z) of the Union Citizenship Act, to persons who are
deemed t.o be citizens under s. 4 (2) thereof. It is not incum-
bent on n person claiming to he a citizen under s. 4 (z), to ask for
the issue or such a citizenship certificate. If he can prove that he
comes under s. 4 (2) in any any proceedings against him, he is not
bound to produce the certificate unders. 6(2). Held also : In such
a serious matter involving the question of citizenship, the record-
ing of evidence by a Magistrate should not be so cryptic. The
caw against the Applicant should be retried carefully by
another n)agistrate.
.Pmm MoHAMW v. THE UNION oF BunMA. 51
FolU!r~NERS REGISTRATION .Ac:r s. 5 (I)-Con'stistutimz s. II (ii)-a

ctitizen of tlze Union utuier--rw necesssity to renew the FMeigtter
Registratimz Certfica~e. Held : It' cannot be disputed . that
the applicant was already a citizen of the Union under the
Constitution and not merely a person deemed to be acitizeri of the
Union when he applied for Union Ci~nship. A person being
lxii GENERAL INDEX
PAGB
" citizen of the Union there Is no necessity to renew hi~ Forei~
ners Registration Certificate if he has taken one o:>crl;;,J~ ( c;:.T)
c Q c c ~ c c Cc oc ( c ) L-" r,: rg " ,
OOOO~J<lU&p:;QC ~<; lJ~GCX>')C~c:!fG')~CC oe~:~o I l:lf~')C::f2:i!XJC~:I
o?(i(CO"flt~o3rvro3) 11 Indu Bha v. The Union of Burma, (1963)
B.L.R. 384 tC.C.), referred to. K.uli 1\!utu v. The Union of
Burma, (xg6z), 51 (C.C.) ; P. K. Duua v. The Sltperintendent,
Central Jail, Rangoon, (1953), B.L.R. 83 (S.C.) distinguished.
Bishna Lal v. The Union of Burma, (1959), B.L.R. 3 (H.C.),
referred to and followed.
MAUNO Sl.\T HTAW (a) MMJNO NYnrN MAuNe v. THB UNTON
OFBURMII. 841
Gi\.RDEN Li\.ND-HOW ATTi\.C"f!El>-WBllN PlliU\!!SS!13l..E 590
GuARDIAN-meaning of--umier Guardan and Wards Act. Appli-

cation by father of minor children under s. zs-wlwn maintainable.
Held: A" guardian" under s. 25 of the Guardian and Wards
Act, need not necessarily be a statutory guardian, but includes a
natura~ or even a de facto guardian. Accordingly, a father of
minor children can apply for the custody of such children under
s. 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, although he is not a statutory
guardian appointed by the Government. under s. 7 of the said Act.
u AYE MAUNC f). DAW AY.E A YB SHWS JZO
GUARDIANSHIP-oN WHAT PRINCIPLES TO DE Al'POINT'0-PERSONAL

LAW OF MINOR TO BE CONSIDERllD 1035
GuARDIANS i\.ND W/I.P.Ds Acr, s. 7--principles goveming the appOint-

ment of gumdian-persvnallaw of m1tor taken into consideration.
Held : The principle governing the appointment <>f a guardian
has been well settled in that when the custody of the minor child
comes before .the Court the paramount consideration must be
the welfare of the minor as a whole and that the C<>urt is not so
m1-1ch concerned with the feelings of parents and natural guardian
as with the .proper welfare of the minor. Govindaswamy and
another v. N. China Tambi, (1952) B.L.R. p. 8 (H.C.) ; [.7
Mam~g Maung v. Ma A~>e Bu, (1952) B.L. R. p. 406 (H.C.),referred
to. Held _further : In preferring the mother to the father for
appointment as the guardian, it has been considered whether
it is consistent with 1:hc lnw to which tlte minor is subject, namely,
the Mahomedan Lnw and the fact tl<.'lt the mother h:ld re-married
and-hadchildren by the subsequent m!lrl"iage. Nit. Samimmissa
v. Mt. Saida Khat-<ln, A.I.R. (1944) All. zoz, referred to and
followed.
. .
SWEYADA RAHMNAN (a) MAuNe THA TuN 11. MA NooR
MAHUHANDTWOOTllli"RS IO'JS
Gui\.RDIAN.S AND WARDS Ac-r-;-s. -+8-oRD!lR PASSED IN PREVlOl:!S

PROCEI!DlNGSBAR TO SUBSEQUilN.1 SUITs---QUESTION OF i\.DOPTION zz6
Gu.,RDIAN AND W.Aim Acr-S. zs-application .for the return of
his t!-QO mnor daughters to his. wstcdy. Held : The paramount
c()nsideration in the matter of custody of a minor of tender years
is the interest of the child, rather than the rights of the pnrents.
Maung .Aung Khin v, Ma Shwe Hla, (l9S8) B.L.R. 3.II H.Q.
referred to and followed. Held further : When the applicant
GENERAL INDEX lxiii
h>t!< many other wives >~nd children and is pr.1ctisiog some super-
natural feats as a bigot accompwed by ill-trel\troent of the
respondent with an inclination to rape )'oung ~tirls, he could not
be .:onsiucrcd to be;: a fit m~u to hmo:- the cu:auoy of the chiklren.
u AYr: M..>.tmo v. DAw An AY" SHwt: 46s
1Nc.:o:vm-~Ax APPELLATE TRliiUNAL-RUf.JlllllNC.:E AG,~INST lTS Olllllm-
Ql'll5TION OF INCOME FROM JlUS!Nil5S--HOW TO llE ASSRSSI\0 78Q
INSOLVENCY-Rangoon Town Insolvency Act s. 9 (e)-attachment of
property for 21 days in execution of decree-act of itJSofvency.
Need for applicatio11 by creditor ,cithin 3 months of mch act of
insolvency-s. 12 (1) (z) uf the Act. Contimtatitm Q.f attachment-
ttot contimtOttS act of itJSolvenc:y. Annulment of Adjudication-
right of dt.ht01 to <1pply for-s. 2! <f the Act. P0111ers of rcvil"lc-
s. 8 (I)-Scope of. Held: Under s. 9 (e) of the Rangoon Town
Insolvency Act, a deb>r commits an Act of Insolvency if his
property has been attached for a period of not less than zt days in
execution of the decree for the payment of money. Under s. 12
(t) (c) of the Act, the creditor must apply within 3 (three) months
of such oct of insolvency. Accordingly, where the attachment
was made on zrst October 1963, the debtor would have commit-
ted the oct of insolvency on tzth November 1963. The credi-
tor mu~t therefore apply before 12th February 1964 under s.
12 (r) (c) of the Act. As the creditor presented the petition on
9th October 1964, the petition was clearly time barred,
and the debtor should not have been adjudicated on
in.s olvcnt. Held also : 11.1erely because the attachment continues,
it is not a continuous act of insolvency, nor is it a repe~~ted oct of
insolvencv on the happening of each fresh period of 21 days.
Wor I.eeliotze & Co. v. V .E.R.M.V. Chettyar Firm, I.L.R. VII
Ran. :us ; A1rupama Devi v. Gurudas Chatterii, T.L.R. 57 Col.
1274 ; referred to and followed. Held .further :The debtor need
not appeal against the order of adjudication, but can apply for
annulment of the same. Under s. z1 of the Act, the Court has
juri~diction to annul adjudication. Obiter : The powers given
to the Court under s. zx (1) of the Act nrc more specific than
those given \tndcr s. 8 (t) of the Act, which gives wider powers
of review rlum one conferred by the Code of Civil PrOcedure.
Jivmi. Gordhandns Goradia lmd a11other v. Messrs. Gagamna
Rmnchaud ajlrm, f. LR. (1953) Born. n68 ; S0011iram Ramniran-
i<~ndnsv. S.A.R.M. Chettyar Firm, T.L.R. Xll Ran. 64; referred
ro.
1:-. 'rim :!\tATTER Of" R.a.!\IHIRAl."'J.\.."1 DHIL'\ Debtor.
0:\W TJ.iA.'I . Creditnr. 6o
{NTEnPJUITATJO~ oF uws-Foru;rcN Ex.CHA>'IGE REctJL.ATION AcT
01' 11)47-S. 6(i)A~-.'D II (i)AND Pm-;.aJ..CoDE,S. 120 868
ISSU1!8-IlOW TO BE F&\MEI>-NOT BBlNG CONFINED TO PLEADINGS

ONL'\'-cOtJRT MAY FRA.!I!B ISSUES FROM THE CONTENTS OF DOCU-
:-.fi!NTS PRODUCED BY EITHER PARTY-ORDER 14, RULE 3. \c)-CIVIL
PROCEDUIU! CODE 1001
}AP.uttsE CuRRENCY (EVA.LUATJON) ACT OF 1947---'fohether it has
retrospective _Oj>eJ"ation. In the year 1945 the suit land was
mortgaged by the first respondent and his late wife Ma Khin to
Maung Htwe (deceased), father o{ the appellants, for a sum of
K r ,400 oy way of usufructuary mortgage. Sometime after-
wards the mortgagors offered to redeelD the land but to no
lxiv GENERAL INDEX
avail. They then filed a suit for recovery of possession on the

basis of their title and it was decreed. On appeal the District
Court confirmed the judgment and decree of th.e trial Court.
In the second appeal as well as in the Civil Appeal the appellants
were unsuccessful. The question which arises in this appeal
is :- " whether the Japanese Currency (Evaluation) Act of 1947
bas retrospective operation so that a mortgage of land in the
year 1945 involving a sum of Rs. I,400 in Japanese Currency
could be equated with a mortgage for K 70 as calculated in
accordance w ith th Schedule under s. 3 of t he Act." Held :
As pointed out by the learned Judges of the Bench which
decided the Civil Special Appeal No. 3 of 1960 of this Court it is
settled law that no :retrospective operation could be given to a
statute unless it is expressly stated to be so or unless it clearly
arises by necessary implication. Neither e.xpressed nor implied
provision for the retrospective operation of the Act: can be found
in it. KoMaung Tinv. U GonMan, R.L.R. (1:947) p. 149 at 156;
John William Cree v. Violet Elizabeth Cree, B.L.R. (I952)
(H.C.) p. 53 ; Mess1s. Burma Corporation Limited v. The Union
of Burma, (I953) B.L.R. (H.C.) p. 403 ; U Hoke Sein v. The
Cantroller of Rents, (1949) B.L.R. (S.C.) p. 160 ; Babu Ram Das
v. U Mg Gyi and four others (1959) B.L.R. (S.C.) p. 179,
referred to.
MATINA"iiF. ANDONv. USANKYU(a)UNYANINDA& Otm 836
LAND AcQUlSITIO~ Acr-s.r9--reference by thr: collector-notijicati~n

under sub-s. (I) of s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisitWn
of a piece of land for the National Hqusing and Develqpment Board
-another notijicatian in respect of the same piece Qj land unde1 s.
I9, sub-s. (I) a11d (2) of the National Housing and Development
Board Act, I951 read with s. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act-
whetlter the compensation should be calculated on the basis of s. 23,
sub-s. (x) and (2) of the Land Acguisition Act .or as directed ins.
28-A of the National Rousing and Developm61zt Act. A piece of
land was required by the National Housing and Development
Bonrd, Rangoon, for the purpose of erecting a building to house .
the automatic telephone installation belonging to the Department
of Tclecommunicntion of Bwmn. Notification No. 590, dated
15th D ec-.cmbcr 1955 was issued by the Deputy Secretary pf the
Finance and Revenue Department and was purported to be made
under sub-s. (I) of s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. However
on the 5th October 1956 a new notificntion was issued in respect
of the same land by the Additiotu~l Secretary of the Ministry of
Finance and Revenue and was purported to luve been issued
under s. 19, sub-s. (1) and (2) of the National Housing and
Development Board Act. In the proceedings which follow,
the Collector awarded compensation to the owners who accepted
it under protest. Held : There was nothing to prevent the
Government from issung a fresh notification under s. 19, .sub-s.
(I) and (2) of the National Housing and Development Boaxd Act
195I, as luis been done in the case now under consideration. The
second notification must, by necessary implicntion, be considered
as having cancelled the first. Held further : Under s. (I) of the
National Housing and Development Act, 1951, the President of
the Union of Burma can, at the instance of the Boaxd, acquire
land for the use of the Board. Sub-s. (z) of s. 9 enacts that in
respect of such acquistion the provisions of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 will apply mutatis 11fl!tandis and as amended thereby.
Among the amendments axe the deletion of the first clause to
sub-s. (I) of the s. 23 relating to the market value of the
GENERAL INDEX lxv
PAOB
land at the date of the publication of the notificatio,n under s. 4,
sub"s. {I) and sub~s. {2) relating to the award of IS per cent of
the market value in consideration of the compulsory nature of
the acquisition. If these two amendments were to stand alone,
clause second to sub-s. {I) of the s. 23 of the Land Acquisition
Act would remain intact in so far as acquisition of and for the
National Housing Board is concerned. However, s. 28-A of the
National Housing and Development Board Act, I95I is specific
in that notwithstanding anything contained in other acts or in this
Act, compensation must be calculated .as directed in s. 28-A.
U BA SmN AND ONil v. THE CoLLECTOR OF R>u~cooN 323
LETTER OF REQUEST-PRACTICE FOLLOWilD-CLAIM BY GOVERNMENT

B.&.NK AGAINST DEBTS DUE BY FIRM BEFORE ITS NATIONALISATION'-
WHETHER DECREE C.&.N BE PASSED OUT OF COMPENSATION PAYABLE-
. CLAIM OF INTEREST-cOST OF SUIT 53
LIMITATION ACT-APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 65 OR ARTICLE I IS 594
LIMITATION ACT-ARTICLE liS-SUIT FOR DAMAGES FOR MALFEASANCE
OR MISFEASANCE OR FOR NEGLIOENCP. ex contractu-HOW APPLIES 1026
MAINTENANCE-Criminal Procedure Codes. 488- When a father r:f to
maintain his child who has attained majority. Amount of
education to be provided for by father-consideration of father's
income. Held : There were two lines of thought in India and
.Burma as to whether or notmaintenance allowance to a" child"
should cease when he or she attained the age of I 8. Certain High
Courts have held the view that the word " ch.ild" in s. 488(I)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure means a person who has not
attained the age of majority, whereas others have felt that there is
no limit of age placed by the said section for maintenance to be
awarded to a child, and that such an allowance is to continue as
long as the child is unable to maintain himself. Baran Shanta v.
Ma Chan Tha May, II Ran. 682 ; U Ba Thaung v. Ma Aye,
IO Ran. 194; A. Krislma57ami Ayyar v. ChandravatUina, I .L.R.
37 Mad. 565; Remantakumar Banerji v. Menorama Debee, 62
Gal. 639; Jambapuram Subbama v. Jambapuram Venkata
Reddi, A.l.R. (I950) Mad. 394 ; Baram Shanta v. MaChan Tha
May, II Ran. 682 ; Tekchand Partabrai Bhaf.111ani v. Sh.
Kalayantibai Tekchand, A.I.R. (1941) Sind, 214; A. J:hum-
buswamy Pillay v. Ma Lone and one, 9 L.B.R. 49 ; Mst.
Khedani Rajwarin v. Lagan Singh ; A.I.R. {I921) Pat. 379;
T. Kamiiah Naidu v. Rajammal, A.l.R. (1941); Mad. 685 ; Sm.
Purnasashi Deviv. Nagendra Nath Bhatacharjyee; A.I.R. (1950)
Cal. 465 ; W L. Faria v. Anita Merlane Faria and another, A.I.R.
(1951) Cal; 66 ; Bakshi N(mihal v. Mst. Ram Lubhai and ohers,
A.l.R. {I953) Jammu and Kashmir, p. I6, referred to. The
correct opinion of the law on the subject seems to be thanhe
question whether a person is a major 9r a minor is not wholly
irrelevant in a proceedings under s. 488 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, for if a person isa minor, there can be no presumption
against him thl!t )le is able to maintain himself ; but that
on the contrary,. if it is shown that he is a major there would
be a presumption against him that he is able to maintain
himself. There may b e circumstances where the father may
not be relieved of the responsibility of maintaining his child,
although he ~p.ight have attained the age of majority. Bakshi
Nonihal . v. Mst. Ram Lubhai and others, .'\.I.R. (1953)
.Jammu and Kashmir p, x6; The State v. Ishwarlal, A.I.R.
5
Ixvi GENERAL INDEX
{t9S<>) Nag. 231, referred to and followed. Held fu?theJ: The

contention in the case \tnder consideration that the elder
daughter who is between 20/2t years of age cannot main-
r.ain herself because she is studying in the 9th Standard
cannot stand. Under the said section, a fatheT is not bound to
pro..,..ide anything more than the .cost of minimum amount of
education which the con''entions of the CO\tntry call for. Matmg
Shwe Ba v. Ma LThen Nya, A l.R. (1939) Ran. 9.5, referred
to and followed. Regarding the second daughter who is x8/t9
yeat-s old, the contention that although she is tnldng lessons in
sewing, her income is only K I/ Kx ~ per day and therefore was
still unable to maintain herself, also cannot stand. The Respon--
dent who is earning only K too/2oo per month, and has a second
fmnily to maintain, cannot be eJ.'l'ected to contribute any more to
her maintenance.
MA MvA THwrN v. Ko MAt'NG THAN 28::11
ORAL EIT!PP..NCE-WHEN lT IS ADMISSIBLE TO PROVE REAL TRANSACTION-
s. 92 EVTDENCEA.C T 19
PADDY-ONLY TO DE SOLD TO Gov:EIU'IMEI'<"T- LIABILITY UNDER
S. 6(i)/90FTREPUBLtCPROPERTYPROTF.CTIONACT 84-s
l'ENAL CODE--8. 380[I09-AI'PEAI. AG.~INST THE ORDER 0('
i:\CQUI'J"l',\L 864
PENAL CODE-S. 410-SALE PROCEEDS . OF STOLEN PR0PER1"Y-
WRETHER STOLEN PROPERTY-DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY U/S
517 01' CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODP. 31?
PENAL CODES. 420- ordering furtlrer ilrquiry under s. 436 Cr. P.C.
to be used sparingly with great ci'rcumspectir:m- further nquiry
in case of perverse or illegal decisir:m. Held : The powers vested in
District Magistrate ordering further inquiry under s. 437 should
be used spapngly and with great circumspection. The jurisdic-
tion exercised in revision is an extraordinary jurisdiction and
is to be used only in exceptional cases where the circumstances
clearly warrrant such a course. Held f~trthel' : T he Additional
District Magistrate has clearly gone wrong in directing further
inquiry in the case decided by the lower Court which was not
in the least perverse or illegal. The U11inu of JJunna v. 'U Po
Chei11, (1963) B.L.R. p. iii, referred to.
DAW THAN TTN f.l. DAW M.!\ NGE Sor
PEN.>..L CoD, s .420--prooj of falsity of the statement-pmof indicating
the dishcnert i11tentio11. Held: The gravamen of the prosecution
case was that the applicant falsely stated that .he had with him
JOO tonsoftirriber for sale. Unless this is proved there cannot be
any offence under s. 420 of the Penal C~de. The applicant was a
timber merchant of many years standing and at. the time of tbe
offence he was activelyengaged in. the business of selling timber.
Therefore, in the absence of any proof indicating the dishonest
. intention on his part at the time of accepting the advance, it
could not be said "that he had no intention of performing his
promise to supply timber to the respondent. Mau?rg Po Lft v.
The State, 1 Ran. p_. 397, referred to.
U WAY LIN fl. F. MoHAMFD . l054
RANcboN C.ITY CiviL. CouRT Acr-S. 25-RilVJSIONAL POwERs
CHIEF COURT-WHEN TO INTERFERE
oi' THS
GENERAL INDEX lxvii
PAGB
l'llNAT. CODE-s. sao-Defamation--use of the tuord " Seroant"

(rr.>~~~) Whetlu:r defamatory 232
PUBLIC PROl'ERTY PROTECTION ACTs. 6(1) READ WITH s. 9-no order,

directitm or 110tification--paddy to be sold only to Government. Held:
It i~ nccess:~ry to detcnnine whether the 77 baskets of paddy
were brought to the Government paddy purchasing point with
a view to have them sold either under a contract or any law for the
time being in force. It has been conceded that at all material
time relating to the alleged offence the Government has not yet
issued ~ny order, direction or notification by which paddy were
required to be sold only to the Government. Therefore it was
clearly no oft"ence for a person to mill his paddy at a private mill
nt the time when the case under consideration took place.
MAtiNG TIN Ncwn AND rwo v. TnE UNION OF BURMA
PLF.ADINc-deternlination of suit on Pleadings, or consistent with

pleadings. Amendment of Plaint at hearing of Appeal-to be allowed
only in special cases. The Plaintiff hnd filed a suit for refund
of purchase price of certain machineries and accessories alleged
to have been sold to him by the Defendant, and on the evidence,
the true facts of the cnse were found to be that the properties
were merely meant to be hypothecated as security for a loan.
The learned trial judge having dismissed the suit ; On Appeal:-
Held: The determination of a suit should be founded upon a case,
either to be found in the pleadings or involved or consistent with
the case thereby made ; the whole of the circumstances must be
taken into account and carefullv scrutinized, and in the ultimate
analysis, the question is one of circumstances and not of law.
A. S.P.S.K.R.K. Karuppan Chettyar ond one v. A. Chokkalingam
Chettiar, (1949), B.L.R. 46 (S.C.) ; A. C. Aklwon and one v.
A. Habib, (1952) B.L.R. 236 (S.C.) ; U Than Tin v~ M. Ba Ba,
(1953) B.L.R. 9 (S.C.) ; and Eschenchunder Singh v. Shamachuru
Bhutto, K(,ilas!l11der Singh arul others, II. M.I.A. 7, referred to.
In the present suit, the Plaintiff had insisted that the whole of the
transaction was a sale of specific movable properties. His remedy
is therefore for delivery of the same, ood possible damages for non-
delivery. He should not be allowed to obtain a decree on the basis
that the alleged purchase price was-in fact a loan. Heldfuriher:
Regarding the question whether the Plaintiff should be allowed
to amend the plaint at this stage, it is not one of the special cases
where such amendment should be allowed.
AllDUL }ALlL KHAN v. MUNTAZ KII,\N ANP ONE 219
PRACTICE-Letter "of Request-when granted. Claim by Government

Bank against debts du by firm before its nationalisation . . Whether.
-decree can be passed out of compensation payable. Claim for
interest after nationalisation whether payable. Costs of Suits-
payment of proportionate costs by Defendant. The Defendants
owed the Plaintiff Bank moneys granted under overdraft facilities
and had also pledged their stock with the Plaintiff. On nationa-
lisation of the Defendants' concern, the Government took over
the business with all the assets including the stock pledged, the
Defendants concern came under the newly formed Cigarettes
Nationalisation Act, tbe Defendants would also be entitled for
payment of compensation by .t~e Government. The Plaintiffs
filed the present suit as the Defendant failed to repay the money
"due to it, and interest accruing after nationalisation to the
institution of the suit; After filing of the suit the Plaintiff ~ank
lxviii GENERAL INDEX
f'ACJ-:
applied to the Court for a le-tter of Request to the Compensation

Adjudication Committee to withhold payment of Compensation
to the Defendants until fuother notice from C<ltort, and the
Defendants took no objection to this application . Held : The
Letter of Request could n ot be sent to the Committee ns it i,;
neither a Prolubitionary Order nor an Att"acbmeut Order.
1\lloreover, as the Committee is not a party to the suit it couJd not
be bound by such a Request. Also, a Letter of Request can be
issued only for the cxaminatio.n of a witness ahtoad on
Commission; or to a Deft-ndant of rank in!'tead of issuing summons
to him. Held also: A decree for payment of the rncneys out of
the compensation payable cannot be aUowed. It is not known
yet how much the Defendants will get as compensation. The
Committee is also not a party to the suit and no proper legal steps
can be taken to prohibit it from paying out the compensation to
the Defendants. The prope r place to take up this point is in the
.execution proceedings. Regarding the payment of interest up to
the date of institution of suit, the Govemment had olrl.>ady held
the stock pledged by the Defendants in the name of the Plaintiff
Bank at the time of nationalisation. It would therefore not be
equitable for the Government to demand interest on the debt.
Held fwther : Regnrding the costs of the suit, it i s the rule and
practice of the Courts in Burma tbat if the Defendant files his
written statement wherein he confesses or admits a part of the
claim, and raises his defence for the other parts, proportionate
costs of the suit are allowed to the plaintiff, the Advocate's fee
being claculated on contested scales on the amount decreed.
PEOPLES' BAl\TK No: 9 v. MESSRS. NATJONAL Cmi\Rl':I'TE eo.
AND IS OTHERS 53
RANGOON I NSOLvENCY ACT,$. 41 ANNULMm-'1 ORDER-Application

under 0. 9, R. 9 .C.P.C. to set aside the order-incompetent in view
of s. 14 (2) of Ra_ngo011 Insolvency Act. Held : In the absence of
;ny specific provision to the contrary, the provisions of the Civil
Procedure Code cannot limit or otherwise affect those of the
Rangoon Insolvency Act. It therefore follows that the
application under Rule 9, Order 9 of the Civil Procedure Code is
incompetent in view of the specific provision of s. 14 (2) of the
Rangoon Insolvency Act. Venugopaktcha~ia1 v. Clttmnilal
SO'Wta1 and others, I .L.R. vol. XLIX, Mad. p. 935 ; The La~o of
Jmolvency in India bf D. F. Mulls, znd edition, p. 331, para. 355,
referred to.
IN THE MATTER OF CHAN KAR LI (ll) U \'VIN M.\L'NG (a)
VKAWLI 1020
RCF.JVR-Appoi11tment of-when property in possessio" of defetukmt

clan11ing legal title. Held : Although the appointment of a
xeceive1 is a matter xesting in the discretion of the Court, the
Court will not interfere by appointing a receiver where a right is
asserted to property in the possessi9n of a defendant claimin,g to
hold it under a legal title, unless a strong case is made out.
Sid.h.ewariDahi. v . . Ab/IQVe.swariDabi, XV Cal. p. 8x8 ; Chan-
didata Jhci v. Pa(immUJnd Singh Balwdur mul oTters, XXII Cal.
p.459 ; MarianBeev.lsmailEbrahim lv!ayathand others, 6 B.L.R.
p . u9, referred to and follqwed.
DAW M~A NWE v .. (l) u BA 'YI, (2) DAW MYA YIN,
(3) MA KYIN ' SEiN AND (4) KyoN -BIN (a) l.Yf.\\JNG
\VIN MYn-."T 12
GENERAL INDEX txix
PAGE
RJ;ctVR-0. 40, Civil Procedttre Code-Just and com:enient-when

appot1tt11letlt ro be made. Held: In deciding whether it would be
just and equitable to appoint a Receiver, due weif(ht must be
given to all relevant considerations and the question of appoint-
ment is to be determined on the facts of each particular case.
Thus, where the application for such appointment is made by the
Plaintiffs who are co-owners of the suit property with the
Defendants, and the Defendants have also futni:shd securities to
the Court, the appointment should not be made. For such
appointment there should be urgent need for protection of the
properties.
ESOOF HASHIM Mi!HTAR AND THlUtE OTHI':RS v. MAH~IOOJ>
JL'\SHIM NlEHTAR AND TWO OTHERS
R:!l<:ll!vt'R-order directing pa)'tlle?tt of ~l)mmissit)ll to rcceiv(:r-

whether appealable. Supervisory jurisdiction of the Chief Court-
S. 4, Union Judiciary Act. Held : An order of a district judge
directing payment of commission to a Receiver, is not ap,Pealablc
under 0. XLIII, r. x (s) of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Nevertheless, the Chief Court, in the e.xercise of its powers of
supervision under s. 4 of the Union Judiciary Act, can interfere
in such mllttcrs in suitable cases.
1. LEE
2.
LAw SHWIN
Y. C. SWAN
1
f v.
f I. DAR.~l\!SIN
I 2. UJ~G:\R S I NGH I
l ... z8o
3 Dt\WYl t 3 R.S. CHOWDHt;nv. .
RFF.EREl'<CE .~GAil,ilrr THE ORDER 011 THE !NcoMF.-TA.'-: A.Pl'I!LL-..,TE Tmuu-

NAL-wl:ether t/3 i11come of the applicants constitutes i11comef7'om the
business-whether the assessment be made as an association c.f pe-rsons.
The assessees were twinzas ofYenangyaWlg. They were assessed
to income-tax individually under the head of "tusiness ", For
the year Il)6t-62 they were assessed as an "association of persons."
They contended that. the assessment should have been made under
the head " property" and the tax imposed on them individual\~
instead of collectively. The Income-tax Appellate Tirbuna! has
put the following two questions :-(a) Vlheth<.'r upon the facts
and circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
was right in law in holding that the income of the applicants from
the oil-wells constituted income from the business? (b) Whe-
ther there was mater.ial or evidence on the record for the
Tril:!unal to come to the co.nclusiou that the applicants who had all
along been asse:.sed individual!~; constituted an association of
persons for the purposes of assessment for the <tssesstnent year
196 r -62 ? The anwswer to the firstqu~tion is in the affi.nnntiv~:.
Even though one of the heirs may have managed the oil-wells
wh.Jlc the other heirs t:~kc no active part in the extractive bu;;iness,
the nature and the character of the operation still re,mains that of a
business. It'is true that profits which were: ~'llined from the oil-
wells flow really out of the land in wf.ich the oil-,~ ells nre situated,
but the oil-wells by themselves do not yield the profits. Manual
labour and machinery have "to be put to work to extract the oil
which must be put through various processes culrr:inating in the
winning of profits. Here, the heirs themselves, ti>rough one of
their co-heirs, have managed and operated the oilwells, an:\
divided the profits among themselves an active carrying on of
business, rather than acquiring gain by a. merely passive own.e r-
ship of property T~e finding that the oil-wel.l.s constitute a
business and not'p1operty for purposes o! taxation paves the path
for a,n an..c:wer to the second question. The co-heirs have shared
GENERAL lNDEX
PACE
mutual rights and obligations in the husinc::ss, the risks of loss and
the prospects of gain th1ough the yean:. They may not have
combined in a formal association as a partnership firm but the fact
remains that they stand in the business not as individuals but
collectively. Therfore the answer is in the affirmative. In re
The Kafadan Soo-ratee Bazaar Compan:y Ltrl., Moulmein, 10 L.D.
Rulings 309 ; The Commissioner of Income-tax, Burma v. Suratee
Bazaar Company Ltd., 9 Ran. 154; Knightsdale Estates v. The
Commissi<mer of Income-tax, (1955) 28 I.T.R. 6so, referred to.
Lahore Ice Factories Association v. Commissioner of Income-tax,
A.I.R. ( 1935), Lah. roo, distinguished.
ALI HAsHIM MllHTAR AND OTHERS V. THE COMMISSIONP.R OF
lNCOME-TA.'C, BURM.'I., RANGOON ?89
Rl!CISTRATION ACT, s. I? (2) (vi)-NON-REGISTRAriON OF LEASE HEW

TO BE VALID HAVING BEEN INCORPORATED IN A COMPROMISE
DECREE-FRUSTRATION-WHEN DEJ!MEl) TO "BE INI!}(!Stl!."CE 26
REGISTRATION OF K.lTTJMA ADOPTION ACT-CoNTRACTUAL NATCRE

OF ADOPTION Tl!EREUNDER-LACK OF PUBLICITY IN ADOPTION-
WHIZN RELBVANT :237
RF.NT-Standard Rent Cert.ijicate under 1946 Act-whether valid
durin<1 the lifetime of subsequtmt "Acts. Rate at which rent w be
awarded for differettt periods. Where the plaintiff respondent had
filed a suit for" recovery of rent of the suit premises at the standat<i
rent fixed by the Controller of Rents on r6th June 1947, for tre
period 1st December 1947, to 31st July r96o and tl~e only
question left on Appeal was at. what rate the rent should be
decreed : Held : (t) For the penod rst December 1947 to 17th
January 1948 (the date of repeal of the 1948 Act), the
plaintiff should be given rent at the rate fixed by the Controller
on J6th June 1947, (2) As regards rent for the period when the
1948 Act was in force, it is clear that the standard I"ent fixed on
t6th June 1947 ceased to be in force when the 1946 Act was
repealed. There being no rent fixed by the Controller under
the 1948 Act, the alternative is to find out the standard rent fixed
under s. 2 (f) (ii) of the 1948 Act, i.e. the 1ent on Ist September
t939 On the evidt:-nce it must be held that the rent on this date
was Rs. 150 per mensem. (3) Regarding the period subsequent
to the expiry of the 1948 Act, and the cvrning in to fotce of the t96o
Act, the rent is to be the contractual rate of K 300 per mense1."1.
(4~ For 'the period 4th M;ay 1960 .to date of suit, the plaiTJ.tiff
cannot recover any rent forc want of a certificate by the Rent
Controller appointed under the Act of 1960. Ko Ba Yin v.
Ko Thein and one, (1958) B.L.R. 6x6 (H.C.} referred to and
follow~d.
HAJIB. P. MusA(a)HAJl MuSAKAi<Av. HAJ: ATIDuLSAMAP . .. 259
REs- JUDICATA-decision in a suit under s. 9 of Specific Relief Act-1t0~

bar fr) subsequent suit i .volving title. LimitatiiJ11 Act, Article -142
-when can come into operati(ITZ. In a suit under s. 9 of the
Specific Relief Act, the question o title is not involved and there-
fore the decision in it cannot operate as res-judicata in a
subsequent suit involving title. In a suit for recovery of
possession, for Art. 14z of the Limitation Act t o come into
operation, there must either be " dispossession " or ...dis:
C9tinua!J.ce," U Kan ancl <me v. Kalachatul and one, Civi
GENERAL INDEX Jxxi
Appeal No.6 of 1962; U Chit Tzm v. Daw Ngwe''Tfr.awi!J, Civil

First Appeal No.9 of 1960; and Sulainuzn an-i two v. Ma Hla Bi,
Civil Second Appeal No. 56 of 1953 of the late High Court,
referred to.
0,\\V EtN TiNT v. u SAN HI.:\ AND 6 O'l'Hf:-RS . ..
REs-JUDfCATA-ordet in proceeding under Guardians and Wards A.ct-

~ohen operates as res-judicata in a subsequent suit. Questi<m of
adoptwn-to be raised in previous jJToceeding. Gua1dwM and
Wards Act s. 48-a bar tu subsequent suits. The Respondents h.'id
in a previous proceeding filed an Application under s. 25 of the
Guardians and '\'Vards Act against the Appellant for the custody of
their minor child. The District Judge, after hearing thl! con ten~
tions of both parties, ordered that the child be delivered to the
Respondents who were his natu.ral parents. The said order
was also confirmed on Appeal. Subsequently the Appellant
filed a suit for declaration that the said child was her adoptive son.
The Respondents contended that the suit was barred hy res
judicata in view of the decision in the previous pro::eeding. On
Appeal: Held: In the. previous proceeding, th~ Appellant
could have contended agatnst the Respondents, that the child W liS
her ad<Jptive son. She should have specifi~lly raised a plea tc>
that effect. She also did not take the alternative course of filing
<ln application under s. !O of the Guardians and \Vards Act .read
with s. 7 thereof, to be appointed guardian of the child, on the
gcound that her rights were superior to that of his natural
parents. Accordingly the Appellant's suit is barced hy res-iudicota.
lVfawzg Hmat " lVIaung Htay, I Ran. p. zs8; Doddi Darayya , ..
Bathula AdinarO"ya11a, A. J.R. ( 1953) Mad. p . 183; Srimati Raj
Lakshmi Dasi and others v. Banamali Sell and others, A.I.R.
(1953) Supreme Court p. 33; Shadeo v. Mahra}i and another,
u Ran. p. 569; Sathi m~d two others v. Ramandi Pandaram,
42 Mad. p. 647, referred to. Held further: The present suit is
also covered by s ..48 of the Guardians and VVards Act, as the
present suit is an attempt to nullify the order passed in the pre-
vious proceeding. Under the said s~i:tion, such an order shall
be final and shall not be contested by suits or otherwise.
DAw CHIT NGWE v. Mn. W. F. Wooo AND ONE 226
RETRACTED CoNFilSSION-OF ONl~ ACCUSED NOT SIJI'FICII!i:-<'1.' 1o COR-

. ROBORATE CONFESSION 01' ANOTHER ACCUSED 46
R~osPECTIVE OPERATION-ITS Qurs:rroN-}APANESE CuRRENCY (E\'A-
LUAT!ON) ACT OI' 1947 836
REVISION AGAINST THE ORDER Of DJ~CHARGE-Qffe11ces Wider ss. 6(x)a.nd
11 (1) oftheForeigtt &~hange Regulation Act, 194:7 readwiths. 120
B.P.C. the i1;-terpretation of laws. Held: The modem trend of
construction is where an equivocal or ambiguous word leaves a
reasonable doubt of its mean.i ng which the canons of interpreta-
tion fail to solve, the benefit of the doubt should be given to the
subject and agaiils~ the legislature which has failed to explain
itself. It must be remembered tl:at the spirit of our free institu-
tions require that'the interpretation of all laws should be favour-.
able to per:;onalliberty. .Where an enactme11t may entail penal
consequences, no '-iolencc must be done to its langwge to bring
people within it, but rather care must be. taken that no orie is
brought within it who is not within.its express langllage. If the
legislature has not used words sufficiently comprd.ensive to
lxx.ii G.I;:NERA:L INDEX
include all cases within its prohibition it is not competent to a

Court to extend them. There is nothing clear to show on the
records that there was intent on the part of the respondents tc
secure delay in the receipt or to stop or cease the receipt of the
foreign exchange. If this be so these two cases do not fall
within the ambit of the provisions of ss. 6 (x) and II (1) of the
Foreign Exchange Regulatic>n Act, 1947. P.C. Ray and one v.
The Onion of Burma, (1961) DeL.R. I (S.C.), referred to.
THE UNioN OF BURMA v . W.T. MciNTYRE AND oNE 868
R EVISION-Warrant c,f attachment under s. 146 of the Criminal

Procedure Code by Towmhip Magistrate-groundsfor setting aside-
power of District Magistrate to withdraw order. Held: It is not
the practice of the Chief Court to interfere in Revision in criminal
matters when the Application filed is more than 6o days after the
order complained of, unless it is accompanied by an explanation
of the delay and the necessary affidavits as required under
paragrapl> 766 of the Courts Manual. Held also: Regarding
a warrant of attachment which has been issued by a Township
Magistrate under s. 146 (I) of the Criminal Procedure Code,
although the Chief Court may decline to interfere ih revision with
regard to it, the District Magistrate himself has the power to
withdraw the attachment after due enquiry, under the proviso
to s. 146 (x). He may also transfer the case to a Magistrate of the
xst Class having jurisdiction over the local a<ea of the land in
dispute. U Au11g Dwe v. TJ Chan Aye,(x9ss)B.L.R. 36o; Maung
Pan Ohn and another v. Maung Ttm Thein, (x961) B.L.R. z8o;
Dha11put Singh v. Chatterput Singh, I.L.R. 20 Cal. 513; Khosh
Mohamed SirhuT v. Nazir Mohamed, I.L.R. 33 Cal. 352 (F.B);
and f;atish C/umd,a Panday v. Rajendra Narain Bagchi, J.L.R.
22 ( 1895) Cal. 899, referred to. .
MAUNG BA THIN v . THE UNION OF BURMA 38
REVOLUTIONARY COUNCIL LAW No. 3 OF 1962-HOW rr APPLIES TO

"THE llXl!CUTION OF A CIVIL CASil- DfiTERMINATION OF JURISDIC1'10N 590
SllA CuSTOMS Ac::r, s. 167 (8)-AND 167 B-Ac::riON TAKEN FOR

ATI'EMPT THilREUNDER- IRRilLEVANT POR THE PURPOSES OF S. 24A
OF FoREIGN ExCHANGE REGULATION Ac::r 64
SET-OFF-Gode r-f Civil Procedttre, 0. VIII, Rule 6-whether it catmot

be claimed. Held: Under Order VIII, Rule 6 the claim must be
legally recoverable, that is, it must not be a dead c.lainl. So
unless we import such words as" legally recoverabl e at the date of
the institut.ion cf the suit," in one case, and "}egally recoverable
at the date when the counter-claim is made," in another case,
into the said enactment there cannot be two different termini ad
q!Ulm for the purpose of limitation in r.esp~t of Order Vlll, Rule 6
of the Code of Civil Procedure. If it is time-barred, "it canriot .be
claimed whether the set-off is legal ;or equitable. Messrs.
NanigramJaga~tf1 v. K.A.M. Sheih Mohamed and ethers, (1947),
R .L.R. 47h; ArifJ v. Jadu Nath, 55 Cal. 1090, referred to and
followed . . Pragi Lal v. Maxwell and r-thers, 7 .A ll. 284; Harendra
Nath Chaudhuri v. Sourindra Nath Chattdlmri, l.L .R. (1924)
2 Cal. 485, ci!ssented from. .
DAW THAN MYJNT ANo
ONE' !J. MF.SSRS. SHWE NI ,TRA.DlNG
C<?M!i'~~ ~~r.!ll'W ,; ,.. . lOIS
GENERAL l('l_DEX lriiii
PAG:i
SHAN STATES CIVIL JusTICE (SUBSIDIARY) ORDER, 19o6-Rule 18 A-

stdJsti.tuted by the Shan States Civil Justice (Subs1diary) Order 1906 .
(Amendment) Act I96I-ultra vires of the State Legislature-
as regards znd appenl to the Hight Court-restriction by s. 102
C.P.C. The question referred to is :-" Is Rule tSA of the
Shan State Civil Justice (Subsidiary)Order, 1906 as substituted by
the Shan State Civil Justice (Subsidiary) Order, 1906 (Amend-
ment) Act, 1961.ultra vires of the State Lep:islature, in so far as it
affects second appeals to the Hight Court from appellate decrees
of the District Courts in the Shan State?" Held : Gaps of-
ten exist between law and policy and when this Court fipds that
it can throw a bridge between the two without doing violence
to statutory interpretation it becomes its duty so to do. In
that spirit it is decided that second appeals will continue to lie
to the Chief Court from the appellate judgment and decrees
of the Courts in the Shan State, restricted only by s. 102 of the
Civil Procedure Code. Ko Kyin Wain v. U San Myint and one,
Civil Reference No. 1 of 1960 decided by the Chief Court on
tz, Oct. 12 referred to.
LAwSuv.NAINGHPAPAUNoiN
SHAM DOCOMI!NT- 'I'HEN TO BE PROVED BY ORAL EVIDENCE
SPECIFIC RELIEF Acr-s. C)-IN A SUIT FlLFD UNDER THIS ACT,

QUES'I'JON OF TITLE NOT INVOLVEI>-DECISION lN IT DOES NOT
OPERATE AS res-judicata IN A SUBSEQUENTSUrr INVOLVING TITLE 5
SPECIFIC REup;p ACT-s. I C)-WHETHER A CLAI MFOR POSSESSION CAN BB
MADE IN ADDffiON TO THAf OF THB SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF
THE CONTRACT ... 10$0
SPECIFic Rm.ti!P AcT-PROVIso TO s. 42-ITS APPLICABILITY-MAIN-
TAINABILITY OF A SUIT FOR DECLARATION THAT THE COMPROMISE
DECREE IS BINDING z68
SUCCESSION Acr-s. 222-PROBATB OF WILL-HOW TO lNTERPERT
THB WORD "devise " -EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE Wl!llN TO DB TAKEN-
II'S jUSTIFICATION IOOS .
SUIT FOR DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT-Limitati:m Act, applica-

bility of either Article 6s ur Article us- Civil Procedure Cude
0. 7, R I I (d), rejection of plaint- The plaintiff filed a suit for
damages for breach of contract to sell a free-hold land. Altogether,
K zs,ooo had been. paid as advance according to tt.e terms of
the agreement, .b ut the defendart! has failed to comply with
them. The defendant contended that the breach of the tetms
was colllJllitted by the plaintiff and that in any event the suit is
barred by the lawof Limitation. Held: In the circumstances
fo the case, either Article 6; or Article IS is applicable, becaus~
whichever article is applied the time runs for 3 years from the
date of the breach of promise or contra-::t or tt.e happening of a
specified contingency. Since the"taigct date was set at 2nd March
1957 for the defendant to make out a good or absolute title
to the satisfaction of the plaintiff's advocate the suit should
have been browrht within three years from this date if the
plaintiff's advocate was not ~;atisfied with the title. Held further:
a
Since ~" was delay of over 7 years in filing the suit the
plaint should have ~ rejected under 0. 7, R. 11 (d) of the
Civil Procedure Code. Khem Chand Motumal and another v.
Bh!'JU>nul Cularbrai, A.I.R. (I9SS) Ajmer I, referred to.
D.o\W THEIN HL.\tNG v. G. G<>RDHARDAS S94
lxxiv GENER:\L INDEX
PAGE
SUl'I' !-'OR COMPENSATION FOR USB AND OCCUPATION OF PREMISES-rela-
tionship of landlord and tenant-failure of St)it for want of Standard
Rent Certificate. Series of litigation had been going on between
the parties sit1ce the year 1956 in respect of the subject-matter of
this suit. In Civil Regular Suit No. 272 of 1962 of the City Civil
Court, Rangoon, plaintiff-appellant U Knin Mau11g filed a suit
against the defendant-respondent Paik Kyain for recovery of ;I
surn of K 8,294 being the amount of compensation for use and
occupation of the Eastern half of the premises known as No. 781,
Maha Bandoola Street, Rangoon. The plaintiff's case was that
he was the owner of the premises, but the status of the defendant
was not specifically identified. Held : There is no slu-ed of
evidence to indicate that the defendant was not a tenant at the
1:elevant periods in respect of which the claim f<Jr compensation
was made. On the other hand there has been successive adjudi-
cations by which the defendant was held to be the tenant. Field
further : Once the relationship of landlord and tenant bad been
held to be established between the parties the suit was bound
to fail for lack of SQ\ndard Rent Certificate as required under
the provisions of the Urban Rent Control Act, even if the suit
bad been otherwise maintainable. A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan
Chettyar v. A. Chokfingam Chettyar, (1949) B.L.R. p. 46. (S.C.),
referred to.
U KHl~<~ lM.'I.uNG ...-. l'.~u< Kvl\rN 8;6
5Ul'l' FOR DAMAGES ON ACCOUN'r 01' BREACH OF COVENANT OF LEASE-
<atster of the tenants from the t~nem1mt without recourse to a Court of
law- breach of covenant of the lease govemed by A1ticle 115 of tlle
Limitation Act--dispossession of a tena1tt i11 breach of covenant-
liability of landlord to pay damages. Held: The plaintiffs are
the lessees of the defendants whose ouster of their tenants from
the tenement without recourse to a Court of law duriin~t the
subsistence of the lease is tantamount to a misfeasance arising out
of the contract oflease. Under s. xo8 (c) of the Transfer of Pro-
perty Act, the lessors are under a statutory obligation to allow
the lessees to hold the lensed property without interruption and
the wrongful dispossession caused by the lessors is undoubtedly
a breach of covennnt of the lease, which comes within the pw-view
of Article XIS of the Li1uitation Act. The plaintiffs were dis-
possessed on the 2oth October 1960 but restored to possession on
the 8th September t96x. The limitation under Article ns will
therefore. commence only on the latter date and the suit which
was instituted on the 30th November 1963 must be held to. be
within time.' Jaganath Malwari.v . Kalidas Raha, A.I.R. (1929)
Pat. 2.45 ; Raja Balu v. Krishna Rao ~mclumrka, 2 Bom. 273 at
293, referred to: Lal Singh v. Rira "Singh, A.I.R. (1921) Lah.
242; Ki1 Mohamed Khan v. Mt. Janath, A.I.R. (1940) Lah. 359 ;
. Rat!ha Krishna v. Radha Ramtma. Swami, A.I:R. (1941) Orissa t ,
. distinguished. Held further : The landlord is under a statutory
obligation to allow his tenants to quiet enjoyment of the leased
property under s. xo8 (c) of the Transfer of Property Act and if he
dispossesses a tenant in breach of such a covcnnnt, otherwise than
in due course oflaw, he will be liable in damages. Sayed Muktar
Ahmed v. Rani Sunder Koa, 17 C.W.N. 960; }{ao Rang Singh v.
A .J. Maik, A.I.R. (1923) Mad. 41 ; Gajadltm RamchandraJatia v .
. Rmnbluiu Vishwa Nath, A.I.R. (1938) Nag. 4'i9; Karachanlal v.
-~ariPrasadDaduKhadakSi11gh, A.I.R, (X9S9) Nag. 379,referred
to.
MESSRS. LIKmncHA....ffi HlRALAt. v. H.E. ]Al\otAL A.'-<D
SEVEN'I'EilNOTiiERS IO;tU
GENERAL INJJEX lxxv
SUI'l FOR POSSESSION OF PREMISES AS 'PHil TENANT- crOSS suit for declczra.
ti.,n claiming the same relief- Revisional power of the Chief Court
under s. 25 of the Rangoon City Civil COIJrt Act. Held: The
deduction made b y the Trial Court from tht: evidence is quite
correct and there is no substantial injustice due to an erroneous
decision on facts and the Court ofRevisi<'n cannot interfere under
~. 25 of the Ranjloon City Civil Court Act. Siva Dass D~ v.
Ashabi and one, I.L.R. 3 Ran. 471; S.S. Mohamed Hanifa v. K.O.
Mohamed Kasim, (1950) B.L.R. 26 (H.C.); Sultan Ahmed v.
Nasara Jaman, (1950) B.L.R. 369 (H.C.): Ram Krishna Shultla
a11d others v. Thakur Sri Ramjan.11i, I.L.R. 35 Pat. 986, referred to.
U TtmiN KVT AND om U KYIN HoKE
U THmN KYl AND oNE v. U KYIN HoKE
SUIT FOR IU!COVERY OF PRESA!Jl ADV.\NCFs--t:ardr11al pri11ciple of

comtruction of a written agreement-burdet' of proof--of the 110n
observance of the direction or negliget1cc to discharge the duties-
Contract Act-ss. 21 x a11d 212. Held: It is the cardinal principle
of oonstruction of n written agreement that when the intention
of the parties are clear and unequivocal, effect must be given to
it in the sense the parties have really intended. Although the
defendant was described as the trustee of the plaintiff in respect
of the ores e."rtracted in one of the clauses of the contract, the real
intention of the parties v.-as that they should adopt one another ns
princ.ipal and agent in respect of the orcs sold through tht:
plaintiff. Wilscn v. Bwan, 7 C.B. 673; Volkart Brothers v.
Rutnavelu Chetti, I .L.R. Vol. XVIII p. 63, referred to. Held
.further: Since the relationship of principal and agent exists
between the parties, the defendant, in order to succeed his
counter claim, must show that the loss was attributable to the
non-observance of the diJ"ection given by him or to the negligence
of the plaintiff in the discharge of his duty within the meaning of
ss. Z II and 212 of the Contract Act. Narav011 Deo. v. Hanu-
ntalltha Rao, A.I.R. (1950) Orissa p. 241, referred to.
THE Mrz..'ERAL REsouRc.ES DEVELOPMENT CoRPORATION v.
U BA YoNE 8s6
SUtr FOR SPilCIFIC PBIIFORMANCE OF CONTR.""CT OF SALE---(lmendment

ofplaint to add claim or d01110ges-O. 2 Rule 2 sub-rule (3) C.P.C.
applies tv subsequertt p roceedittgs-whether claim for possessron be
matk in additicm to specific performance of ccmtract. Held: The
words "shall not afterwards sue" in O.II, Rule 2 sub-rule (3)
clearly connote that the restriction is imposed by this rule applies
only to subsequent proceedings. The bar of the rule will operate
only where a decree has.been passed in a previous suit in which the
plaintiff has omitted a portion of the claim. It has no application
to cases similar to the pr~nt one where the amendment of plaint
is sought for addition of the claim which has been omitted in the
original plaint. Upendra Narain Roy v. Janaki Nath Ruy and
ot/JtTs, A.LR. (1919) Cnl. 90~; Fqteh K.Jum v. Muhammad lsa,
A.I.R. (1919) Lah. 198 ; R. T.S. Klwondoo v. HusseinBuksh, I.L.R.
3 Cal. 785 ;_Jagat Singh v. Sangat Singh, A.I.R. (1940) P.C. 70,
referred to and followed. Held further: The question that poses
for determination is whether a claim foT possession can be made
in addition to that of the specific performance of contract. The
answer to that question is to be found in s. 19 of the Specific
Relief Act whlch clearly says that such a claim is competent.
u TIN M YINT v. u KalN M '\:Th'T AND ONE 1050
GENERAL ll'IDEX
P.HHl
TRANSFER OF PROl'ERTY Aer----o. io8 (c)-WHEN LMIDI.Q){(> T.!ABLE TO
PAY DAMAGES TO HIS TENANTS IOZ6
T~E Dt~~uTn Acr, s. 2o--jai~re to carry out terms of Award-

ttnpontum of the ji'l1e-legalt~~ thereof. Held: On reading the
provisions of s. 20 (4) of the Trade Disputes Act, with s. ~2 of the
-Code of Criminal Procedure, it is clear thnt a Magistrate of the
ISt Class is competent to sentence a person convicted of an offence
under s. 20 (l) of the Act to a fine not exceeding K I ,ooo for every
day on which the terms of the Award are not carried out by him.
The Trade Disputes Act being a special law, it overrides the
general provisions contained in s. 32 of the Criminal Procedure
Code, because of s. 1 thereof. Though s. 20 (1) of the Trade
Disputes Act contains no provision for any imprisonment being
awarded in default of payment of fine, by virtue of the provisions
of s. 40 and s. 67 of the Penal Code, simple imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months can be imposed on default of pament of fine.
Sukdeo Singh v. Corporation of Calcutta, (1953) C .L.J. 196
(Calcutta), referred to.
u All KYIT f}, THil UNION OF BURMA 72
TRANsFER OF CxviL CAst!-CIVIL PROCEDURE ConE-s. sz6--oN wH.n
GROUNDS 799
TRusT Acr S. 74-appoi11t.ment of new Trustee or Trustees-"<JJhether
it should be filled up or 1wt. Held: The sole question that arises
for consideration is whether-there had been a vacancy in the post
of trustee and if so whether it should be iil.lcd up by th~ Court.
The answer must clearly be that the Trust has been without a
trustee and the need for filling up the vacancy is app1u:ent in
the face of refusal by respondent No. 2 to continue his work of
managing the Trust as agent of the beneficiaries so as to safe-
guard the interest of the Trust and aU the b<.'Ileficiaries. Tirathdas
Dharanulas and arwther v. Sh. Parmeshwaribai W.O. Kttndanmal,
A.I.R. (1943) Sind- p. 23; in re Sab?tia, Goregaonkar fE1 Senjit,
ShiflYamadas qnd others v _B. V . N arurkar and others, A. l.R. (1937)
Born. p. 374 at 378, referred to. Khatoon Jannat Bibi v. Syed
Wali Ullah and another, A.LR. (1949) All. p. 310 at 315, referred
to and followed.
DAW THAN NWAI tl. M.WNG MAUNG OHN GHlNE AND
ELBVllN oTHllllS Sos
UNDUE lNFLU.ENCE-GONTRACT ACT-S. t6 (3)-WHEN l'RE~'ION
AlUSES-NOT QUESTION OF FACT BUT THAT OF LAW-POWER OF
HtGH COUR'l' FOR lNTERFEIUlNCE-LACK- OF PUBLICITY h'< ADOI'-
TION-WH.EN RELEVANT . - 237
UNION CrriZENSHIP AC'l', S. 4 (z}-INCUMBENT ON A PERSON CJ..AlMlNG

TO BE 1\ CITIZEN v'Nl>ER SAID SECTTON ' TO l'RODCCE -CF.RTIFICATE
VNDllR S. 6 (z) . ... 51
UNION Cn'IZRNSHll' ACT-s. 4 (2)-WHo Is A cr11ZilN wnHrN I'tS

MEANING , .. Sn
Ur-."lON CONSTI1i:JTION-5. 11 (il)-w.HO IS - A . CITIZEN UNDER lT-
WlliiT.BI!R Ri:Nnwt.t . 01,: Follli'lONERs RP.GISl'RATiON CEKriFtCAl'E
NECI!SSARY ' 841
UNION J UDICIARY ACT, S. 4-'--SUP.&RVISOR Y JURISO~CTION OF THE_<;:
HlliF
COURT-OVER AN ORDER OF 1\ DISTRict jUDGE DIRECTING
PAYMilNT'OF COMMISSlON TO A RECSlVER-NOT APPF.ALADL!l UNPER
ORDER 43 1 RUL!:: 1 (s) OF CIVIL PROCI.IDURli CoDE 280
GENERAL INDEX lxxvji
PAO&
tiNTON JumcrARY ACT, s. 6-rlcfinition of ttnant. in s. 2 (g) of the
Urban Re11t C(lntrol Act. The appellant tiled a suit for eject-
ment and for damages for wrongful use and occupation against
the respondent in respect of a house and its site. She was
unsuccessful in the lower court and the 1st appellate court, but
on 2nd appeal tt.e suit was decreed with costs in her favour under
the provisions of S. 11 (x) (f) of the Urban Rent Control Act.
On nth May 1959 the respondent vacated the premises. There-
after the appellant filed 11 suit for recovery of K 11,500 as damages
for use and occupation of the suit premises against the respondent.
The Aaditional District Judge held tl.at the respondent was
liable to pay only K 4,53g and the appellant's appeal against this
judgment and decree was dismissed. Hence the present appenl.
Held: A tenant who remained in occupation of the premises
after having ceased to be a tenant in wt.atsoever manner his
tenancy might have been terminated is a tenant holding-over and
as such falls within the purview of s. 2 (g) of the Urban Rent
Control Act, and it also includes a tenant against whom an eject-
ment decree is subsisting but who has not yet vacated the
premises. There has not been any appreciable change as would
either restrict or widen t he scope of the tem1" tenant" as defined
in tJ-.c old Act of 1948 and in the existing Act of 1960. Therefore
in spite of the alteration in the language the law as explained in
the rulings decided under the old Act still holds good in so far as
the term "tenant" is concerned. Mrs. DM. Si:nger v. The
Controller of Rents and three others, (1949) B.L.R. p. 143 (S.C.),
Sin Tek and. another v. Lekhany Brcs., (1952) B.L.R. p. z8o (H.C.);
B.R. Kamdor v. The Assi'stant Ctmtroller of Rents and others,
(1950) B.L.R. p. so (S.C.), referred to and followed. Mrs.
Constance Minoo Writer v. A .M. Khan, (1951) B.L.R. p. 169
(S.C.), referred to.
MA KHIN M'YINT '/}. Al-I SHU
UNJON J uoiCIARY Acr, s. 6-distinction between a suit for partition and

an administration suit--natttre of administration suit explained-
0. 2 R. 2 (t) and 0. 23 Rule I (1) C.P.C. /tJr relinquishment or
abandonment f part of claim-whether the relinquishment CJ/ the
padd_v lands out <4 the deceased's estate alters the nature of the
<ldministraticn suit. Held: It is nC't seen how the suit has turned
into a suit for partition simply because the properties barring
those waived by the 1st .respondent remain in possession of the
applicant. The suit is styled as a suit for administration praying
for a decree for (i) declaration of the shares of the parties in the
estate, (ii) ascertainment of the extent of the estate of the deceased,
(iii) accounts and (iv) administration. The properties should no
doubt be ultimately partitioned, but that does not make the suit
a partition suit. The partition may be an incident but it is not
a necessary incident of the administration of the deceased's estate.
:\ suit for partition is not an administration suit though the latter
involves the former. . Order 20 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil
Procedure provides that all persons "ith claims ma} come in
under the preliminary decree and establish their rights~ If the
applicant claims that some of the properties in his possession are
his own it is open to him to cstabli~h his rights. There is !10
reason why a Court should not deetde as between the palrttes
whether the assets belong to the deceased or not. In an adminis-
tration suit a complete inquiry necessarily implies determination
of title to properties and the court is bound to decide questions
as to ownership of such properties as an incident o theadminis-
tration of the estate. Administration means management of the
lx.xviii GENERAL 11\'DEX
dcc.:eased's estate by the Court on request and consists of

ascertainment and presentation of the estate, collection of assets,
payment of debts and le:ga~es, _acts in respect of a_dverse claims
to assets and finally dtstnbutton among the hens. The 1st
respondent in her plaint stated that the properties arc in possession
0 tb.e applicant and he is managing them with the approval of
the parties and therefore the applicant cannot be said to be in
wrongful or illegal possession. If he was in wrongful or illegal
possession a suit for adtninistration roay not be proper. The
present suit being for collection of assets, amongst others, in tte
bll!ldS of the applicant who is properly joined as a defendant
being an heir, it is not outside the scope of an administration
suit. This case is not only in form but also in substance a suit
for administration. Mt. Amir Bi v. Abdul I<alli'm and others,
A.I.R. (1928) Mad. ~ 76o; A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar
and ,.ne v. A. Chokl1ahngan Chettyar, (1949) B.L.R. p. 46 (S.C.),
referred to. Held further: Order 2 Rule 2 (1) and Order 23 .
Rule 1 (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure provide for relinquish-
ment or abandonment of part of the claim and in exercising such
a right no application for an amendment of the plaint but an
intimation to the Court is necessary and the Court has only to note
it and there ends tl:>.e matter. Duggempudi Ramakrishma Reddi
v. Duggempudi Veerareckii and another; U Thim and one v. Daw
Chit Pt<, (1962) B.L.R. 329 (C.C.), referred to.
u OHN TIN v. DAW TIN MYA A..>ro ONJl 1040
URBAN RllNT CONTROL Acr OF 1948-WHETHER ASSI CNMENT OF

PREMISES DEFORE EXPIRY OF 1948 ACT AMOUNTS 1.'0 DRF-AK OF
OBLlCATION UNDER 1960 ACT So
URBAN RENT ComnoL AcT-s. 2 (g)-DEFINITION OF A. TENANT-
wHO IS A TENANT WITHIN ITS MEANING 830
URBAN RENT CONTROl, ACT-RELATiONSHIP OF LANDLORD AND .
'filNANT-WUllN ESTADLlSHliD-FA!LURE OF SUIT FOR .WANT OF
STANDARD RENT CERTIPlCATl! 876
UMAN RI!NT CoNTROl, Acr, 196o-Breach of obligation of tenancy
ttnder s. 12 (1) (a)-Whether assignment Gj premises a breach (Jf
such ul>ligation. Assig11mmt before expiry .,f 1940 Ac t--ttc.t breach
lJ/ obliRatiott u1ul61 1900 Act. Ejectm61tt dee~ee-Whether valid.
The xst Respondent (Plaintiff} had filed a suit for ejectment
against the Appellant and the 2nd Respondent on the ground
that the Appellant as tenant, had vacated the suit room about
the Y.ear 1953-54 after landing oVet' tl e same to the znd
. Respondent (znd Defendant). The leamed trial judge held
that as the Appellant (xst Defend~nt) had committed a breach
. of obhgation of tenancy of whlch an ejectment decree .shou1d be
passed against hiru. A decree was therefore passed against the
Appellant, as tenant, and the 2nd Respondent as sub-tenant.
The said decree was based not only on tte fact that 't here "~"(ere
arrears of rent lawfully due but on the fact t}lat there had been
. a breach _o f obligation of tenancy. On appeal by the Appellant
(tst Defendant): J!eld: As the Appellant {tst Defendant) had
. assigned tile swt room during the Year 1953-54 when the Urban
Rent Control Act, 19~ was.still in force, he still remains a tehant
of the xst Respondent (Plaintiff) and a suit under s . 12 (1) (a} of
the Urban Rent Control Act 1960 for .non-payme:Qt of arrears
of rent lawfully due, is maintainable against hirn. }leld further:
It is a moot point whether the failure of a tenant to give notice
GENE.RAL INDEX bxix
th&t he !:ad v:1catcd the premises which he had been occupying

as required by clause (e) of s. 16 A.!!., constitutes a breach of
obligation of tenancy under the Urban Rent Control Act 194<>.
Assuming that it does constitute a breach of obligation of tenancy
under the Act of 1948, it cannot constitute a breach of obligation
of tenancy under~. 12 (1) (a) of the Act of 1960. This is because
after the coming int<' force of the Act of 1960, the provisions
of the 1948 Act can only be invoked for cases which have been
pending at the time of the expiry of the 1948 Act. Ko Ull Barr
v. Prafulla Chandra Palakkar and 2 others, C.M.A. No. 18 of
1962 of the Chief Court, referred to and followed. Accordingly,
the decree for ejectment based on the breach of obligation of
tenancy of the Appellant (xst Defendant) is bad in law. The
de<.:ree was therefore confirmed in ~o fa1 as it r~latcd to
ejectment for non-payment o f rent.
U KHIN MAUNG v. (1) A.E. MADHA, (2) MAT>AM CawA SHIN 8o
V\'.4RRA)).'T OF ARREST FOR NON-PAYMEJ\:"T OF MONEY DECREED-when can
be made. 0 . 2 1 , r. 37 Civil Procedu!'e Code. Enquirywzder o. 21,
r. 40-ca11 be made without anest. The arrest of a judgment
debtor under o. 2l, r. 3i of the Civil Procedure Code, is only a
means to ensure his attendance in Court. It is not an end in
itself. Thus where the judgment debtor is not only not
absconding but has actually appeared before the Court to plead
for time., a warrant of arrest cannot be issued ag-.1in~t him. The
impression of the txial judge tbat he could make an enquiry as
envisaged in o. :tt, r. 40 only after the Appellant was brought
to Court under arrest, is entirely mistaken.
OM RoA AHIR v. Noo"R MoHAIIffit> KHJIN
WrtL-St~ccessum Act s. 222 (lpplication for probate of the will-

interpretatiml of the w01d " devise "-c01zsideration of el:trinsic
e~--idence. Held: It is true that tl'.e will does not contain the
words ' immoveable property" but the use of the word "devise"
which is commonly employed only in respect of immoveable
property taken in conjunction with the testator's. intention of
making the respondent her sole heir to her entire estate clearly
shows that Daw Mya bequeathed not only her immoveable pro-
perty but also the suit property as well. Held frerther: The
lower Court"is perfectly justified in taking into consideration the
extrinsic evidence appearing on its record in construin~ the will.
DAW KHrN KYI AND ONil v. D;,w M,<~. :i'v1A 1005
WoRKMl!N'S CoMPr~SATtoN ACT, s. 12 (t)-liability of principal-.:ight
nf ~Otrlmzen to recover from c011tractor under s. 12 (x)--p1ocedure
to be aa&j>teil to enf<-rce liability of principal. Held: Where a
workman who is employed by a contractor .is injured, it is open
for him to recover compensation from the contractor ,(his
employer), under s. 12 (3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act.
However, if the workman choose to take action under s. 12 (1)
of the Act, the principal and not the contractor becomes the
opposi~e party. In such a case the principal is entitled UJldet
Rule 36 of the Rules to present a notice to the Commissioner
claiming that he is entitled under s. 12 {2) to be indemnified by
the contractor exnployed by him. Where- liability is imposed
on the principal without giving him an , pportunity of contesting
the claim, the order of the Commissioner must be set l!Side.
U TIN TuN v. U SHWE Hroo YIN 97
lXXx GENERAL INDEX
PAGII
WoRKMEN'S CoMPENSATION ACT-s. no-limitation for institution

of p1oceedings. Held: No reason whatsoever could be assigned
as to why the respondent had failed to make !.is claim within
12 montl.s from the date of the occurrence ot tle accident. It
was only after a lapse of 2~ years that the case was instituted in
the office of the Commissioner and in the face of the plain
provisions of law which prescribe a ddinite tiine limit within
which such a claim must be made. There is no alternative
but to hold that the claim of the respondent is time-barred.
The Consvlid<:lted Tin Mines uf Burma v. Maung TunE, I.L.R.
Ran. Series, VoL. IX (1931) p . n8, referred to.
Kc. $KE1N GYI v. MAtiNG NYUNT SmN 819
~
~roeo,H3"'J":~
(' (' (' ('
ro?roQ)e :ro~~:::ooo~nroeoss u
<)18:ro ~~~~~~~9GOOOO :qj II
" lL at ~ l
0 c
s~o=t~~JG:l"::l;'l,IIJ?:~nroeossu
f::C" OC' C'OC' C'

cfll?<icc s:x>::>"Jrb~o~~n~eossu
C<' OC". OC' t: or;:c- C' t: o C" C'
t::Jf~i?~CC~C~ G'l0011:;;~'1:t:1c~ o~e:::ooou;l\.{GlX>?CG'}Itnro_ei,)GS U
f~~"CZll:>'J?::o':loo~:2 uc~ 11
cc . (- '(" ('
cf~~"ll~ :>"J?oo.,oct:oo~~:Q)ero., ::nroeoss 11
oo~i.l!:m~euss_u
~
"fle'OOOrPJ<;oct: !I
~ .
'Pe::o~:u
9
IIC~o2wec~ccmwc.w
~ ~ .)
Wabeecoeec
0 ~
:GfiCCmrotJcoc.c.o~
.) .>
le datJc
:.J
nc~oC!ww ~w
:b~c.mc.ccoo!ct c.Glllo,:beoc.c:oe~@ro4~f'lw:b&@~ l ct~e cCvc
..) '
.> .> 01, _, .l .> !l,o o .> :J .>
nc~o2:@! aotlewro:c.rfl:h.l~~~~c.co~c.o&
.) .) :~ .) e.J .) .) 1e bCvc
uceoC!wec a j:;'Jec.rro~:c.acco~w
..) ~ ..) ..)
IIC~o2wecdd:e~wGoc.cea
.) .)0 .) .)
o~:c.rm!&o4toc.cce:j:;'J:beec
.) .) .) Ll
uc~o2weccbo'ce:
.) .) 0
oCewcea ew
.,:~ .)
.) .)~~cotlw
nceoC!wec .) ::l
nlflec
.lO
o~c.cc:Are:
.) .)
A6lco& 'Coelloeec
.) OJ.)
n(vbvc) c"'oC!~w (~re~cer) :lo:cee.?~~c.ccsecsc.cw

11 ceo2wwc.coe ccc
..) ..)
uceoC!wececcewcc ..) . ..)
nc~o2..)wec:bs:c.c:ore:c.ct:cc
0
ucsoC!weco~c.ccwcc:c.t:l:cc
.) .) .) ::J 0
ncsoC!wec:c.rfl:occecAmloAcc
..) ..) "
~fleco~c.cc:flre:aO
u,o , .> .>OJ,c.o~
11 eeoC!..)wec:c.Glw::ic.roe
..)
uc,.,oC!ww
.)
(mc.m)~obowccO
0 .) 0.)
o5:b,.,ecwsc.c:ro
.>:.l ...L .) .)
. ']
IIGSOCaJI!Cfl
.)
,~
.)
0
g flC09.flaJt C.091"
'\
1
0 ,)
,

SOVd
!XXXJ X3CINI 'TV'd3:N3!)

cooc
c6c < (; I If 1
l:IC II'I WflWGO c;o:~ CO~Oos-~ : ~OOGOfl IGOCOC'lOOWfX.O . 1
r ::1 \, o .> o ~ " .> , ,.> oo o ,

wbc;o: ()();o:c.oowfl 1 c;ocoaro
.>
c;ol'oc.co::>w ce:.>::>~t;9:c.oowfl ::>~
~

o.> o
OC Olr V
t ~
.)
f
GOfiW
oe

WCC CCC'C
11 '""l .> o .>
1
IWCC I 03C00
e
1 I
:J
; .>oooG;!rcc;,,
c;o
.>
C.GOGOO':
1
.) .) .) .> .) .) .) .) .)O
o0c
111
ftC\)
0
oc.ec~k o
:~occ: .)I,;
oe1
: o
oro::>
.)0 .) .,)
@ro4hl
g "
.,)
.) ,)
.>:.:1 : c.w:c.ccili-:oblowb>
.) ,)
g
,)
.>:::J.)
bc.ccoo c.o~r r: ol:>c.ccl!to c.a-:ccs
0
0
'"Jl
.)
4bhlcc5wcc
,) ~
1
..J,; 0
.,)
1
l<ilewe:a:ccee
,)
,.
rwc.o:
::> 0

w, ~
flro: ~::re
~el::lbw
.>:.:.1 (f :ohw) o"
cof .) (f) f o~ Hcoc.occoO>cl,
,,.
.)0
- :o f\
sroc.rc.ul!t 9
ocorew 'n '"J
ccccccfl 1 1
w:.,ew 9
oew: o ,) .) 1 9
b-oe~ocowc.ccee 1
.) .) .) .) "' ,) .,) 0 .) .) .) .)Q.)
1f9 -.,..,:I l 1
!! 9
91. ,
Oooo: ,)o ,)c.uc. eHflO
.)
ocorewccccccfl-~:~v flcnc.occ.Qlos-oe~rcowc.cc~e
,) t.. .) ,) ~ ~ .,) .) .)Q,)
ooc .)
1
Oo:>C.C o 1 "G r 1 v 1
0<101!6 S'flo:>SO OC.CO Olr C I 0 l)e:c.c OC.fl::>
o .) e" .:> t.. o .>
oc.fleoe:
,) .)
.,.,
c :>\\' .)occ.co<.H::>
6.) .)
( ree) occ.c::c.fle
......
",) .)
X3:CINI '1W3N3!)
lxxxiv GENERAL INDEX
l'AGB
?'29
!Soo
AXXXf
sccc r 1
t() :w~c.o
t,: 0
r " '1
olg :ee:c
,) 0
.... .... .... :oblo~mA:oCo:ok 1c.o6coc I:!:Joco
~~.,0~ .)~ .)0 0 0 S':.3.:.
1 'I
c.oeArosA ~ v
oe:roaw r .-, 11
ccccccooec.occfl1 r
O'::o .:c.ooco!lre
rn b
0
coo t~:~c.cco
,,
o :, t..>o J t, .>o .l .>o .) ., .) .) o e o
(c)Cc Acoc~o2cow:beo~:h.le
.) .) : Ab:rSchoki::BEI-tb
.)~ e:J .> L. .) O :_jOl
flco:kE:-rc.cA:ckco
.) .)
ofc 1
.)O
18'
OOlrC.AS'
.) .:J
" 0!!'r AC.oe
OOC.QO~CC
.) .) 0
,. 10
0
rc r
X3 (1!\il 'JVH ~NZJ~)

lxxxviii GENERAL INDEX
PACE
G:x>? :x>G::r.>? C
oooooaaOO?IG:l>')
~Ctl<X10?J
<: <: 0
G
C' OC 0~ o 0
S<llD;;}()X'O :OO~')S
lt -lJ1 J. V' ,.. -- - -r-
0 l
J;:C' (' ~ c-
C' A\ (" (' (' ("
r:lfW~~ 19U;9t ~OJ<:_G m?c;; ooc;p:~cm:x>? <Xio:>~?;~~ GCQC\:l
' c o r,:c c c c r;;: <" o c- c
~lDG~ot W..J?,ooxp:~~?: tl~ro~GOl']~:Dq<OefJC: !)dl,j~OlJ~OO
o c-
roro=u
c o c
~cJJ;;>oom:roro =O>ocron

nro:
c- c
oo:o>rmn
uG~?m"':
c
L ~- ~ tl T l R T L U ll
C' Q Q C' f,~ C' C' C" OOC' Q G C'I::C"
OlJ~OOG:x>?tlOJ']:l>~ VOI:f~CGOlJ II tlOJ'jOlJ"lOOOC : ~~~~mf:x>~~
] 0 0
c
("' C' C'
;;~a= =OlOCOl001C
mo:ro OO:x> 0\IVOOOO?tG:x>? ocv=Ol<l;~C
-~ ll CJ iJ
.... 0 <:r.; ,<: <:
'II.
<'J:<" c::
L l tl J
f.:<" (' ('

0
aro9ot =~ll','W:)Jsm ~oo~Dt~.~~t'l~~>~n tlc'ito;,c;ro1 o:._~:~ozoo
('
:J.It iJ II.
.:r.:
" J
. C' <: <: <" f.:<"~ <: e C'~ C' e f.: C' <'J:<'<:
oooe9JOJ']f :nc;m tlc ~GOJ?<jc : 1 oooe9JCDSJ<O :x>?Cjc: tr.aro~ tlillea n
0 0
OO:x>G:x>? tl"""'CD
C>~lJ! 0 r.: .::;.,
C'?'JVC(COOSJ
" _<;:
oxp:~:<:>~~
'l ('<: ('~ 0
Oill~IO? Oll')l:l!C91:11 I
L L o C' l Jl I. C J (: : lC' o
GOOOOJ.lCGC:OC;0\1:;., ~0\CIICD
QQO
-[ - t~!ll roooi!:OO<OlD?OJCD
C'C'OC'
IL L C
0 o
O();)U)f-'!:G')0)
ILtl
C'
T IL 1.1
"'rC'OG0'1
tlm')Ot OlDC9JCD~::lJ~~G:x>? 009_:>1'a:"l? 9CI3'dG01 "t,C SOJ'il:l~OI
' (' (' r.:::.r S. <' <'L.:. <: c:;., ' <:
OXI:>Jo:> O~f:!I<X{If.llcr- 10\'j~ fillf?l:l~c:J"'e\111 ~CX>SJ GOOOO~Oill
'
or.~')f GOOOO~O().)G~rq tlfGOI9J O~trq'j'f.tjl OO'f>:_ro:~?l
<: of:<' :;., <' o fR r.: <'
tlf 00~
.:
:;., (' ' (' (' Of.'! :;., (' r::.:
~GOI<:qlC G0000~0U>:>;1~ O~~l'=l'j',):l>?Sjtjl G9,Yax;'l~ f(>f?oC I
o o ' o c c ~ c r.::c o c c ~;: c
~:~~:x>q0?,1 axp:~:~?rof:!: o~e::~:~ax;>:SJ fillf?~:~C:~~:~~ ~~oo:nljc;
0
oo:n mY. (' ('
roororc ooro:'=1100 c:0 (' c:: 0 0 (' '
a~:~~())
(' ('('
ooc cooroc::a u oo:n~:~mro::r.>
\. ol I. t. JJ T JJ } I C.:. L ll l OL t.
. , ~ C' (' 0 (' 0
Grororo:x>~?l
~ ll
~OO?cr:ICD().)GO:o
.a :1 4)~
Oill:x>ICDl .:HXlGQ:JOOIC
-I IL )J
mro:o;
- - T j~
c , C' . c , c r::::c c- o r.::::: c
'>tJto:>o:l o~~~~'[JCIO>'):.l;i~? ~:~p:~?fillpoc: Ol'JGOI:l~ll ~Gt:j?q
('o (' C'OC' C C' C' (' o C' ('
G~?OJ',)IOO Gro?C~m~CGill')f CjCI:,)J~OOOO?I:x>rt GC\)C\)(T.)CGc;pc IO>J
r.:::C' 0 C'f.:t::<" (' J:'<: 0(' (' r.: 0 ('. r.:::<:
tjCl9 ~~Dte!c:1 cr:I~JCit'JGJ~~qco~m, ()';)()'GOII:ICII Groro
, c- c- o c r;:::e oc o
ro<lill:l>rt<OCID ~000\00'f>IOl~?: OOOOGo: 0 c: W.l~I:IJ?IOJ o:>ro;Q
6(' o ; 61. 1l. C C'OC'LC' C' C ~0 ~l- Q
CDJq_<Xll<{tll:l :ljO ~'J Oille9J~CD:x>~ 11 G'\'OJOJ 7q ~f~S)? tl
8)0)c ('")
Q <' o 'l <: ('") <:) I ~') ( 'J'") I 00<(0 I O'j";l
<: <: ( (\)
~fG:Y.>SUI'Iill ill I (h)().) 00
oe>
('9
GCD?Cilll \) ~
' c
9tsjll :x>O?, ('")
'J :7.>?19?:~q OcJ:Y.>f1']9~?
(' 9 (" (" ('") '10
'] OI'JI 901
'l
CD?OOOOo:l?lill')C911
.. (' 00 ('Q
O~GCD?Cilll j@O j@O II
( )
GOJ:Y.>?IIJ?IOI~9J?I i><;('
'I ""c
OOilltllf c
:x> IJ? '] c) ('") OIC'JUI 8)9J?Ii '1 0 'I
G~l ~C
0('
I ~')
(")
'I QQ
I O@jj O'j";l
C"9 C ( ) 0 0 OC" C' C' 0 OC"
GOJ?CIIll jts@ JP 11 flG'ji~?IJ~CI<D?I tq~ro?GI)? ?IJ~CI<D?II
' (' c ( ) 'I c: 'I (' " <: '10 (" 'I
~~ J\'1 I:IS'jO \)OIS \):lj II f,!liQfUI 0'39J?I ~q 00"\JOf !l1iCP\liOI
0<: (") (' c 0 0 (' (' ('
tr39J ?I I _G~I ~CI ~') ') I oenl "-ltl'JO tse9 ~or 9e~f::D~I1
C> ( (') (' C" 'l C" 'I OC' . ((')
a;;ro?. oo &c. o;;mo'lroooolmi:IJ?: I G~1 ~c1 ::T.l? 'I 1 O@j91
c ~ o o C' c r:::c L.
~())0)00 Orj rq "ttJf':lCDJC910CII:IDt II
o
i<:CG!ll ~Go
'f'C"'I
e :o:>GS)I OlJill 01 J
C?m:~JCDico:>:oaa
-L- 'i " &. l
c c o "l:;,
..J
c
~:~:n:x>~S):>~Iooc
1:.,:,
.:
l.:.
'I
0
c '" c
croc~:~ ~cooo:.c
.1\ 6 .l L
.: .:ocBc:
c:-::~a
C
Gr ::!1 L
(' (" (' 0 (' (' (' ('
GOO?Co;tOO().)o;l!J'):g)~qmG919 OO?~OJ:x>~ mooeuGSS)'JI Gc:mcor.
C' (' C'O C \ 0 '1 C' C (' .0
(I)U)::l;)IJ?IOOO')OOJ~:x>~ CDJ 9J?IO'{ Oll'}!JICDU:x>~~ eoo
<: oc
a>'P:amJq~:. uw~
( )
::~ 1 ;;~:eoGt~
c ( ) <: or,: . c
o -~m:nc:m~m a>'P'~ot~
c
'
oro'ls
0 (' ('@.('
:>~c
OC' (' C' ('0 0
c:~:nrorocS):n ~:nc:o;~?:l:l1?1o:> ' &
(' C" C'
rooo? .0>1S)uasl
6&.T Al l 1.:.:. \1 &.I. "~lr
o c c r: cor;:c r,:c~ r,:c
~~00 ~:aJ?9J?:~c GCDJ~'9f~l':Jc :-atleO<:x>t'Jq eu<O!l0'3'J
rr
cbcc
11 .)@cc:~~@b
:> .)
l:oto
0 0
o0~;~ C.Cb~l:o Jb
:.J .) .)
f C I:>OOOC.C'
.,} ..l
15 of
.)
;~cc:~l'JooGC'I5
.)0 .,) .,)
llCCf C.Cb ICDC.COOCOee
.)
tbb t(b).)
c.ee
tcoes
.)
toh::
.)0
t!;!C
::J
ca> tcoc.ccoooee
.)
tfftlc t(b)
.)
cee roh::
.)0
tee:;, t:C!co
0
of
.,}
coM'f. o.f (oo) GOOflbll "@C'Ibwl)oc.ee5 a.;oowce beec50C fGc:ooJIJ
.,) .) .) .,) .) .) .) .) .) 'I ~.) :3
w:c.fflwreoeeto
0 .) J 0
bee (u) c5o2:@~ .)
I(c~J .3;flee
0
:oo ~rwa:chco ;hl
.) 61
~~~oo@oo~hl
.) .) .) .):..:1 beccoto~oo'l!!
.) ~ 0 o~oecca>:obc.a> 'i:oOO::~.=:ob
~ ;)
~:&:cbco
i!._
O=

toccooooo
.) .)
, y
.) \
waee '-=eeoc -- . _.,

c.cc5cc ,. ':""]
uccccs5ooo 1 0
t05 :oc. J5
.JO .) .l 0 :J 0 .) .) ..1. .)
~~h!C'I
.) ::1 c.~~co .)wreowto .) 0 bee (u) C5o2:C2~ (c) ;flec:ooorw
_, _ --
t~:wco wcoeeoo
0 ,. , ~
IIOe>eCl(.'l) oo:oo,
:o wooc.ce5
.)
19 ,
.)0
woo:rocoo,_
.)
cc
.) 0 \.) .) .) .) 0 .)
e: *C2@bt~ t: obc.cce> 1J4bc@rwe ~:crflC.CbiO= t :obccce>W~b
\ .) .) . , .) .) ~ .) ,. , .) .) ~ .) , 0 .)
owrec<J>CbCO '8 :ocl=;;le>cel;:cbcoccoo oo:crt~:c.cc:occee ccccocewcc
.:> .J o .) :::::1 o \ o o .) .) .>O .) r
.)~cc,Qwreowto
!:3.> .) 0 rococ 0
'ftccoe.:&
.) .)
ccce.tc 0
uCdccooe>:cooooo:fiOO~fl
.) .) .) ...,
: .)oc.Qe.J.Clo~
~ ~.)
~bre@oto'!IJhJ:ebco
.) 0 \.) ~0 .
:c.ed:o:dsco
0
e't!oeobee

(u) coo2:@~ 1 ~
I(c) ~fled:oorw
.)0 .)
t~:cbcou II .)wrer.otJ:reu
,J :::J.
II Occfl Occ(l(X)O 0WAeG
.) .) .)
<lDVd
X3:CINI 'IV)I3N3!:>
tMcc
3DVcl
X30NI ~IV}f3N3:) XXXXf,,_

~XXXXI X3GNJ '1V'H3N3!)
'lxxxxii GENERAL INDEX
PAGE
0000
GENERAL INDEX lxxxxiii
PAGll
r.: " " f.'? r.: " "

tiC:~ <Jt~;;otl: :Jd9::JdtJOOGOI:~ II
0 ... r.: "
~:il0Xf>1"o:> ~Go:>JfO:Cjq_
C'(}? OC' ~ o C: " C' c H
oo:>e~:~r.'<>~coxp:~ ro'P::ei:':):o:> 3Xl:>ooc'P roc~o:>.,lo:>')~c:~
~ Q t;,: (' ~ ~ ~ L llr: C" C:
(" 0 J .A
ad<Of~q, o'lc~:tl:rn:o:tl? :~ 11 119:EJro~Jroll 11~ oxpa~
C:!A\ 0 (' (' (" 0 (' 0 (' ('
tJ";j eoroo~ ::Q~')I G:i>JCO'),qGo:>':>O:>OlJ_o:>~J?:~f "::00:~11 II
' 0
>~~9.,
6 .. A J
O.:>>i>sn:
" "
L
~
c ~o:>.,:G:o>l .,.. 0
~~
\A
oo.s:n " ~
'l..:. ~.,: ~.,~~"
.I
f~ roo1cf:~: ~ (Restitution of conjugal right) ~'l

c:-r;-~,s c <:. o oc:- c ( ) ~C"
~~ti"':D' ~01oxp::xp qc s~ef:~:f:'lc::o.,: ::> ~~OJ ... 'Tio
:Jdi:IOOC" (' (' ,s ::D:.OOlOO'P:ro

00~::::
ISJ
0 0
0'>
(
j ) r'.J: " " ' 0

OJ'?I~tl:ltJ"'OO~:c:;;o
Jl('A O~ \ ~ I'(. (' ~OI. C: \ ; 0 LJ L
'11.1~11 IIY:Df:i .;c.GI.l?C~I'If~O<jc~:l ~ ~~ O?~Jo:>~') <f:J::>
('C:::"-! (' (' (' ("0 (' ' ('
II IIGI.l?:::t:.,~ ;c. l.lO'>JCI '}f~>'!C~I::D~OI 0')1.1Jo:>p<;::>::>U U
V.G. Venugopal Naidu ,.. IAkshmi Ammal and another
(' o C:
('
l.l!l'jOI ~ :Jel O')I.)J~')
(' ~ _0 _<: _.! ('
'
c
~~~~f:o:>~U OOUIHX~I[jO>OlJCD
0 ("
C
0 0 ("
reJ . 00 C C (' C
II ll:i>IC:CIJI.l
~ 1\.
~1001.1 lilleCIJ')I :l)~(J)Q) eGro<X>Iill!Dal ::DI.IOXOo:>
~ &. -t I. \ - - "1 A t.. l
~ r:c C' oo C" c- c c
f"!!J 9:[j00'}~ 1.1') ~~LG:l:l~IOO!;IIilleCIJ')::l:>~ eOGtl::DCIJ?IOO~~
OC'f,~I::C" Q (' .'c: C (' 0 'T' C" C r;:c:- C' ('
0
Ol~r:Jl:JCI~'I~ C\:ltl:IO:~II CjC ICT.I C:OI OOCG::Q')C O?tJ~Go:>')C}C:t
CJ:C'
t.rotJq
t.. C' (' JdC' l C' C' r::.L C' O 0 C' C' J\.
G~CIOl<CCI:ftl:IX ::oo>Go:>l::j'}f "3:10:~11
0 ~ C' C'OC'
=>ICI
[,.
I t.C
J
C:U?C QlC
L ~~9
~ 1: 0 (' 1:\\ <:_s C::" .., c::c- <:. "

ro-p:~:ap:.w ()')')0~-93~UJ?I~ fO'>fO'>ff~::o!J 93C:JCilli:I!JciCII93'1CI
C" o T
93all~
<: c- o c <:
Gltl ~:T.IG'J:-93~t0>6pl~ ~4>1JICICIG;;~J:'J~
c r.:
~:1::3rot::lc l
c-c::c:-
.. oooS
or,: <" 1:: <" <' " !:!

O>'f'l~tl:o:>G:~JJ?IO'> ~:GCj?CIGUI'JfG"'J?roOO?It:f'lll
C <" <:
O~l[jO>~JO'>II II
o c c c- c .c:::s~ o , c c~~ o
0Xf?M>1C'f~C c;;p~ro;~t:Pil,~
..o:n ~JOOI1fCT.If~~~ ~
('
Q!J:>?C ~~"'''""l''"':ll Gro?c:Pf
('(" " "(' "~
~"~
"
~~::~ ~df:G::ln
<:. (' 0 ('
C' ('
e (' C" (" ~('
'IOOi,ll l.lOJ~o:>OOG;;o:'lf ~ll!l')lo:>~lp ~l=tO'l?Offl'{ e o:>J~f~?

c <'C::. C::" r,:::: " r.: (' " . r,:::: ('
(X)I,l;G;;~J">::: t:f'lEJG>Go:>')Gei~ ',)IC:Cj?CI'If :Jd<Ot:j?CI~II
0 00 0 <:.
IIW~el
0 C C: ('o (" 0 (" 0 C 0 (' C 0
":Y.)COO*t1~'.l~;q, ~~~d::~ ~~~~ oororom:~t ::QOO')
0 (' < cc: c: . 0 cc:c h 0 C'\r::: \. C' (' ('
":0 0?1:~
C' ~
Ill:~ ~q_ O'J"')O)')O)I!)OOEJC:Gtl')~~ei~~~f<"Of
r::::: (' 0 0 C' 0 (' (' ('
Go;>') Cj~ o:>::DI.IJ"~t:j~ q:ID'):G~'II~ ')o:>G~
' (" (' .. C' (:! (' C' 0 0 0
Ql(,l)e ::~ 11
u:DOOt> ~:oxp~t:j:m qc o:>O,:":I.l")QO) ::JdGf;q,
~ ...
C' C' ~ 0 C'~_.f' C' C'C'O
~0?SOO~ c;:ei'""': 'J~G[j?~')I.)Jcr-. <jC:G~e<:~?ro~:') ~p:
o r : o r ; :. c c c::::c C' 'oJ cc
CD ::Ql:l'):~po:>GI::j?CIG~'If S"",c;:t;.:j?CII.l(J)Q)II lladl.lffil.l OOOCOOOe<:;;o:
< \ ~ C r,:::: C 0 < ~~ A <J 0 ('
'IG:::r.> ~ IC:UI ~C qei~A IJ~OO'f10;(e..~IOOI.l1 OXf.li~J~m, 'J~e;
C' C' \ C' O.C' (' (" C
~:nut 4l0~:.ue 'P Of .. :~ l.lO{O' 11
0 "L.. Ul.., ? ;~(" IJOCIOC
1: "
IO>C" Ul
..,
J ....
e:GO'>J">r:r; ~9'2
.., (' " 1: OC" 0 .., (" " 1: S" " (" ('
O'l?I?II'JII I~O?GUI'Jf931.li-c.o?WO??IOII'la : ae:~~df~ ~U:'Jf
(' -c (' 0('
~ ~~~-ro'P:uroJc:~~~
('
te=e003 !) .... rl!' po~e
rf.lc Cl.c ~0
cbmcllo2wm.
~
~:fiW:@C(I)C.CIJ_gCIJ~CCO?r:c.o:)CIJc.("(l)ll
:J .) .) 0.) .)0 ~
tboc.eell:Oll
' ~ .)
rwcbm
:J '
:oloa;(\)
.,)
l'l
;)
~~~~ccco~rebwc-:oCoc.ee~:oo
. .) .,) 0 .);::J~ ,) . .0W~!:lrwbwc
tw(])bw
coc .... . : .... .... .,::,j., .) 0w~M&

:oCwrG\con .)0
c.ccllco~te
.)
~lsl!o:ecc
.)
c~mc.co~c.~cc~~:>b:~
.)O .) :1 .) w
;, 0 0 !loc.ccewcccooo~~ec
.) J .)
-'oo(])c.oce
., ., ~ea;o~:c.cc:ete:aOc.o~
,) o ., ., .) OJ., o~ CCc nch
;> .,
ceo2wec
,) .)
c.co!:lf'ln<X>
.,
.
f 10 ~roC.f'Ul
"' .) ""'iOO 0' .
.,)
0
C.(I)0GeOCOcb.Ja;e
.)
IIDVd
tJcc
:c.cw:rc.roaw .
(;,loN lq2noa)
fcc
6cc
o0c
Jxxxxvi GENERAL INDEX
I!ACll
Ko Po Maung and one v. Ma Mein Gale, I. L. R. (1923),

Vol. I '(Rang'o on Series) $62; Ko Yan and ano~her v. Ma Mai
Wi,. I.L.R. (1932) Vol..X (Rangoon Series) 529; Maung Daw
Na and another v. Maung Wa Maung and others, R.L:R. (1941)
7o6; Aung Hla v. Ton Gyi, Ma Hnin U, Lower Burma
Rulings (1915-I6) Vol. VIII, 264; Ram Sarup Rai and others,
v .. Charitter Rai, A.I.L.

(1927)
.
All., p. 338 u:.:xY5.88u
l.
V.R.A. Veerappa Chettyar v. U Po Nge, B .L.R. 1949 (H.C:)

p. 553; Radha, Kishun and others v. Chyam Das and others,
A.i.R. (1939) Pat:, p. 671 'l~elf:::u~il .
0 . ~
e::nooc
~. 0
.!;C e:roG~ 01 U
J .. .
ez
'l~O
L
/ ' o0c
~66
!!AXXXXf X3:GNI '1V)13:N3::>

X::IGNT 'IV)I::IN::I!:>
-.....,I ."
lxxxxix rJr' ---.
GENERAL INDEX
..-
PAGJil.
~ <: <: .. <: <: <: c 0<: <: ('
r:JeGOO?C~ OO'('Il>')CG'J: tr.lO?eOGOttO~ \l-~ 11 coo'P:~11 :5 GX/001114>?
tr.lOOPJIOQ.S
cc (' Q:;QII
' 0 - OOQJ !a:~I~OOOCOO:n
('" (' ('
:
' 0<:
G;lGIIII QQ:) c : -
f[COO
('
-..,.Ui I T 6 lJL l" lf ~ 4 C 4 Jl A l rL
8 C'OC' C' Of:C' OC' o C' OC' C' C'O o Q C
4>']Cl{C~~G;l?(11)?~1:JC:-~1)C~!O? G0?~;qCl'jfOO?Of~ U~ll ll<d?'J9f
(' ( '~") '1"0 0 <: (' r;::c- (' h
4>=f GOll GOI UOOXI m<.l:>OOf'::Ot::IC lT.lO;>OlOX(>l~.r,c 001:1?:
llC'Q O OC' L('ll ! C'o, _(: C'IL C'JO ('
.r-4>2:())()) <><~coo;:o:<o~~:ooc mooro.s::oe~ G::Ooo~:<l>?m cc:oom oocC:
J L ll -c c o o oT c. -~ tJ
~ (' <: <: 0 c-c:11. .... (' C'
l
~ C'
elG::O? 4>?00Ul~4>G4>?CO'{ OOOOe?CJt GO:OICjf Gcqj?OXXl?!elX/211
o cr;:c- c- c C'C"' co c
osuOO~OlOO'P:~ro =e;~CJL'Jf mt~~?OOC~CI~XIr:!ll ~Gp:-JJ
OC' <: C' '1"0 C C' 0 \ C' C C
oc:ooc Ueii00G~OO.r,4>~.>1?10? oom ~
t o cc:rDG:ll
-, o J u L
OlGOGU:Q.SOOOOO?
o -,r o o:>:;>C --r
r:: (' (' \ 0\ (' 0 ' 0 (" (' ('
~oo<Ooo?~c OOG~\'[oo~~~~X~C:II~~~co-:>:o2~c: <O::o::ou:o::
oooo::n
C'&,(' C'
cu;c
(' C'
oooX~rDGX~? ~m
0 OC' \ C'
ooc:cco?:G4>:;>X~::nll oc~ooo:><>

oom:ro
C.:. t.
0 \
4>00G:D?
0
J
C'
Jl L
OOI.>~?ro::n:
('(' ('
l
oroo CIOlQGC\)X/::D II
~
0
U
....
ll
0 C'
COOO:;> I :;><>C
r c. o 111 c.:. 1 c " 11
O')'fl~~~CJ?

1.
C'
G::DOOI./14>? OOOOC:XJLI:Jc:
. s:.r;:r.::c OOjt~
o c
OOmooroGOO?c~oxp
c c c
o o
OCIIOOo:>:;>OOQ?IC\):'l) o 004>11>?
& C" c
COOOOCC cc &, 'c:~ ~ GX/0')11!<1>?'=11?!0?o C'
- <J
cc 0 C'T lot\ c 1. I~

L
0
l
00 0(' \
oooo~:oromcoroX~:n u oc~Jooo:>:;,oom:rom ~~.~<>:.s'=!:;>G:n?
-r Ji.! 1
oom:11
u
e3 ;~,>
L
UL
f!XJ)O? :ldo:>:;>OCGC\):'l):DII
L
e("
C. cJ
C:
U.
lT.lO;>:;>;J~
e("
L
OCI.IOOo:>~::o:ro.r,c
O("
T
cl1
00:;> G:x>'>
JL
4 It C.:. ll Jl~ - cJ n. T LJ
(" r:::::: r:::::L'? (' OC' (" (" c: C'
OO~::Oc:JJ ?:m GelG oo:elr:J:~c ~IO?OO<.l[OlOOI.It~C 'f~:roccoo:
(' (' \ r.:;:: C' 0 (' 0 c: 0 C'
')fGcqj?mro?:~el::DCII 9_Gf>?O? osuOO:.J?,_OlO:>;p:~ro q::::oo?:~.OOI!}
c ' c: cr:r;::c o c c c oc: c
1.1tX1oo~ G::Oro~:4>? ooooe;Dt~:~c:~ oo:><9JO?Go:9i' :;,~coxp:r.~":g
C' C'~C'\ c 0 ('
Gcqj?O?OO?:Gro'f' GOO?CI:JC~GC\)X/211 ~~C OO~OlDXpi:;>O>
C" 0 C' 'l C' OC' 0 C: C 0 C'
O'Xf>l'aiOlJ[Oq{ OO<fc:;>OCG:D?OOOll GOO?O?~:~t~ Oo:l<9JO?"i0?GOO
C'
::n::nu X~G
OC'
?C ocuooo:>:;>ooro:oomoo::o:ooo:>:;,oc:;,c 0 C'C'&.C ('
Q.SGOOI?moo?:
C..:. L iJ IL T l n. U. 4 L -, T JJ
O\ c ~ c: c c cr;:r,::c ~
'f' '}'\J~Gro::ne; ll ll~:ljOO~JO? II IIG:l:>OOI./14>? OOOOr:!CJtt:JCI;~
t
C'
OOOXIO?"' :;,<>croro:v<>:&c
OC'
roro:roroGro?ooooc 4>Qcoc0lc
C' C' C 0 C" 0 C'OC" C [1coo C'
'i! -1.- i.1 J
.:1 T Jl et. c. I L 4
QG:x> C('
IL
0 OC' C' C' C"~ C c
Q<>COOCY:>I<.Iqlo:>C G:x>OO<oll~? 0000::>:> G>IO? GOO!?O?OO':>f
j! T 1 T . t: 4 L.:. L U .!..
\hC' (' C' (' (' 0 \ 0 ~<:
:;>I:JCIV?roe;: C!Xplroo:>GOO?o:>C os~lT.lO;>OlC!XpiOOO? OOG::O?OOYo::t
(' J r::::: (' ..1)0(" . f c: il {" (" l b ... .g;
:DCICO?IG::D?G!ffi?C :;><>cq:X~::nooro:roOOGOO?OOC ()CI.IlT.lO;><)OOm:rom
-- -1 IJ L.;.J ] L' C. -r .A 4 cJ IL T l
C' (' or,~.~ C' C' 0 (' (' c 0 (' ('
~:;>OOCCO?I:x>~[jlt:JOO:Dr:!OOO')G:>q<l>?l')f O')?OfU~ II rorororo
(' C'QC' c:
GOC?c"m~c:x>:nll
0 0 c
co::nromroroGOO?CQO? c ::n::n oom:uocm
c (" "" (" (' 0
~oo
AI
o o
L C.:.
c
1. t.
c c cr.:::c o
41
_9 o
C.:. -r
L
o
L
:'l)')G:;>I fiOO:x>OOO?OOO?GOO?cQO?!QCIO?oo?I OOirom OSUOOo:>Olo:>m:rom
ll l L 431 U L I. IL T L
O?XI? :;>~~~~~~XI~Cj8!1 ro'fl:~CJ5Gro~~GX~~<;~I Gcqj?c6:m:'Jt

XI::D<: II <>IOOG.S.r,C
C'
C ] TJ o
C' C o
U.
C'
lT.lO;>OlOCOO?IQ~I .l;C
l!JJJo
0
OOI,>rr,i ooro.soo::noo= OOCIC
Jl. l
C
l>
C' 0
-jJ
OC'
L
C'C' C C'9C' J:'C' C' r;:c C' C C'
CO?I'jf~ '=lXII? OlJI?:ldf~lijO')'JI.ICXI? lj4>GU:De?ll OO~:;>OC~"fit~
oc:
~c:~91J~~ ~~X~~:;>J 11
~\ o o " .c
lltr.l~o:>oo~ymro:u?:,qmo o
c: o c c(c) c~: (ooc)
~ ~ o C" C C'G C C
u:liiiiO?aJI~?: oe?() ~I 'Jf'~fC09C~:J _II>? \'13011
~I? tr.li.IJ?:J
. .,
~(c)
G~IOO ~
c:o c: o<: . (")
~q OOO?~Jf' l oe9J ~I GOOI~CI 00? 'J I O??C\)O?g??l l
4>? JO? ~~'l~~t:X~211

!l " " c.... (' ... .. ('
00?04::7)~,~01 ~ ;~ ~~OJf '(tl
~ c c: o c: c c c ~
r:J2GOO?Cill OO'('I~')CG'JI mmeuGOttGU u--osl.l tr.ltl(.:l~~C 006p:~el:
<:
o c:
:;o:e:ro: 00 C!XI:D oom: oc c.IOC-tr.lOOitr.l!X>:lOC:lC
~ c c t: c e G~ : :;oc
C'
I.IGo:
C. 1 ~ T ll IL 6
GENERAL INDEX
PAG&
GENERAL INDEX ci
PAG"G
0cG
B!>Vd
X::IGNI '1V~3N3~
6c0 .... u 10 : <!cccc: d o~
l.. ..)O O.)
n 10 ::>c.t'l&::>e: d
~\, ~ .:> e
X3<INI '1V113N3~
} civ GENERAL INDEX
PAGB
~fG "'
COCOAo:><..G.l~C/J
., oe e
0
GCOCOW IW IW$ IC/J$ C.C.OCl>A
.):J e o
.A;) xaaNI 'lY'tlaN:aD

ob0
X::IONI '1V'ti::IN3Q tAJ..;!-

l
o06 l !'t
: .)O.)
scc:>lcooo
'
o>.r
r r ro c;.ccccc;.ccco
11 ,
0 .) I., 0
S.!)Vd
X::IQNI '1V'ij3N3~
r.;::.. .....';
<0 rc
OOC
u2ccccol1b i:>eo~wl:o
.> 0 ~ .JO~ 0
oo:mco
J ,.
ccwc~~:o::::J>oco
..-,o , ~~~
"' ~ec
,roo1r.JeCCl>OIO~<=E o:::o:::e:coc.oecoec
..., _,_ ,
:> 0 ~ :> 0 0 ~ ,)\.,; ::>
65o rbec =b c~o2wec:b~:ochl~to:ce~o
.) .) ~ \ ::>
fb:c.cowcoo~
':) ,)
l:.olXlobobw
0 0 .) .,)
wreec::::>ct:;:l~c.cccc~e:t~Cl>~ o&,:c.h:li:clXJ:ob uedo:::Cl>hl~b:c.Cl>:2Cl>:o&;
\ ~ ,)::J ::> ~ 0 ;) ,)~,)
.., ,,. ..., . .. ]'
.) ..;, :::::::1
o:::co cccoo:::cce:loCl> :c.
1,
csc.oe:roc.oecoeccoc.oc
,.,
..)
l, 5o .) ;:,
o'lle:ccc.oecr,ec~
.>
.J
~l " n
OO.J
~ r n n
COOCOWCW~COIOee.G ~:~OCOOCl> O'li:CII'lWIClWCl>
.) ,) ,) L. 0 .
" 'W CO
eGICll'leG
\l,.)
11 t'ICO
,)
,
.)
0
,)

,) ,)
0
t, 0 .)
c~o 2wee 1
,)
v- " " rr n
.)
o ~ ,
uo:'l:o::Jelcoccwcew wc.o
:o~: oc
,. "
~co:o:::CIIo
\ ,)
_,_
0 ,) .) .) ,) ,) 0
c.occ:oro~
0 .)
'wso:::Cl>n
...,., 0 n ::>'lle:mc.oecoec~vo
r _l _ , [:! ..-, ~" ~~
0 .,:)
o1i'-,:o1ees no:::cce
\J
C\eG ccc~ ~es
'w:o~ ~o1o~
r
.)o...,J,) ,)
o
ccc~e :loCl>
:c ]esc.oe:ooc.oecoeccnc.oc
,. J " ' r
()
o'lle:O!c.oecow _1_ ,
o .)
r>
~oo Cf}fle>CO<'~II
:>I...
n' . ,, \. L .>
n
u .)co,ec.o
..)
g
:oeu

1
o
...,
.)

no:::cce('.o:>o
\...)
'
0
o
11
~
1

11
we<:r.ec mooecnw 0 .)
ohlccmHcoe~
.>~ .> _,
n@ccei1b wbwco1o~emx:.ooo lbwccc.oo o~:CC~o
.> \O o e o.>t,; ~.> .> .> :.>
Cl>hl:oreeccecce:cbcoel:oecfl5o
~~.) ~
bee C~ flChC~02ooec :b~:o~: ochl~to
0 ~ .) .) .) '\
l..'JDVd
X3:GNI '1VU3N3:!>.
Gotl
Goc
S!:>Vd
XI::> X30NI '1V113N3~

a ovd
X3GNI '1V1i3N3!:>
.Cctl
:O'll OVd
X3aNI "''V))3N3!:>
66c OO~C.flS'
1
.>o
19'
:~,
<l>OC.CO$
;,
@ 0'!1
.:> .:>
r :CC$
"

gfl
30Vd
X::IGNI '1V)IBN3!>
30Vd
XHGNI '1~3N3~
Ge)c
ol..c
el6c.
, I_ ~ , ..., ~ " i!. __ , ~
IIGe:oenoa.>coO@:C.cot=~ ::ocoeccccc ::;e w:<:>~.ut=~ "'
,}
.)oce.>oow o
~!lli):
~, .1_
l, 0.) 0
_If
cc:roco.>;:>l:!WGOC.
.
]~coli
,. .;> 0 .:1
-:-J ,
.>
1r L o
nccccol::.>oco:ooo::<J> ,oco
o
;> e .> .) o .> .>o .> o "o,l
x::IGN-I '1V(!3"N3~
fp
'80Vd
' .AX:) X:!IONI '1\!1I:!IN3D

BOVd
X'3:GNI '1~3N3:!)
:z.cc C
r
~ .)
'
:>!:C.OfiC.COflroiO
0& t, ~
or tn
::>!: C ,;)0!: ~\l'IOC.flts....,IG~
If <> 1 11' : lb l b n tl 1 ~
lle>fl:>e::>lt:c.ooc.oc.lcoe
o .J .lo .) .
,so :c.ooo:::>ce 1
.>o o o o
w we c.cce~biS''-'PC\J ..,:.:.J:> . ...,
dooec .?~~be.~ :_pbbec (c) Cc ~'~.fb. ceo2 :be~J=9 e:rb:Lo
.d:,okfij1fi
..)Q ._,Q'J
l:;bbec
>
0b. R~b :bJoPwR:cboo o6Jcc~fl :OQ
:> :.1 0
0~ \A)CC
,) ::J.) 0 ..,
11' ,. ':":!
lflCCCCfl 'b
::>!: WGe ICCCDCOfl 1 .., "CC~e:::>
:J
L CDRteGWCro 1 ,
COCOflcc ,. "-
I .>\l'fleG
o.> :> e \.> o.> :> e e.> o o
16ec (c) be ~'~gbceo2 L<>~ec 1oees:pb uf2ro5cce:c.oo~b &oJRLO
.)
~cc"!.Cio~~4$
~..) .)Q
1CCcc
.)
(f) ~be:c..
oowc.!Eueu
.)
uccce:oco:ol;:c.Qe
.) ~ .) ::J,
~:4t2@6
'::) > .;>
. to
0
c C.CDeaXO:cboo
.) .>
I:bJob@::>O~c.fl'J
.> & o .lO .>:_j
1~ cCtJc wkd.c:C!
.>0 o &
o~ .):>c.fk!)I~ICDII
.> o e
~~~d.ofl~R~::>~ o
:c.oo\A)c.!Eue
..,
wcb$::>0
.> .>
:~oS.)c.cce
, b
<J
lb . 0 , ,. l l.l ~ ,
\l' :flccWm CDCOflCC l: ::>o-CC$~"-"Cl:C.OO \:IO:::>ce CJ.) CJ.)C CDCOflCC 1~\l'flec
l l ...
;, > o .) .> o ., :a 0 ..>o o e e .> o o
ofAfAc.whlooo
.>.::.1 ~.>
CoOOIO ~fl"!.CI~e~cc!;b
o.:>t, ... o:..3 .... .> o
hoo4o:be
o .>
or:::l:r:::J b.ro (c) de
.>~f;.j.
<?cbcoo2c.oeG:obwwc.co~oo:2aX.U~hles~cc(Jjhl&be<?:oiJoo;:,rebwc
S ..> .> .> e .... ~ .J .l~ .>::b e e
CDC0<7CC
:J
1 1
0
I.)"l\l'fleB
0
,_, L '?
II .)CCCCo:iW$

1WCCCC;Jco
0 .>
"""1
.)
" 10$ :::>c.w
...L .)
J~@.) " CCI>.~
.)
J~ll
.)
CC be
:::>Qoo::,rebwc
.>::.b e e >
coto<?iX: 1~aec 46?~:c.oowc!Euerocbe>oo
o .> o > ..,o .:> .> .l
~ec (c) Cc.
1 .,, .., ,. 1 l 11 ''b 'I ~ <> 1 r
RflOCe>ocoo
-> o
1ccccoo:oo
:J 0 .:>
r:~oocccecc'-' @fliOs-fl oe t : ::>occc~:t::>~es-
.> 0 .) L. .>O .J .:> ..> L ..,0
ofcoccoroe CoC$o2wec :beol:r:::le:Rb:t b ch :;)(ehi~J'II II CCCC
.> r r 0 1 ~~ 1 .J J~ ..> ol.. v .> 0 :Jo ..> 1
:c.~_?OO c.<?S2ccsocoaccs>E~Lo:fil3Uo:~e~oo 3'CDfl~c.~ tbes 0b R~Go
, n _, ) COC.OR, ,ccooewcc , ,.<.-cccR::>\\'
. . ., rt1.9Wc
eeoc'"I :oo::>ICI.)fl:o:~oo
.>
toe.
.>
e>:,o
.., .> .>o ::> o .:> .J e 6
tCCcc
.>
(f) &be:CCX)CI.)C.IbJeu
.> uwreoo~:kn
.:> ;,
n.)@ccroee:c.ooo:ok \ .>o
w~bc~
o e
JGt;bootoohl:o4~
'S'o .> l,.. .> .>o
::,oo<!o:beo
.> .>
:r:::l
e.::J Ibee (c) Cc ~.>GClGeOC
:beofLil:r:::l
.>~6.:3 .> l..
e:Rb:t bcb*hl~ ..>O ...J0J
1 I ~cc (f) &be:c.oowc.lb:>e
v .>
cccec.oC.oa .)
&oeewcc~iX:CCI'l
.)o .> o .>
o~bwc
.> e o
tcboto"!.Cibc.~
.> ~e
JGi;bbCJJG
~o e e.> ..>
4bcoto::>~::, .:>
!Oe>Q~
..J.., ~
1oe>ec (c) &b~:c.oo3Uc!Eu~ 1dcc&c&:coosoc.lb:>e>u 11 bbc fl~h
-::>Q:>~:c.oococ.rro5
.>~.>o .>
c.o&be::>Qoo~rebc.oG
.>~.> o e.)
oo"l:oR~ o
ra-flee
.:>o
(c). Cc
Rchc5oC!I:o uo~"!Oa::>IJo:ok lobwG 11Ghl:>oolocRIO 1bec (c) de
.l o .>o:3 .):::lo .>o o o e S'!j.l o .l L
RGhC$odl:o IW1.!c:>kflo~bc.oc-GeoC!:b5oh.l: r:::l e: Rb:t~ cb:>khll!il
.) o .:>o .) o e .>:::lG.j .> l. .>o ~Ol
l<l Cf>
-ol.oc 009eGC.CDe>roC.W~ 0"\\'
0 .) 0.) .)
:>cc:ec:;,..).,IG5
.)
uS2cc:ft2S2~g, 6 d s:w (S6x) uTV lOJ.D1f.EI

v!Cqp0]1[ fo 3l01S ".t\ Oo.l.t.f'oJo.W !vSz d; {';)"S) {zS6I) -~TV
ztNu.zs y 'A AD1f.!EI fo n01S ~~~~'~fbso~:Jes-rco$ besse>n2:Jco
'OQoc"!.Cia:oiJ&l:Rcc
.) ~ J ~ .) :::1 ..) 0 6esceo2wec .)
:~ccbletoble
.) 0 ~ 0 :3
uCCccGQ@~bce&1
..) ..> :l.j
C.O@cc4w4.[.
.> .> ").
cMRe.doiecrroe
..>o ~ .>
t;cbwc.~ecocwe
o .> o .>
ccc5e: ~c.3fiib:>
\ .:> .:Jo
0.,..,
WC.Iroewcccc:coo:s-c.oo lC!~9()f,
oco w o 'J
<7GOG5occ.oesoo 11':"1 ;
c.oa::Ro:newte ~
.J
.)
woo
.)
" :1ectroenccflcccc<? .) .)
n , ':"1 ,. .., ,w eccceeco:Rcc
.) o,)0.) 0 \
.)
oll
.>o
g .)
I.
0
2
..)
~wc~o ww G>ec: e
.) \
.)
b
CCOCCC ..)OoCC@C.~~
.) Ol .)of:beoc.ooe>l'oCCco4hll'lec:h:;"&cchln
.) .) .)~.)O 0 .) ~
ttwrecot:l
.) .) :1
:kMoo11 IICCcc:4t2@b 0to"&,
0.) .) 0
oc::
.)
d
.)
peqeJap!..H (556r) 'UTV
pt>qo.tap!CH fo. amg a DJJV1[ trWIJSU!G !vii d per'\1 (L.z6x)
.3!>Vd
f!AX;) X::IGNI '1W3:N3:!>

GENERAL INDEX cxix
PAG E
ro 6<'Cl 8ICUC'' <' ( <' <: o C' ) 6 ~ ro <" <

~~c;OO:l!;Jl
c... ~It 1 b
mooc: c;c :~

mo:>C>?l
~ - 1 c.
CI~ CO
C' 'lO (" f:O ' e . C' (' 9
moo:;!:)lt:~mOO?OO:m;~l?:moeo.t;;:>;roc;~?CZ.C
ii Lt.:....J tJ a o:.i::j[. J J
e:roJ ....
e16c
~OYcl
X3:GNI '1V'd3:N3:!:>
Jcc
fccc
6Gc :oblocc
,:::b
li:coccc.ooo~fbk
s-~
,.
.,) :) .>0
01 g
ru!IC.OOOC.CCC.CCt;QC.~~
:,-o., .:J
llOYd
X30NI '1V'd3:N3:!>
seJoc
rcc
ore
!IOVJ
X::IGNI '1Vil3N3"9
I ''""I 11111'""1~1 '""11 1
uo:x.cce::uc:::cc:cooxoroo;~
.) .) 0 .)
wo:::cc.:>occ
cocn~:o:::coo:::
,)\ .) 1 ...J 0 4 0
uooc:cce
.) .)
'I(.)
.) :.1 cc~:X:e~:~:~~
.)46d:o).IJ ~ .)::1.) .)
1:obcccewl'!crcoeioe
.) .) 0 l,
iGwcccooo~tl'!
:5.) .) .)
ccl;~obJcda@
\ 0 .)::J.) 0
b~:dMt,,oec
.) .) (...:
cccezc....JJ
1
161eoeo
.....,!j,J..: .)
Cof ~~ob:~ ~
.)COCC~U IICIJrecotl:~n
~ .) :J.. li~OC.COC>t\:>lc],CO
.) :)-0
O':obJ~ro:Jirc:ul'!
.) .):J.)
:ohl
.)~
~&:UI'w-:d,o!,ruec
.) .) (,l
aBso:oi:>-~Uroeioe:"
~- .) ~ ....
Cof flcb.)
rt::lcocc.;,cb>
(tj~
0Gb oo?tc.B~Q
.)0
~oc.cne@l::l
.)~ .) .;; :..:1.>
c.I'!4
0
Q:~
0
( """1ee) :e:3
~:owo o'
.)\,
u.)2cc:4t'8@6
.) ' .)
<.o
0
tlb-ob
co~ec~el!oeccooocb 1ofe b~~c 1olre:l',:<bcoook~.bl 1oo~c.~~~Q
.) .> .> .:>Q .>:l .>o .> :.:J
~oc.ooe@hl
.) .) :.l.>o~:a0 \.
v
.)0.) ~.)
c .)
10 ~l(,@l-::loeo:::u

n2cccel!o
.)y
m2cc:::or:rcoec
.) .)
oCo:l,l'!e& OeCCCiflre:,.Qcoroooeroec&@CCA"Q Cccek@cc~lo: lko

.) .)0 .) .) :iOJ.> .) hj 0 .) .)
bee cof ~sb:l-::lc.o-.--c~cb:X.~eoo uoe:::Oiofl:c.r~~nhl, cce:c.00Cl 1 ~e

.) ~.) .) :::3 0 .)~\,. ~JV ~""'
:Xot>
.> o
(e) .>o~ (w) (f) c .>o cbe.s~~ec
~..lo
oec:cc:flre:~5lccro
.> 0 .> ..>oJ.J
1'Sohi~ 0Q
~ .>~ .>:.:1
ccceoK.o;ceto:beobo:cbco@cc~esccce~co:~rwbec cof ~oh:oh:ec
.J .> o .> e .; .> .> .>o
,~cc;c:l;bn
:) e1, o u@~eb:co:2G o~ccc:fiPe:AI::l
9
.)
koMoo:lPwecoc:o;P.ec
, o .) .) .) .)0 .) .) .,oJ
.)~roeroeec ,)ct!cc.)~Rcobo
~.) .)o~hcob .) c roQ~ 81 1e c!Qtlc:J
ot:~cc
.) :'j
cQw()~
.;}~ .)
b .)ctlcce~ro
\.)
:@coc:;,~Peecccc~~ro:]Pco~Ghlto
.) .>1:> .) .).__Q
u::;~cc
:S""
!;1o ..J:Xo~cec~C!orore~
oL .> .> t..: u
:c.f,~n.hlccceorco~ce
!'...:l lo:be.>:::~lcbco
o e
., 1 r.
c:.o'>'~oc
,
} n r v .~..r
1
ococc:seecoeoc
~ o~~cc~wcc..-ftl'l
'1 ~
~co :, cocc.ox:o
1 ~ ~1~
:J .J
.) .) .) .) .) .) .)0 .) )) .)
@cc cof I'!Sb
.) .) l~c.ox..,cbu
e.::!> II wPecot::l:ku
:J. HOofl :lo:Jrc:ueo oro
.) .) . .) i) .)
O~C.CCil'lre: fiCJCO~Co&ro&w-: o{;J;ot>efi!eo beo cor ~cb:h.lcocc.;)cl$,

.> .> .>OJ.> .>w .lw .> ~.)
eGG
u @cclkcc~bco~rewcc,ecc.ccec.c:o~:cc
r o
"'roc.w o!roroc.ee:c
.) .) .'1
v. 9 r > 0 .> ~ -.. 1 .> .>11...... .J .)

c.ccee!';ooec:.c:dboo
.) \0 .)
:ocl-::leecQe:c.ccl'!cca>
.) :=:1 \. ~ 0 0
1l:co&eec
~
1oeec:ob
'r' J
ofro:dhoo
.) ,)
:och.l~ecR~:ccc~
.)::::1\~ v
~ccr2co 0
cc~cocc.)
ol<:ocebct:~l:o
.) 0 0
u@cch.l).IJc&c
.) ::::1~ .)oowcec IGtJ@I'ltO~ .)
l ()~cok
l,;_ ~ .)
to:<bco4~ec
0 .)
,@fl1
.)
ok
\; 0
to:c.wo~:;,ec
9. ~
:obofbectc:rMb~e4e~e
.) .) .) 1:ob
~ .)
oHeec:cr~cc~a.:cc .)
C":cr..,:&coo..,cb:~ec
.) .>
obeecemu
.) \.,
uc:urecohl:kAooou
.) .>:1.> u@cc(u
,) 0
r
'>'bl~ca; ~11'10
' 1WI r'ceWOOCOS'f.t!C v 1 1r -:-~
OOCIJICI::COCI.:Ct!C CC :XC~S'~ .lL
.) 00 0 ) 0 .) 0 .) .) .) \. .) .)
ooccoh>:oflkwrot&:c
.> .> oo .J::Jo .> .>
I~oceoQ~wc.~
~.> .>:,j.>.>
~ o'w@cce~cQ&:c:ccAeaec
.> \O :.:1 .)
@cc:2co
.; o
cceWCCII
.>
oa:!ccowto4bcoto~e
.> .> o .> .J S' .> .>o ow:cbcot~a;
f::to:oo .>
I O:C:r~ob~:;,~~~eWI'!C:CCidl'lo:::e;wcc
L .> ,: ~
0~ .Je oba:<:hccu II .>wrecohl:k .>:1
II u : .>~o
oi:Jte~:d,co
,
coroe.cl2cc;ccnkwro:c.cc~
,) .> o .)
be.c dflc fld"l
.,
:h1c.occooi)cls
O~b
ol..G (~g>Cecco 1:~

" 1
CCl03!:0:00~CI)OOCO'l
,~ 1 J) 1
o:>'iC.I'l~!.l
J.f"l 1
OOCCX>50:::
':"1 r<I<r, ~
O!r'l'CC:>CU:5!C
.) .)0.) .)O .J.:J .) .) .) .> .) 0
I!S2cc~g
.l' ~-~ ~'] 1':"1 ""'::::1 @ccc.cl2@'of
!l'~co";~.,.;;ec
.) l .>o
c:.ccec-:o,occ
> .l
ucoo
..> e
c.oo:::cccccc~~
o .J .J e .) .,) 0 ,J
!I :::IV<!
~!~XXO X3.a.'(I 'JY'!!3N3~

QOC
.::IDVd
X3:GNI 'IV~3:N3:!)
.
AIXX::>,\
aovd
AXX::>
X30Nl 'TV)J3N3!>
H:>Vd
X::IONI '1~3N3!.>
':"] " 1 ., l~ " .... 11 bl
II ~CCCCCO CO~CC>Ol,IC.Oe:G 3'COflCC~OO CCC~~C:_j~~'~
v
~'~COCCro
11 r n 11~
cAa.>leA
1 1~ 11
u~oo:mco ecoe:coc
1 ':"""! J
I[ r....,
e~oo Jlcccc:c~:~oco cecccc
~ .;) ::> 0 .) 0 .,) .) .>
1 ~ ~, ...., ':1 1 " 1 v 1 ':"""! 1 ~"L
ooo
.;)
<>O c.ooocccc:coo:o~
0 .;) .)
coc~oc cooeoococ.occ.oee
0 :) .)Q.;)
ccccro:wco
.) 0
eJ!oe:c OC!=;J~'lX:, JIOe>:CCe>O~<J>!;JflCOCDCOC!=;Je> ccce>cob!OccJ.C.Odb:>e~
:J ~ 6- ~ .> ~..>

.;:1 J. 11
cro:rocoecoes cec.o1ee
..)O.J::J :, O.>
r n 11 ~ 1~cccc~11 r ~ corocoe:cwco
cft:o , ,
:J "
o Ai le ]
~
.)-:>]cO>:e~
.>O
V

.o :r.rr.c.oc I .l
~
1 1 v
11
c.oro:rocoecow
1.Jococow!T Lbcoro
1
.> .>' 0 .>
lV
s-cc:cw
,:, t...:
1 1 1 11
ccro:c:ocoecoes
0 0
~,
..>
.)0 .)
11
o
9.)

.,,_,.
,, ;) o
1r
~:>OCOOC ~116 C.OCCCCeiOCOWCC lii~S'ft Cf!CCCCOCO
l.. 0 :> .;) .>
...,
'':"":1
.>
~
Q1 v , v 1 ':"":1 . n 11 "JlJ , 1. 11 l;l1 1
o:::Js-e>w oeoococ.occoee =w1ee:.J ~ro:oocoecow cwocc:cc
~ ~ ..:>o.>~, 1
rr.: 0co:roe<X>f!e:cn
; v.:> .:J :>9--,
:ccu
uoeooroc.oc.c.oee
v v.)
1 .) ,
.)S'6"loe>:c<J>:c<J>
.) '$'.
"c.oreco
.> .) .) .) (),)
-:oblob(!):c.l;ocoCJ>hl~
.) ::b 0 .) .) ::.1
1be.s(f):obe.s
.) 0 1cof ,)o~(f) f od acb:
.)
h:lcocc~cb
G.j.)
S{)Vd
XHONI '1V1!3N:S:~
6
cchce .l. ,rorotero n ccc~cec g" ' ,'
, ~ ec corowcro~ ocro~oooeeo wrote n
.oc
.) .) 0 ~
1
0 .)
1!."
~ .)
r 1_1 n
.>
~ ll)e:roco ccc~oc.o: o cow o~t~o cocoteoc ~ .:>oo:rocoecoro
, 1_ ,..>
.)OOO
.)'
, ~
'N"; .)
II!!~~ A !!~ c.oc.oc.cn:;,e.s 1ecocoeco
..)Q .)O .;)

0
1 1
.) .)
.
0 .)
cc<ecoc.o
..)
, 1
0 .)
r..
.).
~
eoc.
.>
~-
!!I 0H~iC."I Ae:mc.o
. ,

c.cc~:c.o:>OJre'&e.s~oc:lo6c:c.~oro~ehl
.) .,=::~., e :J .)~
16e.s bdf (f)fod. Mh:h.lcocc~Cb
.> L,J.,
<WVd
X3aNI '1V~3N3!>
ooG
ore
BOVd
X;:ICINI '1Vi:I3N30
belo r :oc.ccooc.fl::>
.) .)
X3:GNI 1Y~3N3!)
foe
~ob
Co(;
ucG
CCC
liOVd
;" i AXXX::>
- {
X3QNI 'IV)I3N3!)
~co~cc:neet'IC.W
0 .>
1 "l 1
f'l>0 l50CCOW:s>cc-:o
OCCCOI'I
11
:J .l .)O ~ ~
16W (co) C!;l(; flGb :lJoorcoc.o04lcb

. ;J ~ . :J ~
srcc
lbetl (core::~:iil)
~ .>tl ;:}ll~b ach
.) :!:obrco~ll
~ .) ncurecot:l:kn
~ .: :I.
ucb:::>Cl
~::~
::)c.c;J~ec tbcurflCOOh.,~ec tbco~ o~:dKo-cPtl..ot:llt~w c.cc~
., :::::::1 .) .:a ., ~ .> O , , .) ,:J".>:J.>o
.)orculce
.) .):,wot>OH.) lO" :.l .)~ere~ :c.ec~beco~
.>
~:d,~lt~m
.) . .)0
tb:~cMa>@co.u:J
.) .) .> .)
~:~:c;J&:cbcoc.oo.,d,o&e
.;::~ ~- ~ .) .)O
Dc!b
;J
aoh
.)
:h>bl'cucoo.xlt
.) .)
l..oQc eclf~ (..&,le~) GCP8CC .)~ .)O

:>:>~GA~IJ
.>:J ~!>Go:>e@Q
.) .> :_j
n@cc:~@(,W (e) SICC

r
<:Ot'IC&A~
.,)
Y ~-- __ _,_
t.OOOlO>
.) --.) .)
n CDUC
I..)O~C l -:I
;:) .)
H
I!).) 0 .)::>C!>GitS 0!'
.)
.) .)
1
.) 0
.)
r O!)!'Gft!J
.)
0
19 1
OOGCX>~
.)
;)
@Q ne?ccoezc.~ooo c.~cccotoa :oc.r:;;tl)O~ba li:do11l~:lu :@oo

.> ~.) .> .> .> .) :::::J .>o S".> !j'"' .>
~(,~ 1~~~@cmdl;cc ft,,.~@l'l W:d~tcb:~:xJecc -;ed(!cc
~ v 00 0 .) 1.) 00 , .) 't' 0 ' .) 1 { .>
ceG roeccaa :::><occ~cc:c.o:>ce oco cbC aco:ooor(.ocoo~@cc
0 \.~ 00 .)0 .) 0 .) .) .) .) .)
,, IL ._~,.':":I 19 ~ fl1,.
cc~coc.rw~ zc.cu"G cc uccccoes-e::>oo 1oe co: :c.o:>col'l:o~ coco
.> ;, o- .J ~ ..J., .) .> o o
coreoree :oc.h.le~M
.> .> :::::1 o ~
CC fb(,~~:]rcol'l Jbcocccoo~~coree ~f:::>IJ:cCO
~ .) ~.) .> .) .> ~.) .>:::.1
:c~hl~
~!j
c.o&becocfOO~
.) w:d~@cc:(')oco:&
0 .)
IGcocccoo
~.,) .)
:)~:crt'lCOre
.) .)
~or,
\..) duxh.'le;;loo:d
.) :::::1 :S"" ~ccdkoc.coe
00 .)
co:ob
.)
eecc.cce:ceeGG
l; J
:cec
l!c()ecoc.lke d:occ:;;~~, ocococc u@ccb~$:oc.~e:re$oo 1eceooo
.> .>o ~"" t.. .> .> o .> .::::::1 .:> o " o
~t.l:"~ 1:o:cri'CC~...o<c d:oec&:!cc
1
:@co:c.cd:cbecoc.
.:> 1 .)
Ike r zhl:Ge>G!
o'J .> .., :.:1 o t .> .>o .>
!;cc cef:l@ooihl
0(.1 ~ ~.) .>:.l .)b>t<hcc~cc eo@cclb~a .) .) .) .)::>~ceQ .) ~ :c.cc:ob .,)
S:::be~c.G
~ .)
l:ocore6!::!6
0 .) 0 !:lc:s- 01 ~ .)~hlcbcc~
:f:lGehl :1 k:cfl'lcb:..J:I:oc.h.l~ec
0 ~ ,:, ~
laccoo:ae
.) 0
~becoc[ue j--
::>obcc .)corek!::l
.) 0 ~
:J:;;l~:dxocoo~
L::1 .) .)~cc
:ce~ll .) ucorecohl:beu
.) .>:J II :lOA
.) oo:Jrcocc
.) bee cbc! ftGO:kofcuc.oo~d,
.) : > . )
9(;;0 ( .)oc.a~~=C!)
.)
::>o~c.a~Cl:>Gooe@f:l
:10 .) ~ .,)
o~ .)@h.l:too:<!
.) :.l.) ~ .) 0
IIXccdcolu:~@b&,
.) .,) 0 .) .) 0
(c.co~
.)
~cbco) ~0cc C.<l> 1bC 1oec ICO~cfoceo2~ 1e cctlc 100~
.> \. .> .) .>O
c.I'I~IJ MC~oc.ae11
.) :3,) :.J .) n<:?ccborw~ce
.) bt
.,) .) .) (c) bdf acb:C:oorco=cb
.) ..) .)
r ~COAle
c.a: ~ "
oewc01~ eu<.ocezcc:cccc
" v~, 11: n __ ,.
" co OiCO:o:cel co ,cocccc
':":I
.).) .).) .) 00 .)Q..) 0 :
.)ruc.t:le1j,J.:J
~ !'~
bcctoe
0
b .)CG:::>~eeo
.) 0
zc.cce:Cbco~:ceOOGCI.JC\X/Jce
S' .) ,) .) 0
l:o&c
~,
b C<~>:oe~ o~e b
9 , , . y , r1
ooc.cocc:f:l::>cocoreG
01.> .) \ 0 .) : ooo e .) .) l..
n;:cocccoo
S'.) .) .) l'lr..cco
0
td,:x.ocore~ IOec&e: co :!:lee&, 'l:o@cc~e b ~,.Q o!::l::fl:eoM:IC
.> .> .> ' ..L OJ .> o ~..J ":1 ..>.:J o .> l..
l:ococ.cne>
0 .)
b & coe:cbcou

ucofecot:l:ku
.) .) :J.
u@ccecoaPe~acc:@ool:o
.) \..) .)0 .) 0
~bGeePco
.>
:@<OIOCO
.> l.
to:c.PAWCOC.co~6
o ..).) o 1tb<1>~efco
.> eGOO f .).)WGOC.COe
~~:ah.'ldocc cooc.cee:oel'l ,.>*b:>Gcee:o~GoPco oC .>co&>ec<~>ecc~O>Q
.> .>~.> .> .> o.> e .>~
or::Jccb~oe
.) ~3 0... eo@cccoc.f:le1i~bcc
.) j - - :.:1 9::..:1 bfd f)Ghcocc.:xbcoC.ocdi3ccolu'lC1
.) .) .) .) .) ~
oc.cc~~bdacbwc
..> o .>
bhloc.
.> :3.)
e:1c h.>to:c
t.. o o e
~ :c.IJcc
:::1
ofibb u@cce
.:> .J .) .> \.
~re~acc ~bGeercoeco:!::leco l:o:c.PI'lwcoc.coe ,~b<~>~~dcowc::c.oo~
.J .>o .> t>J o .J .J .> .> .J
::~:l'l~orocc
.J .)~.)
oaxoc.~e
.) .)
::>ltueoc.cee:oel'l
.) \.)
1~boc.ree:o~
.) .)
oPco ooc
.)
'b~WG
.)
o!::l:::>b I.)~bG~erco
.)~.)
00 b WCOC.C08 of:aliild:occ ohlcct;('oe
.) .) .>:.:I 0
.) .)......J.)
!I!)Vd
I !!AXXX;) X30NI '""JW3N3:~

.... ,oiJow
:J.
0
oi C.fiWfl
~
o~cc
tlooc
oelo
oo6
X3CINJ '1V~3MI~
o f~
80Vd
o06
boo
otlo
o60
BOYd
X30NJ '1Vt13N3~
c fC
or
tlfG
l!DVd
+t' i AIX::>
I ,
X3QNI '1V113N39
6Coc
o60
erG
X::i<INI '1V'a3:N3~
~Q:fl<O::x.ro~
,;'".j~ ~ ~
@a::c:.rt!&~:c:.axocl6~
:::::1 ~
.ba::dOOJPe~~cocc
~ ~ ~ .
ro:dxoll
0
ucore-..Qk
. . :I .)'::f
:kcod~ll
.) "
ll@a::
~ .> 'oJ~b-::,.Jj:~
2roe =>"'..l ~
..,
~
~&:Jirco~,h} cfcc A
!'..J. bee
. . ~Chcoo<Joo
0
I5:::J r
":,(:lcc:>;GIJA 4l,oe"&-, }.,_;:;:)CCGQ
.)o.>::J .) ~~v ~:1
(~snoq-lJ~IUl88

uommo:>) @a:Ae.O
.)O
c:.a:~:ce:AO
0
Wcb~oo
.) .)
~~
.) ~ ~
~ro ?cJ~:c:.r,: 5c:.]OOJ Lo~u u(s) ,;ore~g:~~~~ 11 t.n"

~cob@cc:AbJ.
'.) .> .>
oea:OOJCC
->
o~l~
.>
ll;:;:lCC,QcOfe:o&lrel2a:a~
~ 'S~ !:1.> .> B'"-> ~
. :b~
oi611JA
.) ~ : .) .) co~:b~. ll@a:,Q:-"oecro4bco~:b~
.) 3:1 ~.> 0 ,J .J b.Jg,eobl~~a:
0 \.)
,
IOOCOCO I:X. ::>C:.CC~O':
] , ~':") CC<:oec . C:.CCIOCOI!C
- " .W b )U CCCCIA ..., bI.)I0 ,CO
.> .) . .lO.> .J .J .l .) .) l, 0
u@a::c:.co:k5hl
.:J .>:.=1.>.>
~b~:b::> 0 ~h \.
~a::o~:Ab:u;
.> .> .JL.l
1~ (c) g;)
ACbcooC!O:J..,hl::hll
.:J o5~.)
II (C) .,wrecoQ:ku , .);pi
u@cc.:4C2@6Woto
.> :> .> o
SlCSl (.C)
;J;J
(~) oc axc:oooloh:cc \. .> O.lO
0'1
.>
~ (.0 .rb axs:ooobG:c:.~co
\ .> 0
roc:.co11 u~"&-> ~a:~:$16:1? (P!IBAu!) 2a:~~coec
@a;:Ab;loOO ii:~Q1:t; ll;:;:lCCb(o:;, W@cc"A l"l:l:cCOO"fcoeocec.o:i)
.> .> \,.:o ~!".Jo ~"' O.l o ~ .>o.> .lO
uC2ro<:a:::>10~
.> .) \,.) .)
w:~&::cbc.o
:f 0:::1 .)~cb .)0.) ohro4 .)oi6~~EOI:ce::>tpG .) ~ 0'
....
W:flb:o
0 ..) (;
ea:::>wa:
.)
w~~ro
;:, .
11 .)@a:Ghl@f!bo-fcoe(")(eco:
.) ;:j.) .>O.J .)0
o :hl:Qa:
OJ..,
~~b ,!l;il:o:b::> co~wro ~iflb:o eolkbec c:.cc::>coOO:flbt~o
.) '.) S' 0 .) .) .) .) "' 0 .) .) lo
l .>~(c) ;; 1:1 ACb00*6>COII
.> o.>
II (b) corecoQ:h,ll
.> .,:..
u@cc:~::2@{,W
:J .> .> o
ccf
deoroc~(b)c:.eccc
.> .J e
*e
.~ .>o 0t.loc ~"~obl:cbw~.l v
:,.; C10
.> t, .> ~.,
~hloG~"~~
11 ~~~~ o:i":::J
:"":c:.co::Xc~co"ct:oo
.).)00
:c:.~~~ro .>
u@ccro
.>o.>
~b:c:.co::Xc~co .).)
~~ 0
.) ~
b.JwPe:c:.co:c:.a::b::>
.)
!,Qc:.o
.>::1 lb:2rrooo
~.) .) ;.;
.) (uoqcwJoju) .. .
::x.occ
.>
~a:~b
.> o
wreoe&ro
.> .> o
ASo c~- (c) ~~:~ fiCbcooC!oo .1
..,Q:X,
o .>:.:Jo-
11 u(c!)coPecoQ:ku
.) .>:I u@a:dcdu
.) .)Q~.)..)
li::4(2@b 1XD 00
bbC c:.~corflro .)
db)c:.ec
\..)
t(ro)cnro
.) .)
ICC
0
0 ICOC:oflobl:c
.) :,j.) .)
0~
..)
OC 10 IIOOWII
(., "' .)
uofC
(.lzCOrA(.~
.)
1(b) .)
ceCI~ e
(ro)roec
.> .>
C 1fC 10 ~~a ofcol:l:OA:>bl:cu
L .) .l .> ::.:1.> .>
II
o;11Jfl
.)O.) ~
toeofece~
~.)
(uoudwns;ud)

&:!cc:c:.co:~k3hl
.) .) ~
1 bec 0 ACb
.>
~ec oi6J.Cla :ol:lc:.~cdu u @a:oec~4bwlh:cex4eo~ c:.~c:.fea:::>
L o .l ~ .>~ ~ .l o .) .l o .> .l .> .> o
1
reoco 0
w:df!core:kohl
0 .) .) ~ .
ibec (c) 1:1~ ACO .)
c::>nC!:o!> .)
.4bo;~
.) .)Q.)
to
0
( uoqdwns;ud) wrece~ 1bec 0 ACocoo2oo c:.a:~&ll II a;(;
. .) .) 0 .) 0 .) 0
wfro:c:.co:k5hl
.> .> ~
:oc:.h.l:;,~Xl
.> :::::3 .:to:l
w:r,
<b*cocc
.>o .>
1:o
o
(uo11dwns:ud)

c:.a:~,.Q,,rece~ 16a: 0 f!chcoo<!:ob ,o!k:ce:Afl<.Od,:~:c:.&
3':l~
,
CCCO O~S' r tb
:ce:AO 1oa>IA __ b
110 C:.a;~~
.>
, 1..IXllfiCOCO
.>
__
.>
11
o.>.>
, w,
CO: AIOO:C:.()(O
o o .> .> e .> .> "' .> .> o o .)0
c:.a:~:c:.,.,.J:J ~.j,J.,
~::> ~(c) .)
~:~ Achcoo2Co
;:) ~ 0
x~::>'Cn ll@a::2roe
.) :::::1 0 .) .) \ .)
*b:o:;,
...hlec beccoo(! oc~:;,;ol:l~!,A;:>rroec cc::>COCC <1-CC~o;hl,~:;, 1(.~
!':..J .> ~ .J:::1.>o .> .> .>o~X
:c:.~5co ~~a:b:coc.o jb~: J~s-oec .fc.J::>ccc::>:a::;,:::>eo
'ct::hl:;,:hleormob:coc.o
:_j e'J.> .JO
:ol:leocb:;,
.l~.>
ol6wcb::>
.> .)
c.oh->A"tt:
.> 0
,f!Wcb::>Att::XX:o
8.) 0 .>00
I OOOch:A~ ~CO :oO:C:.GCOII 11 (I) corecoQ:l:eu II .>@ccc:.4w~
.) .> 0 .JO .) .> :J .> 0
to CC 10
o ee
ICO (ro)roec
..>.>
ICC
o
b II(!>) 10 o. coC:onobl:c
ob:l:coc:.a5 .>.>:.l.>.>
\,.)o.>
II u@a::~((!@bto
.) .) .) 0
tJC ICC 0
ICC
0
1ro~ 1(G) .)
WI!CII'IObl:c
.) .)
bco~ .)'::>ot
0
~<!Ifill u@a:o\o:o:;,~hlec
( c) 1"'0 .)0 .) .)0 .)~
bee (' cjcc a cbc::>OC:oo
.) 0
:c:.ec:dA
lc:c:.oo.>:oc:.ro~
.)
to:c:.rA@a:o
0 .)
ww
~
1ec

.a>t~
~
~ 4bco00:4~ec""JJec
\.) .) .) ~~
:>~
.)
SOYd
r - i
l !! tlAJX3
\..._. J1--, X30NI 'IV"H3N38
coc
c~b
X!ICINI "JV~3 NJ!)

60c
''
n
c
(f
~
8 Jl~~ m.-g ~ s ~o~g~ 8 s;c-J~ a~ 8 Cfr18 2 s ..~~,8 ..~o~ ~ ..e ~ ..o ~o~rtl ~o"S ~g..,
-
(")
r~o"
...f) I. ". e
a.
8 ,e
fB,,.8 ~ g" ~ ~ .,.8 ., _j"o.8 (".., 8 .8,..;. 8"'1!~ d;"~ <C ~ 0 ..:: S LOJ,.8 ~.., ~ f'"~~~J~a:"'"8~ e ~
..s ~\,.) 01").-~ -8 aso ~ "'o~J)
& a "e C:Q.n ::cs., g .t-eo
.. ~ -fi>">~
- L,L;Cl)
a: e
rn"8ol ru - g:n,.So~"
-JV... I") .- -
Sn ~ .v ru~ r=-1~.~--e-..,-fi;
0~ H <>~ ..8o[3] 0".8o6il3J~~..S ..o ~ 0~Jev
e,.. 8o o>l e '~"fA,., ~~~ -fl>"r-nru8
e ~'l~'l~ ru..,
Ill
~ 3 [BB
,.,
~~ ~.l~ ~~!], ~ 8o"'~~ct~~ ~ ~~1,~ &~'"~ >~ ~ t8o~.JJ ~ ~.~

,., .- . 01") 1...1..o J 0 LU J I') ..., ,.,
..~~0 e aso.. .o.., ~ .. ,., 84) ..o,ruC) .. .. J:), .& -,.. l.lj J 8 fB8o \)I') 8 jo 1 -e.8, 4) ,.8 S..8 :=B ..
[BJ~ " s )IQ; -en ~0 ~ 8 .. fl.,
H bllo~O e8sj ..~o.JJ . 0~8 rtlOfB s ~" ~ ...00">..8~)k~"~ l:j~.::g,~~ ru8 ~"~" ".2 .,o,C3J..~. -~~~
I') Ia !")
a:J ~ - ~g ilSo f) wu~ "> So 8 s:;,.8 c ~ 'l 0 0 ~ ,...,.,.., .. 0 rn-J 'li t:::n ">
(.1
e ...~ n C_, ~ Fi& E)

8 a
'l () C
'l -
.v ....
<& -
..~.- 8
8 ~-f/1.., H
,; ~"'
8 -_'> r n R 8
0
tlo .0 r 0 ~
~

:.l:)or!!/000
6
C>o,... ~~
..,
00
0
v [B ~ r
e,,.._.8 J fj~ c!:!
o, 8..,,<>g"ru
- 8
"<&~ ..So 8 " 0v
r,,
~~o .eo l'l..,

e l::!l ~ !=t'o
"
'a"~, " ..
8 8 0
~,j..,~..,.o,cla"''"~
<.1 >~ e..,
<>tl "' -
t
11: ~G.; 4>"..oo 8 ;;j.., ~ "~ n
-fl> (])(l -
'";3 0 ,.~ g, ::. ~..,ru,.$,.., ~" ~,..g> CB'l.&
: -fl>
f> - ~ v " c.1 ,v,. S c rn1
8 "~ eo~ )<: u~-$. <.1 8..,

- CCO , "' (])) n
~.., o, ~ ~~
CCl-
e n ruo

~- 8= ~-fl>'l~,j: ::j~ ~ ~;~o"~ ;or
\) 8 ~RA ~ o.o,~
,~RII
..~. .T. ~:~ 88 ~~,;~o~~,~~ ~,.'~1. ~"oa,~"::..~~t ~o ~ ~"
r,.., 8 "> 0 ~ (])(l rRI'Oru
C (.1
.
0 V ~
~eo~<&~ 8 ~
- .. o....o
e..,. c.1v 8s"> c '-"'s' 8S.. ..a8 8~ Ci'ia,o, :~ v o, ~,So 0 ~ .. ~ a,., ,!.!.1o'~"~ o ~" v. oo o,lo" u o .,.~
~ "' ~ )l<C 8,....oo.V.; = 8 V
~
.

rO-e.
~
i&') 1>V [C';jl 0
CCl~ dh e'l[3] o,,o, .., 80 [3Jru" c,CCl 8 - 8 e .. ....!> "
r
"'8 n v
~~ +~~
ctl)rPo:Do
~ . ~""o'"osg ~"-fl>" s ru ~ ~..,rn.., ~.., 8..,'t 2 CBJ ~ .JJ '- g 8 = ~osR/1"-e.a" 8 8 ..8ofB..,..8oj" S ~
B V,;1) g8 _,:00.3 g~g 8 8 g,8 ~ cD~~8'>...t>r80,. o ~ c'::O,.V s"= 8"-fl>'>l!lo v ~
8 0 ..>...0 ru, II:f> ..8 '"3,~:::: ~co ~(.1
8
~ "o ..~() ru,"3 ~~ ~ ..8o a,~~, ~~~8 !], ~ ~<& '"8 r8o-e.,..oc8sG;,.,
..
~ = '-"' ~ 8 n n o v " e " "' , ~
~ . . .,Q U" ..a0 c 8 ~, n .o, 8or o'"og 0 ,~ ~ 8 e..,.o, co[B..,~ ~ .., s" s 'P."fB,~
-tn N , ..,. '"'G tj
- ,!.4)o,e c, ~ 8
..oo.,8 a~~ S 88, ~(;B,ri?-, ~..~" ~"[l H 1:"' ~o.a,. 8 ~ ..~..,~ 8"~{),~88o ~,."'E ..~,r,"98.~o[l:~..,rtj, S3 "8
8 ~R/10 8 . ,, ,.. 0 C, ...._,, 8 0 ,, lo ~'l U .- OlO'> '-'-'0 .,o,"' 8') 6>(.') 8 8 t) ' (.')~
01) 8- 8 .o, " G) , (.') ~oo 0') 8 .. .. 8 C>8 '"c!.1v .v' r->1 v ..!) c
S8 coii~ ~ "'
n
u v -.flit) I) 6)
cr:o 8c" 80 n".-tlg V+ C= 8V );Cl l!l c.1 rRIIo 0 tl C 6) ~
Jl 0 8 <V 0'>....0 rOffiT .J3 8 rR/I'lcn3 v" II: l..OJ"-0 ' 8 0 '> V oo O'l 1' il:o
- o 0 0 r Or 8 o
~"
8 ..~ 8 8
~ o~<&o 8
: _!frtlO ~ 8, .8.; o,-fl>'> a,rn-J....!> 8 0dh u ;:8 -fl>'l 9. C8'> <&~~ 8 r~g tl l!2"> 8 ~ :0~ 8 ,8 80 .-!1>~
v -~ So '"<& j, - ~ ru ,.8o~~ 88 .o, co"'cs, 8, 4) 8 f) ~ .. o.J! >g"..c, e s '"s g~ ~"l=t'o~" ~ ..8o
~~:, ~
~,.,,..vo"'"
., oo -f.? 1'8 u .-8 (;B C e CCl,tJ,; Oocc.il 0') u~~ti 8 ~ 8 .. 8 ~ 1 C CCJ...Do ('3
'";3 e" -tn" "CCJ-e., n , 8.., "(])) 8 ...t> >-<& ISl >II: e C:Q.n
.-8o V 0~G r~O 8
n
. 8 _g~
P. v e.., ~ ~Qh, 8, 8 ::e 8 Ccl~~o~ ~"8" 8e e 8 8 84) ~'> ~ 8o 8v ~6 ~t ~8~6 88">)-~0'Qj, e..,:~ c-1 'l~
<SI")tt{l_) -(h
- .n,., u "' [l 0 >: .o, .Ill> r o
o..,r.B.., .o,l = 8 fB, u~ 8 o0 fB,ru,
o, o, ,0 ..80..8 ~..v
:)..,..!) .o~ So .. o, 8..,~,., 8, o,,!. o .. o, 8,
o..,:==<l'" .. ...So o,... o
"'
;>-
~
l'1
G0oc
IWVd
X30NI '1~3N3!:>
o0c
elof
06c
Cocc
ecce
ol;c
Gor
S5Vd
i i
-
,/ ~ ":i--:> .! ...
m ! ~) 1\::JCINl ..1\.iEI I\'.'1~
~CCC ..... .... .... .... . .... : o~"'""
"::~eoo
ccac.occ
;, ~ .3
rr
OJCI)e
:J
9 rr ~ '
C.CCIAOilec.e:=~c.oes!lco-:::~
:1 .) .3 ,
~ ::ll:CX)(Iccec.occ
:J
,"
~0 .)
-3 0.>
,, , '
c.oc.occoe
0 0
oJrer.:ro~o~"l:i:>:c.c.oeiOOJrec.ep::lfbCP~~mGOCK.C:::lt:li:;:Jel:_eoJre ::,~core
.:~ ~,' ~ o ..:.> .;, .>:J;, ,) .,::J~,o-, ,:J,
Ot;@b 4bGac.ocl,ec.occ:lrcoec
'01 ;, .) .) l:f .)
l:.ohc.oolrcc.<P-
0 ,)
ft.l ocbcenacoec
,) .)
eccec.occ
.)
ofb
BOYd
GENERAL INDEX clv /S'!
PAOB
c ( ) o.- c-r.::~ ~ .- o IR o
~c Endran ~::txJOOJcr-=~e:f:><; I m~ro:roer~:n::q:t!:'
roe:'J">
...,...J;"~ (' (" ~ ' C:
--c:t-:::IXOf C009flOlO?:'J<n?l ~~: f ~<n?Cro~: G:n::q:~o.J[j': I
CO~'XD~Io.J~'I_)Co.JO:)eJ:<l9W roj
- _r .. c~ .. ( )
j SXjq:1.. "
<l!JW ?09 ~~! "
L~ ' (' (" o (" C: c: <"
~~o:"!coro:n~u uro'P:CJ:<>JL0~9'4~:)0c'Pn n~:l::2oo<>JmU n
.. <: 0 0(' A\ r:::(' c <: ('
mcoror~w ~wwprC'T.l ~;;oo~:::g Go.JOO~:~cr:n~ oro::qro ~.,
c (' ~ ~
~m?Cr::g ~:coro:c;:n:> 1:1"~~ 0 -,roGo:n:nn. ~~Go.J? t::r'~"'dL'
r-~ ~:: , " o , o r-s .~
L.:.f 0 C'' ~ T t o
~~ ~21 OO~W:>mo.J~ ~O~Ol~f'J"3JCI ~~~01
C' C' C'
a;;; C'
~~~;;:ror
r:::c- 'l o C'!1(:<' __ or,-~ ~ .. o c c (' c o o
I:!Cfl G(l l o.JOOO~I:IC:OOr:t;~2~ OO'f?:OOG;o:l'JC~C W.J~fmt~<ll
_g9_r _o C' ... (' c co oc oc:- c- c
U>VOXT.>m
" 1\.
u:mw:n?:
l 6 6
c:c; ?c ~?:=:n
J t
ww:tl)c
l
roro:n::nu
c:,
o r::; c o ' _o _ .~ c ~ r."S c- <> c
~t:j?C, ~op;~coo.J?~wdl:ZI' ro'P:~~:wp=f1::2';1c: ro'P:OC!c
c - -~ ~ 0 (' <: ('
IO'JfOOC ~~OO?m:r.lO?, t;;o.J? OO'f?IOOOX))Wlc:r <><> OO'f?l<>~ro
'l-- 4 L C' I. J C' C' ('6 0 0 ~
c;eox~oS~orG:>.J? ro'P:.,=~ ~~:c;oo:>cC:lp:~c: ~;;:roroo:>J
'l o .. o o c .s ~H~<' r,:c c o oc c A\
IOOI:>.JOO'J~<ll Oti)SJ?ISJ OOe:tJWI09'41GOO:~p[j<; ~fOO'Pf<ll ~CrOfZSJI
OC' C" ~ c S e QC' c e o cr,: C'
Sl"~~tc'l.;; ~c;9:~:::o~ n ng]1 34~~c Sd::OO<X>eo.J~<Jt WJmc:~c
(' 0 (' (' (' SOl'T'o.J:n(' 9'4W:i>OOC:Oiroet
oc ~
o.J<n~o:>waiO:>.J')ro:Dll
Jl ~
9'4WOOC
A 6 l:.!. r. T l
~
l
9:11H
lL
C': 0 0 c f:":t' 0 c 'TJ;": ..
r
~C::J'):r.I~O?.o.J~ I 9'400C :r.l~?l 1001 t!IO:>.J? o.J('T.)IO:>.J&WJ?I
t!O~m,
r,:r ~S: c o c c c
c c c t:'o
l':Jo:ne:n 1cr:n~ mc;ro:wprea w:i>C;<;ro~: w~wOO<;SliOf~:nt:~c.;'
' r.:: ..
0 ('0(' (' ...s '
OOOCJc:ocro? :=JI~~.
0 cr:::r 1::" ('
~<nJ[:~fl:l":~o:n~ot U[009w~:n:> t:lo
(' r.:: ('
0 (' C' 0 c (' (' (' c ,...
:n~n ~~S 109'4:>m~: "'1:ro<>Jro<llociO'Pro~muro'lt :r.110x~
C' ('
w~u
t'? (' 1:': .. .. (;:<' 0(".
w11c ~~ t!~coo?CGtof"'"~cc ?~9
lDQOOGOOCO()')
"(S('UIOIIIII:>.J?OICOOC
(" C' (' (" (" ('[9I 031.1
lJ)O)I(IOCWOC-CI'le';).)O'J (' JO:I
.o IJ t1 T l
lD') m~cOIC')I .... .... 9~~
(' .. ~ "fs('
Gl~:n~IIJ?~~ GSGft:jliiJ?IG G;!O?C90'')f O'J?Of-o:>UC CI~CJ:>t~ro
<: .. (' .. (' 0 (' ..
r::. L. .. , o <' c .11 L't c- ,r.:r:

1:1"': "'D'l"1U::o m~~ eoc334') 'ftmt mrodl~~., m[j::l')O')~'t:J()')
0(' (" 0 .. (' .. 0 ,.~ . 0
~cca: mooro comoG:))? ml>lrrom(l)(l)lll?:ro:n? cur a:romro
l 01 6 l ., ., ' ~ l tl
m~co:c9: .... .... .... ... ti ~e
c .. " .. " r.:r.:c ).4 c.. : eoc3tt3"'
m~:~oo~;;mmeo~3tt3"'o" :~
" J"r.:cm ) m'l~'"'\'"'
.. '[; .. ..
1)\,0'jf
C" (" c c c oc:~ c c C"":: <' c o o
moooomtumoucouroccr-:mroeocllm'l"'ooooocDL(l)(J'If "1"'ron n
a L ~- (' L C 0 ((') J (' I , (' b L (' 0 L ('
co:>oroo8::oIL w~rororo::o?:w:
Ill
o <X>IO'):JC cro.,oc'l:ac:ro
4.. jJ L
~OC~t"o
LJl-
0 0 C' ,...c;. C' A; C' ' (' C CJ;'?
<Oro:er m~9'4WJ344J.~W'fi"J?I<X>a~rSJ oroc !!o~:roeGoo:>ct:J:.
C' t:' C' c oc-~1:' c r,: c <: .. cr,: C'C r
O{tU0000900{C 01mroeoc;n t!g?f1<>J009'4') wro~IX9<-'t::1o.Jel
~ o c- c- o ' c-o c- c c
~stcroe:~:> ~ ~f~ ~4(SJC roe:m ~::qv1 IOro:>qc:')1~1"1UCfl~
.. (' _0 (' (' c c 0 ~<::. 0 (' c
~oo<Xlm"1ro:n~u OOJf 344J.SJC ooe:c:a ::OO::O'Ja;l2:<>Jm!r.l')l lf,ro~SIC
~ C' c c c o o c t"O c- ("
c:a ~~tl)wc;'Proc;:n::nl?t o.J?:7c. :nw:wp:011c:cro?<l<O'l:Slc :~c
C" C" C" C" OC'h .~ ~..... C'O C" f:<" C' C' t:
O"tt00000 ~otccr- 1 a;rodl1 ~c:rn<>O?:~Sl:n~ ~ft::l<: 00rl~:'lf
s C' 0 0 c (' [~ co . c (' (" . (' C" (' 0
:nc;::o?O?.!!! 1c~m, oorl~:t::l: romS! ot;;urooo ~;;::oo<ll
.. <'f:: ..~ C':" ('' "L~ . c "' " ( ~)
4>?<>J[09'4:00 Dl~~ I [jfro~ !!4>~:[j: O'J<>JlO lfOO<{O'C IO')()fei
o0c
bGc ..
bo0
!AP ..-,. :; \
.-/
6eJ6
:X3'0Nl 'JV'ti3N3'~
coel 1
.lO ~
'9'
:>:r~:c.flso
~
.-, .)o'!:r a.)tooecoac.co"
a~oc.ooecc
.)
"
.)
X'30Nl '1Vli::TN'3!>
cc6
oocc
"'' .... ... ..rcccnfi~C:O:

,..,.b~to b()
to W csc .fi~O ,
:korwcooO>ch--occ:o5a
.> .;, .J
Oc:c:os eflc.ec
.)
:X.o~ c.cco:c.cobe1,
.) ~\.
bw
(w) (c) i) OCO
,)
CSOC :4c.c-oflb
.)0
aco
.)
:korwcoo~~WlCCCIOtlel'lC.(.O
.) .) 0 .,)
oo6
61
X30NI 'lV'li3N30
'XI /69/9'1/( r)'t{ot:/d~
OOV
sccc
cZ..c
X3QNT 1V'd3N3~
xp CJS I
BURMA LAV7 REPORTS
CRIMINAL REVISION
B l!j.,rc U Matmg '11/armg,.'f.
ASHA BI BI )
ABDUL RAHIM ; (APPLICANTS) c. c.
1965
Jan. I.
v.
THE UNION OF BURMA {RESPONDENT). *
Citizenship--prosecution under s. 5 (a) of the Unirm Citi~tnship Act. for 110n-
renee.JJal of stay permit-name on passport of foreigner father while minors-
whether will. divest Union Citi::enship.
The Applicants were born in Burma in 1944 and 1946 respectively, and
their monther and grand-mother being of Burmese origin they.were accordingly
natural born citi;~ens. In 1958, while they were still minors, their father,
a Pakistani national, took them to Pakistan on his passport. On their return,
the Applicants resided in Burma under stay permits, and were prosecuted and
convicted on ~h<.: expiry of the said permits which had.not been renewed.
The main. Ci'-'"stion which arose was whether the fact that the names of the
Applicants wc1c borne in the passport t:~ken out by their father, would divest.
them of Uniun Citizenship.
H<:ld: The pames of the Applicants appeared on their father's (Pakistani}
pa~sport,riot by their volition. Nor did the children apply for sta~ permits-
s
Thus, whnt h;n h:1ppem:d does not come within the rnischi~f of s. (a) of the
Union Citizenship Act.
It is also . ci~ar that the Applicants themselves never took out Pakistani
passports, nor register~d themselves as Pakistani citizens with the Pakistan
Embassy at Rangoon.
The convictions were accordingly
. . set aside.
Obiter : Regarding the question of dual citizenship, it is for the Applicants.
to examine their own situations in the light of s. 14A of the Union Citizenship
Act.
-----------~-------------
Criminai R~vision Nos. 173 (B) and 174 (B) of 1964. Review of order
of. 3rd Additional Magistrate,. Rangoon, in C.R.T. Nos. 455 and 456of 1964,
dated 14th .July, 1964.
2 BURMA LAW REPORTS
Tun SeJ,n for the applicants.

AsH.'>. BIB!
U Hnit (Government Advocate; for the respondent.
A '3DT)I.
RAHIM
V.
THRUNION U MAUNG MAUNG, J.-This revision application and
OF BURMA.
Crimi.I\al Revision No. 174(B) of 1964 have been taken up
together:~because the facts giving rise to them are similar
and identical questions of law are also involved. The
l~arned Sessions judge who has submitted his recommenda
tions had also dealt with the two cases together. Asha
Bi Bi born in I944 and Ahciul Rahim born in ; yt6 arc the
children of one Sultan Mohamed, a Pakistani national. In
1958, their father took them to Pakistan for a stay of two
months. The names of the two children, then minors,
were borne on his Pakistani Passport. On arrival in
Burma, the father applied for stay permits for. the two
children and these were issued. The appliCants failed to
renew. their stay permits claiming that they were Burmese
citizens b.y birth, and therefore the permits. were' taken
out by mistake.
Prosecuted under section I3 (1) of the Burma IFnrnigra-
. tion Act for overstaying their permits, the applicants were
found guilty by the Third Additional Magistrate, Rangoon
and sentenced to pay fines of K 100 each. Against those
orders the applicants went on revision to the learned
Sessions Judg~, who has recommended that the convictions
should be set aside.
The learned trial Magistrate did_fl.nd th_a t the applicants
were born in Burma and that their mother. and grand-
mother were of Burmese origin: These . rriake .the ap-
. plicants natural born citizens by virtue of section I r(ii) of
the Constitution. The question therefore :is whether the
.. fact that their names were borne on the passports taken
cut by their father woul_d divest them of thejr Union
Citizenship:
1965] B~A LAVV REPORTS 3
The learned Sessions Judge has rightly quoted Maung c. c.
!965 .
Ko Gyi v. The Union of Burma (x) in which the principle
AsHABI Bt
was laid down that a person born of a foreigner and a ABDUL
Burmese mother did not lose his Union Citizenship only RAHIM
v.
because he was taken to India during his minority and his TH.EU~lON
OF BURMA.
name was carried in his father's Indian Passport.
In 1hese two applications also, Asha Bi Bi and Abdul
Rahim were minors -when their Pakistani father took them
out of Burma for a short stay. It wasnot by their volition
that their names were carried on his passport on their
return. Nor did the children apply for stay permits.
Thus, what has happened does not come within the
mischief of section 5 (a} of the Union Citizenship Act
which deprives a child of his Union Citizenship if, on the
expiry of a year after he attains majority, he has failed to
renounce any other citizenship that he may have. That
provision, the learned Sessions Judge has rightly pointed
out, applies only to persons born after the commencement
of the Constitution, i.e., 4th January, 1948.
I may point out that the principle in Maung Ko Gyi v.
The Union of Burma (I) has been further explained and
upheld in Chan You Ta v. The Union of Burma (2) by a
Bench of this Court. In that case, it was ruled that a
natural born citizen does not lose his citizenship and
become .a foreigner merely because he was compelled,
under deportation order, to take out a Chinese passport.
Here, in these two applications it is clear that the ap-
plicants themselves never took out Pakistani passports nor
registered themselves as Pakistani citizen with the Embassy
()f Pakistan in Rangoon.
U Tun Sein, learned Advocate for the applicants and
U Hnit, learned Government Advocate, concur in their
support of the recommendations made by the learned
Sessions Judge.
(.x} (1959} B.L.R. z68. (2} Civil I~t Appeal No. ll4 of 1963.
4 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. In these circumstances, the recommendations of the
t965
AsHA Br BI
learned Sessions Judge must be accepted. The convictions
'AiDa entered against the applicants. are set aside. If they have
RAHlM
v.
already paid the fines, they must be given tbeir refunct.
'I'm! UNION
OF BURMA. The learned Sessions Judge made some comments on
the undesirability of dual nationality. People who retain
Union citizenship and a foreign nationality at the same
time are, in his potent words, .. a curse ". Section r4(a)
of the Union Citizenship Act, introduced by the amend-
ment of 1954 is ~med at eliminating, to the greatest
extent possible, the curse of dual nationality. lt is for
the applicants to examine their own situations in the light
of that section and then do whatever they might feel
advised to do, if they should feel that they might fall
within the provision thereof.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 5
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS
Before U $!In Marmg, J.
c.c.
DAW EIN TINT (APPELLANT) 1965
v. Jan.9.
u SAN HLA AND SIX OTHERS (RESPONDENTS).*
Resju lielta-decision in a suit und~r s. 9 of Specific Relief Act-not bar to

subsequent sttit involving title. [,imitation Act, A rticle 142-when can
come intc op~ration.
I,, " suit under s. 9 of the Specifi<- Relief Act, the question of title is not
involved and therefore the decision in it cannot operate as riSjudicata in a
subsequent suit involving title.
In a suit for recovery of possession, for Art. q.z of the Limitation Act to
come into operation, t!-lerc must either be "dispossession " or dis
continuance."
U Kan and one v. Kalaclumd and one, Civil Appeal No.6 of 1962 ; CT Chit
Ttm v. Datu Ng-<11e Tharmg, Civil First Appeal No. 9 of 1960 ; and Sulaiman
-and two v. Ma Hla Bi, Civil Seeond Appeal No. s6 of 1953 of the late High
Court, referred to.
Maung Maung Ain for the appellant.

Than Sein for the respondents.
U SAN MAUNG, ].-In Civil Regular Suit No. 53 of

1960 of the Township Court of Monywa plaintiff U San
Hla anq six others, who are the respondents in the present
appeal, sued the defendant-appellant Daw Ein Tint for
possession of a piece of land situated in Kwin No. 742 .
Nyaungbyu-bin Anauk, Nyaungbyu-bin Circle, Monywa
Town and bounded on the South by cart-track, on the
East by Ma E Khin's and Ma Ohn Bwint's holdings, on
ithe West by cart-track and on the North by cart-track,
on the ground that this land belonged to their father
U Kan Saung and devolved upon them in the year 1312
B.E. as inheritance when U Kan Saung became a Buddhist
monk. In the year. 13qo B.E., U Kan Saung married one,
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 9 of 1962, against the decree of the District Court
<>fLower Chindwin in Civil Appeal No. x6 of 1961, dated zznd May 1962.
6 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. Ma Tin May, as a second wife .and on the occasion of his

1965
marriage he made a gift to her of a contiguous piece of
DAw En; land as Kanwin property. This land is on the south of
.TINT
the cart-track which forms the southern boundary of the
. "HL!\.
u SAl!l
AND SIX
land now in dispute. In the year 132 I B.E. the present .
OTHJ:RS. defendant Daw Ein Tint encroached upon the suit land
and built a house thereon without the plaintiffs' permis-
sion. She refused to vacate when asked to do so so that
the present suit for possession had to be filed against her.
The defendant Daw Ein Tint denied that the suit land
devolved upon the plaintiffs as inheritance when U Kan
Saung was ordained as a Buddhist monk in th~ year
131 2 B.E. as alleged by the plaintiffs. On the other hand,
she contended that when U Kan Saung married Ma Tin
May as his second wife he made a gift of the whole piece
of land shown :in the map, Exhibit " m ,. filed by the
plaintiffs, and not merely the southern portion thereof.
Since that time Ma Tin May had been in possession of
the land as ?Wner till the same was sold to the present
defendant Daw Ein Tint and her husband, U San Lin, by
a registered deed of sale dated the 28th of July I947
Thereafter the defendant and her husband had been in
continuous possession of the land as owners the.reof.
Accordingly, whatever may be the merits of the plaintiffs'
cla:lm their suit was barred by limitation. Furw."1ermore,
in Civil Regular Suit No. 3 of 1947 of the Court of the
Subordinate Judge, Monywa, Ma Tin May~the predecessor:-
in-title of u"1e present dcfc:n'dc:.nt-filed a suit fm pv.::J-.:ssion
of the .land now in dispute against her husband U Kan
Saung and three of his children, namely, 'U .San Hla~
Ma Sein Yin and Mau..'l.g Ba Thwin who figure as plaintiffs
Nos. I , 3 and 5irl; the present C?-SF;> She obt::~in.~d ? tit:'~ree
and ln .execution of that decree the suit land was rest'ared
to the possession of Ma Tin May in Civil Execution Case
No. IS of I.-947 AccoitUngly the .pre!?ent defendant con-
tended. that . . su.it ..is .bc;;rred by res .judice/a.
. . . the plaintiffs' .
BURM.A. LAW REPORTS 7
On the pleadings the learned trial Judge framed several c.c.

. J965
issues of which the most important are: DAWEIN
TINT
(i). Whether the land shown in the map, tr.
. u SAN HLA
Exhibit " ro " was given by U Kan Saung t o AND SIX
his second wife Ma Tin May as Kanwin OTHERs.
on the occasion of his marriage to Ma Tin
Iviay.
(ii) Whether the plaintiffs have any right to the suit
land by devolution from their father U Kan
Saung as inheritance.
(iii) Whether Ma Tin May had the right to sell the
whole piece of land to the present defendant;.
(iv) Whether the suit is barred by limitation ; and
. (v) whether the suit is barred by res judicata.
Treating . the issues relating to limitation and res

judicata as pre1iminary issues, the learned trial Judge held
that the plaintiffs' suit w~s. barred under Article 142 of
the Limit?.tion Act. Regarding the defendant's plea of
res judicrlt.(J rhe learned Judge held that as the parties now
figu ring a<> p1aintiffs were not parties in Civil Miscellaneous
Case No. 5 of 1948, the present suit was not barred by
res judicata.
At this stage I may point out that there was consider-
able confusion in the mind of the learned Township Judge
as regards the plea of res judicata. VVhereas the defendant
"" "'": t1}"' dn~..,.-~ ,..l ..... ...,! ~ .....:.=. b-r '!\.K~ T.:_ ' '- .,. ;n
had
1 re11""''
.&.'-U
1 \':'!'"'
.:.""'\,."&..... ...., ""' ._ ..... .c.\...'-" "'"". - .- .... ..... ...L ) ;../av. .1 ..... .,~.
J. '"'-.. ...
Civil Regular Suit No . .3 of 1947 in support of her plea,

the learned Township Judge based his order on another
case, namely, Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 5 of 1948 , in
whirh M~ T;n M;:~y jointly with the pre<:P.n.t npfpnrhmt
Daw Ein Tint and her husband U San Lin~ were successful
in their application under Order XXI, Rules roo and ror,
Civil Procedure Code, against one Maung Aye Maung who
harl ...........;.,;..,..,A ..., m rwt-ganp. ,.}..,,.,...,.,. ,..,,;;nst u Kan <:........... ,. .,...nd
\,4 VV~A"A'-'''-"' W 6-
J.t'-".."' '""-'"""-._'-'V ~.:...-AA .\ ............. ~~ < (.4
8 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. his son, Maung Ba Thwin, in respect of the present' suit

,t..S
land.
DAWEIN
TINT
'll. To continue with the order of the Township Judge,
U SAN HLa Monywa, in the suit now under appeal : The learned
AND SIX
OTHERS. Judge, as already stated above, holding that the plaintiffs'
suit was barred by limitation dismissed the same. The
plaintiffs being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree
of the trial Court appealed and the lea.rned District Judge
of Lower Chindwin by his judgment and decree in Civil
Appeal No. r6 of 1961, set aside the judgment and decree
of the trial Court and under Order 4 r, R ulc 2 3 of the
Civil Procedure Code, remanded the suit for trial. In the
view of the learned District Judge the issue relating to
limitation being one of mixed fact and law the trial Court
was not justified in deciding it without any evidence being
adduced by the parties to the suit. The defendant Daw
Ein Tint being di~satisfied with this order of remand under
Order 4:1:, Rule 23 has accordingly preferred the present
appeaL
There has been a long history of litigation between the
plaintiffs and the defendant's predece<:>sor-in-title, Ma Tin
May. This has been fully set out in the judgment of the
District Judge, Lower Chindwin, in Civil Appeal No. 15
of 1958 arising out of Civil Suit No. 4 of 1948 in which
Maung Aye Maung, already mentioned above, sued Ma
Tin May, Daw Ein Tint, U San Lin and three others for a
declaration of 'his tide to the suit ]and as mortgagee of
U Kan Saung and his son, Maung Ba Thwin. Therefore
for a clear appreciation of the present.appeal also I shall
summarize what . has been said by the learned District
Judge in that appeal. In the year 1931, U Kan Saung
mortgaged the lana now .in dispute to one, Maung .Kan
l:ftaik by a registered .deed. After redeeming this. land, he
and.- his son, Maung Ba Thwin, mortgaged the land to
Maung Aye Maung by another registered deed dated the
BURMA LAW REPORTS 9
c.c.
30th May 1947. In Civil Regular Suit No. 3 of 1947 of 1965
the Subordinate Judge of Monywa, U Kan Saung's wife DAWEt.N
Ma Tin May sued U Kan Saung, Maung Ba Thwin, Maung TINT
. v.
San 1113
T n .lVJd Se1n v:- ~o-
at1U.) """- .&. i ! i
J. -~~s.,<-s~
.t. J.
,..f ..... .,. su1"t lanrl on
t-'V"' ~ o"' VL tJ \.H...._ U. 'l~ SAN HLA
AND SIX
the ground that she had been wrongly dispossessed by OTHERS.
them, the suit being one under section 9 of the Specific
Relief Act. Ma Tin May obtained a decree in that suit on
the roth of April 1947, before the mortgage of the suit
land to Maung Aye Maung. Maung Aye Maung
thereafter sued U Kan Saung and his son Maung Ba Thwin
for possession of the suit land on the ground that
he was a. usufructuary mortgagee and that the land had
not yet been delivered to his possession. He obtained
a decree in that suit, being Civil Regular Suit No. 43
o f 1947 of the Assistant Judge, Monywa. During the
pendency of this suit, Ma Tin May sold the suit land
to the present defendant Daw Ein Tint and her husband,
U San Lin, for Rs. r ,ooo by a registered deed of sale.
Thereafter, in Civil Execution Case No. 4 of 1948
arising out of Civil Suit No. 33 of 1947, Maung Aye
Maung obtained possess!on of the suit land which was
then in possession of Ma Tin May, Daw Ein Tint and
U San Lin. These persons therefore filed an application
under Order XXI. Rules roo and ror of the Civil Proc;edurc
Code on the ground that the decree obtained by Maung Aye
MaWig in Civil Regular Suit No. 33 of 1947 was not
'binding upon them as they were in possession of the suit
land on their own right. They were successful and the
suit la~d was ordered to be restored to them. Maung Aye
Maung then filed Civil Suit No. 4 of 1948 fer declaration
of his title to possession as mortgagee. The suit was
decreed hy the learn~d Assistant Judge, Monywa but on
. appeal to the District Court of Lower Chindwin, the
learned District Judge of that Court holding on the
authority of MaE Tin .v. Maung Byaw (r) that there can
(x) A.I.R. (1928) Ran. 286.
"10 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. be a v~lid. ante--nuptial prowise to give land as Kanwin

1965
property made in consideration of a marriage and that
0
~':N~N it becomes a binding contract on the marriage taking
. s AN
v. H place, dismis~d Mg Aye Iviaung's suit.
U LA
A~!~. Unfortunately, in Civil Suit No. 4 of 1948 of the
Assistant Judge, Monywa, U Kan Saung was not a party-
defcnd~r,.t ~0 . t11~t the p!:d.I!tiffs ".x.rhc nO'/V claim ~!~!'!'r~tive
title from U Kan Saung cannot be bound by the decision
made therein. Furthermore, Civil Suit No. 43 of 1947
of the Subordinate Judge, Monywa, which was relied upon
by the defendant Daw Ein Tint in her written statement
in support of her plea of res judicata being a suit under
section 9 of the Specific Relief Act the question of title
was not invo1ved therein. Therefore it cannot operate
as res judicata although U Kan Saung was a defendant in
that suit.
Accordingly in the suit now under appeal the question
of the validity of the gift made by U Kan Saung to his
second wife Ma Tin May can still be agitated. Can the
documen~ executed by U Kan Saung in Ma Tin May's.
favour be made use of by the defendant Daw Ein Tint
as successor-in-title to Ma Tin May for the purpose of
section 53 A of the Transfer of Property Act? If not, has
the defendent Daw Ein Tint obtained a prescriptive title
to the suit land because of adveJ;se possession by herself
and her predecessor-in-title for more :than the statutory
p.,.rjnti 0f- T'J. ;re:lrs? Therefore, I am not prepared to say"
that the order of the learned District Judge, now appealed
agains( reman~ing the suit under Order 4I, Rule 23 is
wrong ...
Rt:'g:::Yt'!ing th~ <").H~t'tirm nf l1niit:=~tinn i.t clnP<; ry0t. S~;'P'm
that the learned District Judge has had the opportunity
of benefiting by the decision of this Courtin U Kan and one
.v. Kalachand and one (2) where the ruling u Chit Tun: in
(2) Civil App{:l\1 No.6 of 1962.
BURMA LAW REPORTS l1
v. Da.w Ngwe Thaung (3) was affirmed by a Full Bench.

The principle laid down in U Chit Tun's (3) is the same
0
as that laid aown by me in Sulaiman and two v. Ma Hla Bi .j.~_;~N
(-+) where it was pointed out that before Article I42 can v.
.
come mto . t h.ere must en
operanon . her be " d"1spossess10n
. " U SAN Ht.A.
AND szx
in the sense that the plaintiff had been ousted from posses- oTHERs.
sion of the suit land or "discontinuance" in the sense
that the plaintiff had abandoned the suit land. The
principles laid down in the above three cases should be
carefully studied by the learned trial Judge to whom the
case has been remanded under Order 41, Rule 23.
For the reasons given above the present appeal is dis-
missed with costs, Advocate's fee being assessed at 3
(three) gold mohurs.
- -----
(3) Civi J Fir-St App~a'l N!>.9 of I960 of the) ate High c;;~:l:-.
(4) Civi!Second Appeal No. 56 of 1953 of tile late High Court.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION

Before U San Maung, U Tun Tin, and U !<;yaw Zan U,JJ.
DAW MYA NWE (APPELLANT)

c.c.
1965
Feb. 26.
I. U BA YI.
2. DAW MYA YIN.
3 MA KHIN SEIN. !.(RESPONDENTS).*
4 KYON BIN (a) MAUNG WIN
MYINT. I
j
Receiv~r appoiutment nf--'l.uhctt properly itt possession <>] dcjendallt claiming

legal title.
Eield : Although th~ appoinment of a receiver is a matter resting in the
discretion of the Cottrt, the Court will not interfere by appointing >1 ;~~t!ivcr
where a right is asserted to property in the possession of a defendant c!::iming to
hold it under n l:!gal title, unles~ a strom~ case is made out.
Sidheswari Dabi v. Abho-ceswari Dabi, 15 Cal. p. 818 ; Clumdidat Jha
v. Padmtmand Singh Bahadur and others, 22 Cal. p . .J.59 ; Mariau B'''" v.
Ismail Ebrahim 11-fayath a11d others, 6 !3.L.R. p . It<), rcfcr n:d to and fo!lo-.v,.d.
Ba Swe for the appellant.
Ba Gyan for the respondents.
U SAN MAUNG, J.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 94 of 1961

of the Original Side of this Court the present appellant
Daw Mya Nwe, wife of a retired Commissioner U Sein
Chaw, sued the defendant-respondents U Ba Yi, his wife
Daw Mya Yin, his daughter Ma Khin Sein~ and Kyon Bin,
husband of Ma Iq:lin Sein, for a declaration that she was
the absolute owner of th~ premises in suit, na!nely,
. No. 241, Maung Taulay Street, R~ngoon, and all the assets
of Shwe Pyi Company, which were housed in :the aforesaid
premises. Her case was that she was the owner of Shwe
.Pyi Company a nd Shwe Si Taw Company situated at No ..4,
. ...
Civil Misc. Appeal No .. 8 of 19?2, against the oder of the Original Si<!e
.of this Court in Civil Regular Suit No.9+ of J9St, dated 2.9th March 1962.
BURMA LAvV REPORTS 13
Eclw:~rd Street, Rangoon, having invested K 29,000 in the ;:9~5

former and K ro.ooo in the latter. The principal busi-
DAw
ness of the said companies was the import and distribu- MY:\ N.v~>
tion of textiles and woollen goods. The Ist 9-efendant- t. u B~<~. Yr.
respondent U Ba Yi. who was her own uncle, was ap- 2 Dt~~Iv..~.
pginted manager of Shwe Pyi Company as well as general :! M -" Knm
agent of the plaintiff for which he was paid a salary of 4 ~~~~~ BrN
K 2 00 per mensem. The 3rd defendant-respondent Ma ,~~~~~~~.
Khin Sein was appointed manager of Shwe Si Taw com-
pailY and general agent of the plaintiff at a monthiy
salary of K roo. Vv'ithout the consent and knowledge
of the plaintiff, the defendant-respondents U Ba Yi and
Kyon B1n had disposed of the premises known as No. 4,
Edward Street, Rangoon, wherein Shwe Si Taw Company
was housed and had credited the sum to the account of
Shwe P}i Company. Shwe Pyi Company having obtained
licences regularly from the Government made a profit of
over K 78,ooo in the year 1956-57 and about K 30,ooo
annually in subsequent years. Out of the assets of Shwe
Pyi Company, two buildings and a plot of land were
purchased for K 14.000 in Prome. but ~hese were trans-
ferred to the names of the defendant-respondents U Ba
Yi and his wife Daw Mya Yin without the knowledge and
consent of the plaintiff. The defendant-respondents also
purchased a Moscovitch Car out of the assets of Shwe Pyi
Company and they had failed to render accounts to her
of that 'company, although several demands had been
made. Hence the present suit for declaration and posses-
sion and .accounts.
The defendant-respondel).ts U Ba Yi and Ma Khin Seih
by their written statement contended that they were the
o~ners of Shwe Pyi Company, and that they had nothing
whatsoever to do with Shwe Si Taw Company. Their
story was that Shwe Pyi Company first belonged to U San
Nyun and U Aung Kai, vide document " m " relied
upon by the plaintiff. . U Aung Kai left the partnership
14 BURMA LAW REPORTS
leaving U San Nyun as the sole owner of Shwe Pyi Com-

pany. On the rst January 1955, U San Nyun had
DAW
MvA ~\"wv. transferred Shwe Pyi Company for a consideration of
u B~ y1 K I5,000 by executing a deed of transfer. Theretnre.
1
Y., ... '.1v.., the defendants were the owners of that company. Re-
2 . D ...
IN. .
3 MA I{HtN garding the deed of release dated the :rzth August 1958
4. KS:: BrN signed by U Aung Kai and U San Nyun relied upon by
J~~l'v~~~~- the plaintiff-appellant, the defendant-respondents contend-
ed that since U Aung Kai had resigned from the partner-
ship on the 4th July 1950, leaving U San Nyun as the
sole owner and since U S<L.'1 Nyun h2d. i:ransfc..:rred the
company to the defendant-respondents on the rst January
1955, they no longer had any right on the 12th August
1958 to execute a deed of release in favour of the plaintiff.
Regarding the house and its site in Prome, the defendant-
respondents stated that they belonged to U Ba Yi and Daw
Mya Yin, and that these properties were in no way con-
nected with Shwe Pyi Company. These defcnd:mts
further contended that the 2nd and 4th defendants were
not necessary parties to the present suit .
Tne suit under appeal was filed on the 24th July 1961.
On the same day the plaintiff filed an application u nder
Order XL, Rule I of the Civil Procedure Code for t he <!p-
pointment of a Receiver over the properties in suit. In
the affidavit in support thereof the plai.ntitr stated that
both the defendants U Ba Yi and Ma Khin Sein were em-
ployed. by her to m.znage Shwe Pyi. Cornpany and .Sh w<~
Si Taw Company respectively belonging to her and her
husband U Sein Chaw, that U San Nyun and U Aung Kai
were merely benamidars of the plaintiff .and her husband.
and that the docUment by which U San Nyun purported
to transfer the assets of Shwe Pyi .Company was executed
with a view to bind U San Nyun, their benainidar. and
that originally the mime of the tr~nsferee had been kept
blank in that dC>Gument. Accordingly, the only adl)'lis-
sible docum~nt on record was the registered deed of
BURMA LAW REPORTS 15
release executed by U San Nyun and U Aung Kai in c.c.

r96s
favour of the plaintiff. As there was danger of the
properties in suit being wasted or alienated by the de- :-- 1 ,~~~wB
fendants, it was fit and proper to appoint a Receiver in 1. U v.BA Yr.
respect of them. . z . D_Aw MvA
U Sein Chaw, husband of the plaintiff Daw Mya Nvve, 3 . M~ NkHm
1
also filed an affidavit in support of his wife's application + rf:~':; Bm

for appointment of a Receiver . . He said that Shwe Pyi .$~) lV!AuNo
hTN 1YINT.
!V
Company was originally established at Prome in the name
of U Thein Shwe and the address of the company was
the house belonging to the plaintiff and himself. In the
year 1949 Shwe Pyi Company was transferred to the
premises known as No. 26'}. Mogul Street and U San Nyun
was employed as a manag~r at a salary of K 2.00 per
mensem. In the year 1949 when it was necessary to
register firms for (he purpose of obtaining import licences,
the company was temporarily registered as belonging to
U San Nyun 'vvith U Aung Kai as managing director.
However, in order to bind U San Nyun he was made to
execute a deed of transfer of all the assets of Shwe Pyi
Company fm K I5,ooo. The name of the purchaser
was however left blank. U Aung Kaj left the service in
the year 1950 and Shwe Pyi Company was transferred to
No. 241, Maung Taulay Street, whose occupancy rights
were purchased in the name of lJ San Nyun. The
defendant-appellant U Ba Yi being a poor relation was
employed by U Sein Chaw on the repeated request of his
wife Daw Mya Nwe. Hewas made manager at a salary
of K 100 after U San Nyun left the service, and the
document relating to the transfer of Shwe Pyi . Company
executed by U San Nyun was left in the possession of U
Ba Yi with other documents belonging to Shwe Pyi Com-
pany. Taking advantage of this fact, U BaYi had inserted
his name as purchaser in that document. Because of this
cpmplication, U San Nyun and U Aung Kai had on the
I2th August 1.958 executed a deed of release relating to
Shwe Pyi Company in favour of Daw Mya Nwe. There

was an attempt at compromise between U Sein Chaw and
M~ANwE his wife on the one hand a.'I'J.d U Ba Yi on the other hy
uf). Y which U Ba Yi was to be given half the profit because of
~: o . . !\-rv~ his efforts in making the business of Shwe Py i Cornpany a
3. MY,.mi<mN success. But the compromise failed as U Ba Yi would
SEoiN.B N not render true accounts of the affairs of Shwe. Pyi Com-
-+ K YN I.
(a) MAuNe pany. Therefore, U Ba Yi had :to be prosecuted under
WrN MYlNT.
secnon 409, penal Co de and th e case was st1'll pend'mg.
Accordingly, a Receiver should be appointed over the
assets of Shwe Pyi Company in order to prevent them
being wasted or a.lienated in any way.
The ~efendant-appellant U Ba Yi by his counter-
affidavit reiterated the statements contained in his written
statement. He admitted that he had been . prosecuted
under section 409 of the Penal Code in Criminal Regular
Trial No. 651 of 1959 of the 4th Additional Magistrate,
Rangoon, and that a charge had been framed against him
l:>y the learned Magistrate. But he said that that was no
reason why the Court should come to a conclusion that
the plaintiff in the present suit had made out a prima
facie case that she was the owner of Shwe Pyi Company.
On the affidavits and counter-affidavits filed in the
case, the learned Judge on the Original Side of the late
High Court, namely, U Shu Maung, J., by his order dated
the 29th March 1962 dismissed the application of the
pl<:t_intiff Daw Mya Nwe on the ground that the owner-:
ship of Shwe Pyi Company being very much -in dispute
he could n<:?t, at that stage of the proceeding, come to a
fiD;qing that a strong prima facie case had been made out
by the plaintiff. The learned Judge also said that the
learned Advocate appeafing for the defendants in the case.
had undertaken not to alienate the properties now in
dispute during the pendency of the suit on to transfer to
other persons licences obtained by Shwe Pyi Company.
B~ LAVV REPORTS 17
In This appeal by the plaintiff-appellant Daw Mya ~9~5

Nwe, it is contended that if the evidence recorded
in the criminal case against U Ba Yi and the documents MRA~ws
therein be referred :to, it would show that U Ba Yi was "'
mereIy a person empIoyed by the pIamn . 'ff D aw Mya N we z. U B.>. Yr.
2. DAw 'vln
as manager of Shwe Pyi Company. However, we must 3
. MY KHIN
1
at once say that merely because a charge had been framed SEIN.
.
agamst U Ba YI. m. t h e cnmma
. . I case on the ground t hat 4 KYON BIN
(a) .M.AuNo
a prima facie case had been made out against him, it does WN MvrNT.
not necessarily mean that U Ba Yi was in fact employed
by Daw Mya Nwe as her manager. The criminal case
has still to be disposed of after hearing the defence of U
Ba Yi. As regards the documents filed in that case by the
plaintiff Daw Mya Nwe, they could not have been con"
sidered a1art from 'the evide!!ce adduced in the case.
Therefore, it would not be proper to come to a conclu-
sion that t.l}e plain~ in the present case had made out a
strong prima facie case by l'eference to the documents
which she had filed in the criminal case.
In Sidheswari Dabi v. Abhoyeswari Dabi (1) a Bench
of the Calcutta High Cour.t held that although the
appointment of a Receiver is a matter resting in the dis"
cretion of the Court~ .the Court will not interfere by
appointing a Receiver where a right is asserted to pro-
perty in the possession of a defendant claiming to hold it
under a legal title, unless a strong case is maae out. See
also Chandidat ]ha v. Padmanand Singh Bahadur. and
others (2) where the case of Sidheswari Dabi v. Abhoyes-
wari Dabi (I) was cited with approval. These two cases
of the Calcutta High .Court were followed in M,arian Bee
v. Ismail Ebrahiin Naycith and o'thers ~35. See Dunkley
Digest of Burma Rulings (I872-1922J, column 1032. 'In
the case now under consideration, we do no~ consider that
(I) IS Cal. p. 8x8. (2) 22 Cal. p. 459
(3) 6 B.L.R. I 19
2
c.c.
t965
on the materials on record a strong prima facie case has
been mane out; by the plaintiff-appellant Daw Mya Nwe.
M~ANwa For these reasons we consider fhat the application for
u ~ Y appointmenf of a Receiver has been rightly dismissed by
!: DAwAMv~ ~he learned judge on the Original Side of the late High
3. .,LINKHIN Court. In the resul~ the appeal {ails and it is d.isnrlssed
:K~r;,r::BIN
4(a) MAuNo
with costs; ~dvoca~e fees bejng assessed at five. go.ld
mohurs.
WmMYINT.
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 19
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before U San Maung, J.
1. DAW THAUNG CHIT.

) c.c.
2. MAUNG KYI MYINT. I
I x!)6s
Feb. r6.
3 MA KYU KYU. r (APPELLANTS)
4 MAUNG TOE MYINT.
5 MAUNG KYAW ;MYINT. J
~
I. u TUN HLAING. l (RESPONDENTS).*

2. DAW MYINT AYE. J
.Evidence Act s. 9z-qral evidence admissible to prove real transaction- Sham

document-proof of-by oral evidence.
Held : Oral evidence is admissible to prove the real nature of a transaction.
S. 92 of the Evidence Act does not stand in the way.
Thus, where the heading of a document showed that it was an agreement
to sell immoveable property, and the body of the document was drafted as if it
was an outright sale with possession, it was held that it was a sham document
int.e nding to cloak the real transaction, namely the mortgage of the property.
Shio Karan Singh v. Surya Nath Singh and two othMs (1959) B.L.R. 207
(H. C.) ; Asaram and others v. Ludheshwar and others, A.I.R. (1938) Nag. 335
(F.B.), referred to and followed.
Mon Po Choe for the appellants.

Than Maung for the respondents.
U SAN MAUNG, ].-In Civil Regular Suit No. 44 of 1961

of th-;; Subdivisional Court of tnsein, the plaintiffs U Tun
Hlaing and Daw Myint Aye, who are the respondents in
lhe present appeal sued fue defendant-appellants Daw
Thaung Chit, Maung Kyi Myint and three others for
specific performance of lhe contract of sale of 125 acre
of land in Holding No. 7JC of Kwin No. 20, Kamayut Myo-
kwet, lnsein TownsWp, with a 1iouse standing tliereon, on
the ground Jhaf the decease(l U Aung 1in, Daw Thaung
Civil 2nd Appeill No. zo of 1964, against the decree of the District Court
of Insein, in Civil Appeal No. 20 of 1962, dated the 6th December, 1963.
c.c. Chit and Maung Kyi Myint had contracted to sell them to
t96S
the plaintiffs as per document, Exhibit A, and that after
THP~~ the death of U Aung Tin, Daw Thaung Chit and ,Maung
crrxT.
2. M AUNG
Kyi Myint had refused to execute a registered .deed of
Kvx MYxNT. conveyance. The defence of Daw Thaung Chit and
-~. MA
Kvu. Kvu M aung KYl Mymt and t h e three mmor def endants. w ho
.:~BMM~N~r. were the children of the deceased u Aung Tin was that
S ~UNG the document, Exhibit A, was obtained f:rom them by
M~~- fraud and misrepresentation, and that there was no
1. uvTuN consideration for the alleged sale o:{ the house and its
~~ site. On the pleadings, the learned . nial Judge framed
MYim Ava. several issues of which the most important were whether
U Aung Tin and the defendants Daw Thaung Chit and
Maung Kyi Myint did execute an agreement to sell the
suit house and its site as alleged in the plaint and whether
there was consideration for the said agreement. After
examining witnesses cited by both the parties, the learned
trial Judge came to the conclusion that what purported
to be an agreement to sell was in fact a sham document:
intended to cloak a different transaction, namely, mor~gage
of the suit house and the land on which it was situate,
and that full consideration as recited therein had not been
paid. In the result the plaintiffs' suit was dismissed with
costs.
Being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree of the
~ial Court tlie plaintiffs appealed and the learned District
!Jw:Ige of lnsein by his order datea the. 19th December
1962 in Civil Appeal Nd. 20 of 19q.2 re.manded the suit to
the trial Court under Order XLI, Rule 25 of the Civil
Proced~re Code for tlie trial of the issue whether or not
the document, Exhibit A, was obtained by the plaintiffs.
from U Aung Tin, Daw Thaung Chit and Maung. Kyi
Myint ..by fraudana misrepresenfation. After the suit
.. ~as remanded, 'fresh evidence was led before the successor .
or the learned Su~visional Judge .whose judgment was
under appeal. TIUs S~bdi:vlsional. 1udge submitted 'the
BURMA LAW REPORTS 2l
proceedings to the District Court with his answer to the c.c.
I96S
issue framed by the learned District Judge in the negative.
I. DAW
Accepting this answer the learned District Judge held that ThAUNc
the plaintiffs had SUCCeeded in prOVing the dUe eXeCUtiOn z. z~~~G
of the agreement, Exhibit A, and that therefore the Kv1 MYINT.
, '< . ~~AKYU
plaintiffs' suit should succeed. Accordingly he passed a Kyu.
judgment and decree in favour of the plaintiffs as prayed T~ll ~~<;..
for by them. Hence the present appeal under clause (d) S K~:~No
of sub-section (r) of section roo, Civil Procedure Code. MYINT.
v.
According to the plaintiff U Tun Hlaing who gave ~~A~~
evidence in the case, a sum of K 3,500 was given about Mv~~1'YB.
four or five days before the date of the execution of
Exhibit A and K 1,500 about the time of its execution. The
-document, Exhibit A, was written by the petition writer
U Sein (PW 3) and executed in the presence of Ko Mya
Than (PW 2), who resided with him and U Lone Tin
(PW r), his cousin-in-law who was also related to the
deceased U Aung Tin as uncle. The petition writer
U Sein said that before the execution of Exhibit A it was
read out by him to those present and it was signed by U
'Aung Tin and Maung Kyi Myint. The thumb impression
qf Daw Thaung Chit was also taken and U Lone Tin and
Maung Mya Than attested the document. U Lone Tin
(PW r) said that although the agreement, Exhibit A, was
read out by the petition writer, he did so in a low tone.
He also said that he did not see any money being paid by
U Tun Hlaing to U Aung Tin at the time Exhibit A was
executed.
The defence version as stated by Daw Thaung Chit
was that there were no payments of K 3,500 a 'few days
before the execution of Exhibit A and K 1,500 at about
the time of its execution as alleged by the plaintiffs. On
the other hand, the deceased U Aung Tin had borrowed
a few ye~~s before E.,'<l1ihit A was .executed K 3,500 from
U Tun Hlaing for the purpose of his business. This loan
c.c. was to bear interest at the rate of s% p~r mensem so that

1965
monthly payment of K 175 as interest had to be made.
.fir~~~- vVhen bl;l.siness declined .U Aung Tjn _w as unable to pay
CHtT. - interest regularly so that there was accumulated iriteresf
2. MAUNG . . h . f
Kvx MYIN'i:. to the amount of K. 1,500. T ere ore,
u A ung Tm
. h ad
3' Miro~YU to execute a documen( in favour of U Tjn Hlaing as
~ MMAuNG security for the loan. Daw Thaung Chit herself being'
.o.OB YlNT
. S MAuNe illiterate did not know the nature of the document which
~~. she was executing, but because her husband signed it she
I. u 'TuN put her thumb impreSSiOn thereon. The defendant
HLAINc. Maung Kyi Myint was about 17 years old at the time
M~;N~AA~e. Exhibit A was. executed. He said that so far as he under-
sto9d, Exhibit A was executed in order to secure the loan
of K 3,500 taken by his father for which he had been
paying monthly interest of K 175.
The defence story receives strong s_u pport from Ko

Kyaw Din (DW r). He said that the deceased U Aung
Tin had borrowed K 3,500 from the plaintiffs for his
business of calico printing. Interest had to be paid at 5%
per mensem. Ko Kyaw Din himself had once borrowed
a sum of K 4,ooo from the plaintiffs on the security of
his V 8 motorcar and at that time also he had to execute
a sale deed in favour of U Tun Hlaing. U Taik Kaung
(DW -8), a rice miller of "rhamaing was a friend of the
oeceased U Aung Tin. He said he knew for a fact that
v Aung Tin. had borrowed K 3,500 from u Tun.Hlaing
with interest at the rate. of s% per menseni, and that u
Aung Tin was in later _years l!-llable to pay the interest.
U Tun Hlaing then told U Aung Tin to execute a document
. to secure a loan of K 3,500 With .i nterest thereon, and
tha~ the house of U Aung Tin should be offered as
-secu.--ity. U Tail< Kimng ttied to dissuade U Tun -Hlaing
not to press for payment on the ground that U Aung Tirt
was then a sick man:; He did not kilow when an d how
th,e _d qcument, .Exhibit _A, was exe~uted, but he could say .
BURMA LAW ~PORTS 23..
that at that time the land alone was wortli about!

I . DAW
On the evidence on record, llie learned Subdivisional Tt:.\UNG
Judge who passed the judgment relying upon tlie decision 2. %1~~~G
of the late High Court in Shio Karan Singh v. Surya Natli ~~~ 1k~~
~:U
Singh and two others (1) came to llie conclusion that 4 nAAUNG
Exhibit A was executed as a sham document intending to ToE MYmT.
cloak the real transaction which was the mortgage of the s. ~~a
suit house and its site by U Aung Tin, his wife Daw Thaung MvrNT.
~.
Chit and his son Maung Kyi Myint for the aebt of ~~TuN
K 3,500 and interest thereon. His successor who 2. 0:.~
answered the issue framed by the District Judge held that MYJNT AYE.
.since the defendants Daw Thaung Chit and Maung Kyi
Myint and the deceased U Aung Tin executed the
document, Exhibit A, knowing the nature of.its contents,
the defenaants were precluded by section 92 of the
Evidence Act for adducing evidence ~o show that it was
intended to be a cloak for something else, namely,
mortgage of the suit house and its site. Th'e learned
DistTic.t Judge agreeing with this view had decreed the
plaintiffs' suit.
Now, it is common ground that U Aung Tin's health
was at a low ebb at the time EXhibit A was executed by
him. His business was failing ana he was depressed in
mind. The defendan~ Daw Thaung Chit was illiterate
and the defendant Maung Kyi Myint was qujte young and
inexperienced. Acco:r,-ding to the plaintiff he paid the
consideration of K s,ooo to U Aun:g Tin in two instal-
ments: 'namely, K 3,500 a few 'days before the execution
of the document, Exhibit A, and K I,soo at the time of
its execution. However, his own witness U Lone Tjn
(PVV I). who was again cited by th.e .defendants after the
remand; admitted that. when U Aung Tin died about six
mo1.1ths after the execution of Exhibit A, he died as a
pauper. U Lone Tin himself had to defray the funeral
(t) (r959) B.L.R .2 07 (H. C.).
c.c. expenses. Therefore the plaintiffs' story that a considera-

1965 .
tion of K 5,ooo in cash was paid at or about the time of
.j.;.~~~ . the execution of Exhibit A is palpably untrue. In
z. CMHti:.
AUNG
contrast, the defence story that a few years before the
Kvz MYINT. execution of Exhibit A U Aung Tin had borrowed from
. 3 MA :Kvu.Kvu U Tun. Hlamg . K 3,500 f or h. .,Is busmess
. at a h.1gh rate o f
Tt~ ~~~. interest of s%. per mensem, and ihal because he was
S ~~~G largely in arrears in. interest payment, Exhibit A had to be
MYINT. executed, rings true. It is SJipported by an independent
1 . UTUN witness like U Taik Kaung (DW 8). Furthermore,
~b~~ according to U Taik Kaung the land alone was worth
MvzNT AYB. about K 15,000 at the time Exhibit A was .executed.
Therefore, I am of the opinion that the defendants oaw
. Thaung Chit and Maung Kyi Myint were telling the truth
when they stated that the transaction evidenced by Exhibit
A was meant to be a mortgage and not a deed of agree-
ment to sell the property in question.
No doubt, U Sein (PW 3), the writer of the document.
Exhibit A, said that he read it out to the executants before
the execution of Exhibit A. However, U Lone Tin said
that this was done in a low tone. . Therefore, .the probab-
ilities are that Daw Thaung Chit and Maung Kyi Myint
were not paying any particular attention to the contents
of Exhibit A at the time it was being read out by U Sein.
Daw Thaung Chit affixed her thumb impression or Exl1ihit
A beca':lse her husband had signed jt. As for Maung Kyi
Myint he sjgned it thinking that it was not unusual to
execute s. uch. . a document
. even if .the
. .transaction was in
fact a mortgage. .
Exhibit A itself is a peculiar aocument. \Nhile the.
heading shows that jt was an agr~ement to sell the house
and it:S site, the body of the document was drafted as ifit
was in evidence of an outright sale with possession. No
.doubt, there is a recital to the effect that-
" C' C' C' Oc 0 . C' 'I C 0 C' OC'
G:[>?mG.s?c
T
08~ :)f? ::-~ .,)"'.sQOO:>~S'dQI
10 -, Jl ..-
Groc:o:><,-?m o:>moocro
-l n. o. t. -r
0 C: .. (' (' (' 0
~gG('O')(DC!OO()')!.)(DGOg(X)~
(' \. ~ (' 'l (' . ('.@: "
.S'J!';::>:>O:G tl,?C:GO:OI0:D()) o.s:;- 0::.
1! ~ J -, I ~ .. A C ! T .:
BU~A LAVV REPORTS 25
However, as observed by the learned Subdivisional Judge, c.c.

rg6s
who wrote the judgment under appeal, this statement is
J. DAW
not unequivocal. It could be construed as meaning that THAUNG
when permission under section 39 was obtained the land 2 . ~!~~m
would be mutated into the names o{ UTun Hlaing and his I~vk~v:k~
3
sister Daw Myint Aye. Accordingly, it is quite probable K-vu
.t h at none of the parties enVISage
d t h e execution
f 4 MAO.NG
o a ToE MviNT.
registered deed of sale. and that Exhibit A was drafted 5/t~";a
with a view to attract the provisions of section 53A of the MY INT.
v.
Transfer of Property Act. x. u TON
, HLA1NG.
For these reasons I consider that Exhibit A was a snam 2
. DAw
document intending to cloak the real transaction, namely, MYlNl' Au.

the mortgage of the suit house and its site by U Aung Tin,
his wife Daw Thaung Chit and his son Maung Kyi Myint
for an old debt of K 3,500 with interest thereon. There-
fore, oral evidence is admissible to prove the real nature
of tlie transaction. In this connection, see the observa-
tion of .Bose, J. in Asaram and others v. Ludheshwar and
others (2) which has been quoted with approval in the
case of Shio Karan Singh v. Surya Nath Singh and two
Others (1). Section 92 of the Evidence Act does not stand
in the way of oral evidence being given to prove the real
nature of the transaction which Exhibit A was intended to
-cloak.
For these reasons 1 consider that the learned Sub-
divisional . Judge who passed the judgment now under
aRpeal was correct in the conclusion arrived at by him.
'The appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree of the
trial Court are confirmed and those of the District Court
of Insein reversed. The defendants are awarded costs
throughout. Advocate fees in this Court being assessed at
'five gold mohurs.
(2) A.T.R. (193~) Nag. 335 (F.B.).

26 BURMA LAW REPORTS.
APPELLATE CIVIL
c.c: MA THEIN HAN (APPELLANT)

I96s
F_eb. 23. v.
u MYA MAUNG AND ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Compromise decree-'l.alidity of--payment of " G9l:d " - Whether mesne

profit$ or rent-Creation of tenancy under the R ent Control Acts-Non-
registration of lease-whether valid-s. 17 (2} (vi) Registration Act-
Frustration-impossibility of performance--when exists. .
T he parties to the present Appeal had entered into a compromise petition
and a decree had been passed on it.
One of the terms o.f the deere~ was that for a period of 4 yenrs the Plaintiff
should allow the first Defend~nt to occupy the suit land on payinent of K 30
a month as " c;q1:0> " (ground rent}. Another term was .that if the Jst
D t':fcpdant was ahle to pur::hase for the Plaintiffs a piece of land comparable
to that of the suit land and situated i n a certain area . within 4 years from the
date of the decree, the Plaintiffs would convey the suit land to the Ist Defendant.
The Plaintiffs subseq'.lently applied f!lr execution of the dec(ee and the said
application was granted by the District Judge.
Oa Appe:tl to the Chief Court, onlv t ;vo p) iots were raised by t"t<: Defendant/
Appellant : firstly, that a& a testilt of the ompro:nise dect ec t'-1:! re~ationship of
Landiord and tenant had beo:n created, an1 therefor~ the Anp!tant/D~fendant
can be ejected only under t he prtHis<ons of the Urb>lh Rent 8o:1t->\ Act ,. t96o ;
and secondly, that the comprom \so;: d ecree w<>s impos~ihle of pe fonnance as the
D efendant was upahle to purchase <:t ?ie:;~ 0 land to th e Jikim~ of tltc Plaintiffs ..
H eld : All the terms which had been incorporated in th;: compromise
decree had ~een properly incorporated. .
U 1V.laung Maung and one v. lvfmt.ng M{.;ung (19.56) B.L.R 188 (F.B.}; Hemanta.
Kuma~i Debi v. Midnapur Z amindari Co., A.l.R. { IQI9) .. Privy Council 79 ;
Go!;ida ChandraPazv:.:owark.z .V.1t h .Pal, I.L.R ~s, 837 re':: . ;.~i to .
. l-Iel:i . also : \Vhat th.:: Ddendarit i,ad. ag~eed ~o pay fro:n tne date of the
' . . .. ~ d . .. ' h . \ (( :-:- ') . "l d b ..
"Q.e<:ree was mesne pro}l't$ 2n not rent a tnougn t . e worG G. i:: : ~ ;, 1a . ccn
used therein. A lease or agreement:oflease must relate.to sOP-1~ do::u<:nent that
creates a .present and immediate intf'r.::st in the land.
B:emanta Kumar{ Debi: v. 1J,1idn,;pi;-r Zamindari co., A. 1.~. ( r<;19) Privy .
Council, 79 referred to.
$. Civil :ind Appeai N.o. 1 iO of 1903 in the Chief Cour t, a~ni st the d~<~ree
of the D istrict Court of' Pegu in Civil M_iscellaneous Ai>"'< "'' .,;;~o. s of 19.62,.
dated 27 September 1963 . .
Even assuming that by the tem1s of the compromise decree a tenancy was c.c.
created in favour of the rst D!!fendant, both the Urban Rent Control Acts 1965
are irrelevant for the purposes of the present case. The decree must be taken
MA
as .a whole and it is not open to a party to a compromise decree to take advan- THEIN HAN
tage of a part of it and resist its effect as to the rest. tl.
UMYA
Hema11ta Kwnari Debi v. Midnapur Zamindari Co., A.I.R. (1919), Privy
MAtlNG ANO.
Council, 79 referred to. ONE.
Moreover, the lease (which is for 4 years) would be valid notwithstanding
that it i:; not evidenced by a registered document. Having been incorporated
in a compromise decree, s. 17 (2) (vi) of the Registration Act applies and no
registration was necessary for the validity of the lease.
Held further : Regarding the question of frustration there is no force in this
contention. All that the Defendant is required to prove is that she offered
a piece of land in the stipulated area comparable to the site of the suit land and
that the Plaintiffs had refused to accept the same. It is not necessary for the
land so offered to be entirely to the liking of the Plaintiffs.
Cheng Po for the appellant.

Tun Maung for the respondents.
U SAN MAUNG, 1.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 5 of 1951

of the Subdivisional Cour.t of Pegu the present respondents
U Mya Maung and Daw Khin Thein sued the defendant-
appellant Ma Thein Han fo~ possessjon of a house site
known as Holding No. 29-B of r949-50 in Panhlaing
Kyonyo'dan Yat No. 13, Pegu Myoma Charge No. 49 of Pegu
Town. In that suit the plaintiffs were husband and wife
and the present appellant Ma Thein Han was the own
sister of the plaintiff"Daw Khin Thein. The 2nd defendant
Daw Pwa was the mother of .Daw Khin Thein and Ma
Thein Han while the 3rd and 4th defendants Alamun and
Ma E Thin were the tenants of Ma Thein Han. The
plaintiffs' case was that the . suit _la~d was purchased
by. them by a registered deed of sale, No. 22o of 1948 of
the Sub-Registrar, Pegu arid that sometime after their
purchase the two defendants Ma Thein Han and Daw
Pwa, surreptitiously and' without the consent of the
plaintiffs erected thereon a tWo-storeyed building. They
occupied part of the building and let out parts to Al~mun
.and Ma E Thin. When the 1st and 2nd defendants failed
to comply with th'e repeated requests of the plaintiffs to

dismantle their building the plaintiffs moved the Pegu
MA
THErN HAN Municipality, by application dated the 30th of August
u MvA 1949 and again, on the 30th of January :1950, to demolish
MAuNG AND the same as the plaintiffs learnt tha~ the building had been
ONB. erected without any plan having been approved by the
Municipality. However, the plaintiffs' applications to the
municipal autnorities .having proved fruitless they had to
file the suit for possession and also for mesne profits from
August 1949 till the end of April 1951. Further mesne
profits from the date of the suit till the date of delivery oj
possession of ~he suit land were also claimed.
The de;fendant Ma Thein Han by het: written state-
ment denied that she and her mother Daw Pwa had surrep-
titiously and without consent of the plaintiffs ereG:ted the
~o~storeyed building in question. On the other hand,
she said that it was she who had originally made a wn-
trac~ with the agent of Vellamai Achi, the owner of the
suit land for the purchase of the same at a price of
Rs. 2,ooo for which an advance of Rs. 200 had been
paid. Later, at the request of the plaintiffs she had
allowed them to. purchase the suit land for Rs. 2,ooo
from Vellamai Achi and the plaindffs had to pay the
owner only Rs. r,8oo as she had already paid Rs. 2oo
as earnest money. At the time of the pu~chase the plain-
tiffs agreed with her that they would convey to her the
suit land on payment to them of Rs. I ,Sob only. About
the month of F~bruary, 1949. she obtained the permission
of .the p1aintiffs to occupy th~ suit land free of rent and to
construct a substantial building thereon. After obtail)jng
the permission the two storeyed building was construc~ed
at a cost of about ~ 8,ooo. Then .she offered to -pay
the plaintiffs Rs. I,8oo in order that the. suit land might
be_, conveyed to her but the plaintiffs r~fused to allow her
to purchase the . suit land. Accordingly, ~he plaintiffs'
:suit for possession and mesne profits should be dismissed
BURMA LAW REPORTS 29 .
as she was occupying the suit land under a contract of c.c.

1965
sale and she was at all times willing to perform her part
MA
of the contract. 'l'HE!N HAN
ft.
The defendant Daw Pwa by a separate written state- u MYA
. MAUNG AND
ment supported the story of her daughter Ma Them Han. oNs.
She also said that she had been wrongly impleaded in the
suit as the house was built by Ma Thein Han and she was
living with her as a aependent. The other defendants did
not contest the plaintiffs' suit.
The suit did not, however, proceed to a hearing on the
merits of each party's case. The parties being close
relatives better counsels seemed to have prevailed and on
the I6th of May 1951, a compromise petition was filed
for the passing of a decree in the following terms:-
(a) TI1at the 2nd defendant Daw Pwa be dismissed
from the suit "~Nith no order as to costs.
(b) That the rst defendant should pay to the
plaintiffs Rs .. soo for the use and occupation
of the suit land and costs of the suit by
monthly instalments of K 20 with effect from
the rst of September, 1951.
(c) That. from the date of the decree for a period of
4 years the plaintiffs should allow the .rst
defendant to occupy the suit land on payment
of K 30 a month as " c:g1:0l " (ground rent).
(d) That after .the expiry of the period of 4 years
from the date of the decree the rst defendant
should vacate from the suit land after

aemolishing the building standing thereon.
(e) That the rst defendant will pay to the plaintiffs
the ~urn of K so as stipulated in (b) and (c)
above on or before the 5th of e.'\ch month.
(f) That on failure to make such payments die
plaintiffs would be at liberty to file e~_ecution
c.c. proceedings against the rst defendant for

1965
recovery of all the sums due to them and for
MA the ejectment of the defendant.
THEIN HAN
'1/.
U MYA (g) That if the rst defendant were able to purchase
MAuNG AND
ONE.
for the plaintiffs a piece of land comparable to
that of the suit land and situated in 2 I st or
22nd Street or Panhlaing Road or Kone-baw
Road within 4 years from the date of the
decree the plaintiffs would convey the suit
land to the 1st defendant.
A decree in terms of the compromise was- accordingly

passe<I on Ute r6th of August, 1951.
on the 29th of November, 1958, the plaintiffs U Mya
Maung and Daw Khin Thein filed an application for execu-
~on of the decree for possession and for recovery of the
sums at,Ie to dlem under tile terms of the compromise
<Iecree on the ground dlat since the date of the decree
the rst defendant Ma Thein Han had only paid K 300
which did not even cover the amount stipulated in clause
~b) of the terms o$ the decree~ The defendant Ma Thein
Han filed a written objection to the . application for
execuQ.on contending, inter alia : -
tr) that 't he application for execution having been
filed more .t han 3 years from the date of the
. decree it was barred by limitati9n.
l2) t hat she had been paying the p~aintiffs regularly
up ~ll March, 1958, the sums stipulated in
Ute dea:ee as per details given in the sChedule
annexed to her written objection.
(3) that the krm contained in clause (g) of the
compromise decree was impoSsible of perfor-
. mance as the plaintiffs bad refused' :to accept
a number
. of alternativeS sites
. shown
.. . . to them
and Utat therefore, the whole compromise
agreement giving rise to the compromise c.c.
r g6s
decree had become void.
MA
(4) that in any event, in vieW Of the COming into T Hsm H AN
force in the meantime of the Urban Rent u MYA

Control Act, 1960, she should be allowed to MAUNG AND
ONJ!.
pay arrear$ of rent which may be found due
to the plaintifis by reasonable monthly instal-
ments as provided for in section I 6 of that
Act.
1'hC learned Subd.ivisional Judge, however, over-ruled
all these objections. He held that section 2 of the Special
Limitation and Accrual of In~erest (Adjustment) Act, 1950,
applied and that lhe courts in Pegu must be deemed to be
closed within the meaning of section 4 of the Limitation
'Act on the date the plaintiff-respondents filed their
application for execution. In coming to this conclusion
the learnoo Judge relied upon the decision of the late High
Court in U Maung Maung and one v. Maung Maung (rJ.
He also held that the defendant-appellant Daw Thein Han
had failed ~o prove the payments as detajled in the
schedule annexed fo her written objection. It was also
held jhat the doctrine of frustration of contract was
inapplicable ~o the case as it was not impossible for the .
defendant to perform thai pari: of the compromjse decree
as contained in clause (g) thereof. Finally, he held that
the provisiqns o{ the Urban Rent Control Acts ot I 948
and 1960 were not ~pplicable. _Accordingly, the learn~
Subdivisional Judge directed fuai exe~~Qon shoulQ. pro-
ceed. Being dissatisfied with the order of the learned
Subdiv:isional Judge the aefendant Ma Thein Han appe~led .
and the learned DismCt: Judge agr~g with the findings
of the trial Court in his Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5 .
of 19~2 dismissed the appeal. Hence fue present second
appeal by Ma Thein Han.
' (x) (1956) B.L.R. x88 (F.B.).
c.c. Only two points have been r aised by the learned

1965
Advocate for the defendant-appellant Ma Thein Han : -
MA
T H BJNHAN (a) that clause (g) of the compromise decree was impossible
v. of performance : and (b) that in tem;ts of the compromise
UMYA
M AUNG AND d~cree, especially dause .(c) :thereof :the rela.t;ionship o~
ONB.
landlord and tenant had been created as between the
plaintiffs and the defendant Ma Thein Han so that Ma
Thein Han ca...."lnot be ejected otherwise than as provided
for in the Urban Rent Control Act of 1:960. The question
therefore is whether .these contentions can be allowed t.o
prevail.
Unquestionably, all. the terms contained. in the agree-
m.ent dated. the x6th of May I95Jr had been validly
incorporated in the compromise decree. .As pointed out
by the PriV'J Council ill the leading case of Hemanta
Kumali Debi v. Midnapur Zamindmi Co. (2) a proper and
effectual method of carrying out the terms of section 375
of the Civil Procedure Code, 1882, corresponding to Order
XXIII, Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is for the
:decree to recite the whole of the agreement and then to
conclude with an qrder relative to that part which is the
subject of the suit. As to wh at constitutes the subject of
the suit the case of Gobinda Chandra Pal v. Dwarka Natli.
Pal {3) affords a useful illustration. There, upon a suit
for recovery of money due on bahikhata accounts, a com-
proinise was com~ :t o, and a petition filed in accordance
with which a decree was .made to . e effect that the
defendants must pay the plaintiffscertain sums of money
with interest ~hereon in instalments and that the immove-
able property specified .therein should be hypothecate(} for
t he realization of the said money, itwas .held that as the
hypothecation of immoveable propert.y in the con.Sen~
decree was e c.on~ideration for the i;jme .allowed for,
payment of .the sum decreed ~y instalments it was an
integral
.
and necessary part of the adjustment of the
.
cla.im
(2) .A.I,R. (1919) Privy Counci.l 79 (3) l.L.R. 35 . Cal. 837.- .
in the suit. Accordingly, the hypothecation clause was c.c.

19,65
,properly inserted in the consent decree and the Court did
MA
not act against the provisions of section 375 of the Code THBJN HAN
.of Civil Procedure.in allowing its insertion. u MvA

In this connection the observations of a Bench of the MAt:No AND
Patna High Court in Ramjanarri v. Bindeshwari (4) may oNJr

.be usefully quoted. It was observed:-
" The question then boils down ~o this. What is meant
by the expression: subject-matter of the suit? No hard and
fast rule can be laid down as to the meaning of this expression
which will inevitably depend upon the facts of each case.
The question whether a P.articular term of a compromise
relates to the subject-matter of the suit has to be answered
on the frame of the suit, the reliefs claimed and the matters
which arose for decision in the case on the pleadings of the
parties. The term is comprehensive enough and if the com-
promise relates .to all those matters which fell to be decided
in the case, it could not be said that any part of the com-
promise was beyond the subject-matter of the suit. There
is a large body of authority to show that where a compro-
mise relating to matters outside the scop~ of the s'.lit is a
part of the consideration for the agreement as to
matters in suit, the entire compromjse as an integral
whole must be recorded and decreed as relating to the suit
whether they otherwise relate to the suit or not. But the
present case stands on a stronger footing. . Here the
defendant-appellant themselves contended that the contract
for sale related to the sale of both the houses referred to in
the compromise petition. That being so, the matter whether
the contract for sale related only to one house or to both
~e houses was entirely within the scope of the suit, and had
to be decided in the case. Parties, therefore, could come to
an agreement in regard to this matter and agree that the
.contract in question related to both the houses. In effect
that is what they have done and the compromise, therefore,
as affecting both the houses falls within the subject-matter of
the suit. In Cbaru Chandra Mitra v. Sambbu Natb Pandey
'(5) which is a FUll B.ench decision of this Court, it has been
(+) I.L.R. Patna VoL 29. p.. 6xo at 6z6-zJ. (s) (1918) 3 Pat. L.J. zss, F. J.
3
c.c. observed by Atkinson, ]., at p. 268 of the report that where,

1965 as in the present case :
MA 'the compromise was really an adjustment of the rights
THmNHAN
v. and differences in respect of all matters in dispute betWeen
u MYA them whether as framed in. the plaint or set up by way of
M!.UNG AND
em. <:Jefence in the written st atement ; and that the compromise
purported to be a final settlement and adjustment of these
disputes on a fair and satisfactory basis acceptable to all
it must be held to relate to the suit which expression
should receive an extended constrUction. It must be there
fore, held that the compromise jn so far as it relates not
only to the house in occupation of the plaintiff but also in
respect of the other house referred to therein has to be
:regarded as forming the operative part of the decree with
the result that the entire compromise decree could be
executable as such. .,
Applying the test enunciated above there can be no
doubt that ali the terms which I had enumerated in the
earlier part of this judgment had been properly incorporated
in the compromise aecree in the suit now under considera-
tion. The question now which arises for. consideration is
this : Has the defendant-appellant Ma Thein Han been
constituted a tenant of the plaintiffs as from the date of
the comprorrrise decree because of clause (c) thereof? In
this connection, the learned District Judge held that what
the defendant. had ~greed to pay was K 30 mesne profits
from the date of .the decree and not as rent although the
word " Gg1:~ " had .been used therein. The reason he
gave was that when the parties talked of. mesne profits
for the period prior .to the date qf the suit they used the
11 o0 r.; o o<: r.; ' r.; 'l "
expreSSIOn,

. o:>'P:~~~~<T.>
'
I Gt::Jot G;;~c @~:Diro?~GX? Glljgl:~ .
.and so the express~on ~.. c;ql:~ ., in clause {c) relating to
. the period subsequent to the date of the decree . was an
inartistic way of expressing the same idea. I am inclined
to. agree .'with this conclusion of ,the leanied.DiSb.ict Judge
b.ecaU.Se it was nobody's case. that .t he :rst defendcmt was
th~. tenan.t of ~e plaintiffs . . According. to .the plaintiffs
sh~ was a tre5p~ser and according to the Ist defend~~
BURMA LAW REPORTS 35"
she was in occupation by permission of the plaintiffs c.c.

1965
because of the existence of the contract of sale in her
M~;
favour. Af> a lease or agreement of lease must relate to THEIN HAN
some document that creates a p:resent and immediate u ~-\1vA

interest in the land vide Hemanta Kumari Debi's (2) case MAUNG ANo
cited above there can be no such thing as ex post facto oNe.

lease. Therefore, clause (b) of the compromise decree
undoubtedly related to mesne profits and cluase (c) also
apparently envisaged futr.rre !!!~sne profits for a period of
4 years from the date of the decree.
However, even assuming that by the terms of the

compromise decree a tenancy in favour of the 1St aefen-
dant Ma Thein Han was created for a period of 4 years
from the date of the decree I do not consider that either
section I I (r) of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948 or
section 12 (r) of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960 is
relevant for the purpose of the present case. The decree
must be taken as a whole and it is not open to a party to
a compromise decree to take advantage of a part of it and
resist its effect as to the rest. So said the Privy Council
in Heman.ta Kumar Debi v. Midnapur Zamindari Co. (2).
The advantage accruing to the defendant Ma Thein Han
from the fact of the agreement to allow her to stay on
the suit land for 4 years from the date of the decree on
payment of K 30 a month as rent (assuming it is to be
considered as rent) is that the lease is valid notwith-
standing that it is .n ot evidenced by a registered document.
Having been incorporated in a compromise decree section
17. sub-section ~2), clause {vi) of the Registration Act
applied and no registration was necessary for the validity
of the lease. Had the agreeme~t not been incorporated
in a decree the lease for a period exceeding one year
would be invalid in law and the defendant Ma Thein Han
wpuld be liable to be ejected after 15 days' notice ending
as
with the month of tenancy_ provided for in section ro(f
BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
c. c.
1965
of the Transfer of Property Act. If the Urban Rent Con- .
- trol Act of I 948 or I 960 as the case may be, is in opera-
MA
THBIN HAN tion she can be ejected if the land is required bona fide by
. u ~;A the landlord for the erection of a building thereon. [See
ONE AND section II (1) (d) of the Urban Rent Control Act, r94.S3
MAUNe _ and
section 12 (z\ (d) of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960.]
However, because clause (c) has been incorporated in the
compromise decree she could remain on the suit land for
4 years from the date of the decree so long as she paid
rent regularly. Having had the advantage of this clause
she cannot turn round to say that she cannot be ejected
if she failed to vacate after the 4 years' period stipulated
in clause _(c) of the compromise decree has expired.
In short, assuming that clause (c) did have the effect
of creating a tenancy of the suit land for a period of 4
years such a creation having derived its force from the
terms of the compromise decree itself the defendant-
appellant cannot resist its effect, namely, that she is liable
to be ejected if she does not vacate after 4 years or if she
fails to pay rent regularly as stipulated in the decree.
Regarding the question wh~th~r the whole agreement
leadjng to the passing of the compromise decr~e was
frustrated beca~se of the alleged impossibility of per-
formance of clause (g) I consider that there is no force
whatsoever in this contention. All that .the defendant
is required .t o prove to the Court is that she did offer
a .piece of .land in ~he area stipulated in that clause which
Was comparable in size to the su~t land and that the
plaintiffs had refused to accept the same in orde:r: to resist
the effect of clause (c) of the compromise decree. How-
ever, the defenda:nt had not in the execution proceedings
now under consideration been able to prove this fact. It
was not necessary as the defendant' had contended that the
piec;e of l~nd . offered as an alternative to the suit land
should be entirely .to the liking of the plaintiffs ; all that
was necessary was that .the land offered mu~t be in tha~
B~ LAVV REPORTS 37
particular area and be of comparable size. This c.c.
1965
undoubtedly is a justifiable issue. Accordingly, I am not
MA
prepared to hold that clause (g) of the compromise decree 'I'lmN HAN
was impossible of performance. u"M:YA
- For these reasons I do not consider that there is any MAUNe ..uro
merit in the present appeal. It is accordingly dismissed . om.
wiu'l costs, Advocate's fees being assessed at 5 (five} gc!d
rnohurs.
CRIMINAL REVISION
Before U San lv.laung, :J.
c.1965
c. MAUNG BA THIN (APPLICANT) .
Jan. 22. v.
THE UNION OF BURMA (RESPONDENT).*
Revision- Warrant of attachment under s. 146 of the Criminal Procedure Code

by Toz:mship Magistrate- gr01mds for seiting aside- power of District
Magistrate to withdraw order.
Held : It is not the practice of the Chief Court to i~terfere in Revision in
criminal matters when the Application filed is more than 6o days after the order
complained of, unless it is accompanied by an explanation of the delay and the
necessary affidavits as required under paragraph 766 of the Courts Manual.
Held aTso : R~earnine a warmnt of attachm~nt which ha:o ht>R.n issuc-.d hy
a Township Magistrate under s. 146 (x) of the Criminal Procedure Code,
although the Chief Court may decline to interfere in revisio~ with regard to it,
the District Magistrate himself has the power to withdraw the attachment
after due enquiry, under the proviso to s. 146 (1).
He may also transfer the case to a Magistrate of the xst Class having juris-
diction over the local area of the land in dispute.
U Aung Dwe ;,. U Chan Aye, (1955) B.L.R. 366 ; iv.laung Pan Ohn and another
v. Maung Tun Thein, (1961) B.L.R. 280 ; Dhanput Singh v. Chatterput S ingh,
I.L.R. 20 Cal. 513 ; Khosh l!~ohame:i. ::>i,-kar ~. Nazir Mohamed, I.l...R. 33 Cal.
352 (F.B.) ; and Satish Chandra Panday v. Rafendta Narain Bagchi, LL.R.
22 (1895) Cal. 899, referred to.
- for the applicant.

Khin Sein (Government Advocate{) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUI'fG, J.-In Criminal Revision ~ase No. 2 of

1964 of the District Magistrate, Thayetmyo, whi~h was
initiated on the application of Ma Than-on the 2 3rd of
March 1964, the learned DistrictMagistrate l;>y }lis order
dated t~?-e x6th of June 1964 r~commended to this Court
that the order of the Township Magistrate, Aunglan, dated
the 7th September 1961, under sub-section (r) of section
146 of the Criminal Procedure Code be set aside on th~
Cri!Dinal Revisiop..No. xo8 (B) of !96-i.
ground that the learned Magistrate had acted without c.c.

zs
juris~icti<?n. The facts giving rise to the present recom-
MAUNO BA
mendation of the learned District Magistrate are briefly THIN
!7.
these: THE UNION
OF BURMA.
On the 2nd of September 1961, U Aye, Hea'dman of
Thayettaw Quarter, Aunglan-myo, made a report to the
Township Magistrate that there was a likelihood of the
breach of the peace between two rival claimants to hold-
ing No. 263 of 1960-61 of Thayettaw Quarter, Aunglan-
.myo and that accordingly the learned Magistrate should
take necessary action according to law. The Magistrate
thereupon examined U Aye who said that the dispute
was between one Maung Khin and Ma Than because
Maung Khin closed the gates of the compound leading
to the houses of Ma Ohn Khin, and U Nyi Bu who were
residing on this land and that the dispute was so heated
that there was likelihood .t o a breach of the peace. The
Township Magistrate then sent the papers to the Police
Station Officer for inquiry and report as to the existence
or oi.l1cwise of tb.c likclil<ood of a brcac!i. of the peace.
The Police Station Officer reported immediately that the
two parties in dispute were having heated arguments over
the n:~.a::tcr and that unless the police were to watch over
the lo~ality both night and day, which was not possible,
there was likelihood to breach of peace resulting from the
arguments. This report 'Yas received on the 4th of
September 1961 and the learned Township Magistrate after
perusal thereof recorded the following order in his diary :
" Having perused the police report I am satisfied that
criminal cases ~re likely to emerge from the disj>ute between
the parties: Accordingly I order that copies of prohibitory
order under section 145, Criminal Procedure Code be served
:up~n the disputants and the Headman and a c.opy of the
order be affixed in a conspicuous place near the property
in disp~te. Also call upon .the two parties concerned. ~o
<-vme to Court ory the 7th _September 1961 _brjnging 'two
witn ses each in support of their claims." ..
BURMA LAW REPORTS
On the 7th September, 1961, the two disputants,

Ma Than and M~ung Khin were examined ; U Nyi Bu, the
~T:rC:. BA access to whose house was blocked was also examine~.
'Tali UNioN The Headman was also examined, but it is not clear on
oF BuRMA. which date. Seven other witnesses were also examined
but the headi:q.g of their deposition record states that the
date of exam1nation was the 9th of July 196r which was
obviously a_n error for the 7th September 196r. After
examining these witnesses the learned Township Magis-
trate, by ashort Diary Order dated the 7th of September
r 96 r, state:d that he was unable to decide who had the
right to be in possession of the disputed ]and that accord- .
ingiy there would be a warrant of attachment under sec-
tion 145 of the . Criminal Procedure Code. A warrant
of attachment was actually issued, but obviously another
error was committed becaus~ such a warrant should be
und~r sub-section (r) of section 146 of the c ode.
Now, the undisputed facts were that Holding No. 263
in question consists .o f two plots, namely, No. 366 on the
south side and No. 367 .o n the north. No: 366 was
actually in possession of one of the disputants, Maung
Khin. No. 367 was in the possession of U Nyi BU. and .
Ma Ohn Khin. Maung Khin claimed that both U Nyi Bu
and Ma Ohn Khin were in possession of plot No. 367 as
his tenant and licensee. On the other hand, the other
disputant . Ma Than claimed that the whole of Holding
No. 263 having devolved upon ~er deceased husband U Ba
~aw on the death of his mother Daw Lay a:bout 17 years
ago, Mamig Khin an~ Ma Ohn Khin were _residing .on the
land with-the permission of her husband while U Ny~ Bu
was her husband's tenant. A few days befor.e this dispute
~ccurred, Maung Khin and his sister Ma Than Yin had the
whole Holdin~ . No. 263 mutated from the name of their
grandmother Daw Lay to their own names. Thereafter,
they shut the gates leadi:Q.gto the houses of U Nyi Bu and
!vfa Oh~ Khin in asse;rtio~ of th,eir daim to ownership ove~
BURMA LAvV REPORTS
,
the whole holding. Therefore, the dispute over the owner- c.c.
I96S
ship of the land arose between Ma Than as widow of
MAUNGBA
U Ba Saw on the one hand, and Maung Khin and Ma Than THIN
Yin on the other, these persons incidentally, being the THE "'uNro~
nephew and niece of U Ba Saw. oF BuRMA.
Ma Ohn Khin who lived on Plot No. 367 of Holding

No. 263 being fed-up with the conduct of Maung Khin
went to reside in another house leavipg her son to go and
sleep in her house at night. She had also sold her house
to Ma Than. So the result of the Township Magistrate's
order of attachment, was that while Ma Than and h.e r
alleged licensee Ma _Ohn Khin remained- ousted Maung
Khin and U Nyi Bu con~nued to occupy Plot No. 366 and
Plot No. 367 respectively. According to Ma Than the
Magistrate subsequently ordered the ~,I;ltrance to U Nyi
Bu's house to be opened so that the only person remain-
ing aggrieved by the Magistrate's order was herself.
Ma Than, however, did not take any steps to have
the Township Magistrate's order of attachment dated the
7th September 1961 set aside in revision until she filed
the present application before the District Magistrate,
Thayetmyo, on the 23rd March 1964, more than 2.Yz years
later. In the meantime, she appealed to the Deputy Com-
missioner, Thayetmy9, against the order of the Subdivi-
sional Officer for the mutation of names in respect of
Holding No. 263 from that of Daw Lay to those of Maung
Khin and Ma Than Yin. In this she was successful and
on the 2oth of Novembe~ 1962, the Deputy Commissioner
by his or<ler in District Offic;e Revenue Proceedings No. c1:-n.-
of 1962-63 direc.ted that the land should remain in the-
name of Daw Lay until such time as the civil courts had
adjudicated on the rights of ownership over the land.
Ma Than then applied to the Township Magistrate, _Aung-
lanmyo, to ~thdraw the -~Jder of attachment of his
predecess9r ' and ' this ... appiication was apparently. made
c.c. under the proviso to sub-section (r) of section 146 which

I96S . reads: .
MAuNG BA
. THIN '' . . . Provided that the District Magistrate or the
t1. Magistrate who has attached the subject of dispute may
THB:f! UNION
OF BVllMA. withdraw the attachment at any time if he is satisfied that
there is no longer any likelihood of a breach of the peace
in regard to the subject of dispute."
The stand taken by Ma Than in her application was

that since the land had been re-mutated .to the name of
Daw Lay there was no likelli'lood of a breach of the peace
any longer. The matter was enquired jnto by the succes-
sor of the Township O~cer who passed the order of attach-
ment dated the 7th September 196r. After examining
witnesses as to the likelihood of a breach of the peace
still existing or not, the learned Magistrate discovered that
he had no jurisdiction as he was . exercising only second
Class magisterial powers-proceeding under sections 145
and 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being within the
jurisdiction only of District Magistrates, . Subdivisional
.Magistr~tcs and lvfagistr3.t~~ cf the first Class. He then.
submitted the proceedings to the Subdivisional Magistrate
for necess~y action with the report that in his opinion,
in spite of the. mutation of the name of ownership to that
of Daw Lay, there was still a likelihood of the breach of
peace. between the rival claimants to the land in dispute.
The S.ubdivisional Magistrate then without himself enquir-
ing into the case, refused to take any .action and directed
the parties to settle the matter in the civil court. Accord-
ingly; }via Than went before the District Magistrate, Tha-
yetmyq, for redress by filing .the present application for
revision.
The learned District agistra.te relying upon the deci-
~ons of the _la~e . High <:ourt in U Aung Dwe v~ U Chan ..
Aye (1) and !Jaimy J>q.n Ohn and another v: Maung Tun
Thein .(2) recomme~deq. that .the nrder qf attachmen.t of
(z) (196i) B.L.R. z8o.
the .. Toyvnship Magistrate, Aunglan-myo, dated the 7th c.c.

ig6s
:September I96I be set aside. For this he gave two
MAUNo BA
reasons : (I) that the Magistrate did not pass a preliminary THIN
order under section I45 (I} of the Criminal Procedure TiiE vUNtoN
Code, and (2) that before the Magistrate passed the final oF BURMA.
order . under section I45 (6} of the Criminal Procedure

Code, he did not hold an inquiry as required by
~section r1s (4).
The first of these two reasons seems to be sound as
A -oa..o. ..1....., 'li.K..,g;~tf'">f'P
althono'h !V.;_(;4 . ._,:) " W."''"'
i,. .. i\,...
rHrl
.....,_.""'
,.u.L r!i ..eCt that 0"'r1"'"' Ulld<>r
A.<u."".&. l '-'
section I iS {r) be issued, none was served to the disput-

.ants or affixed to a conspicuous place at or near the subject
matter- of wspute. The second reason is not acceptable
l;lecause the ~agistrate did held an inquiry although he
'bad somewhat misdirected himself by paying too much
:regard to the right to possession which was irrelevant, then
t:o the factum of actual possession which was essential
l:o be deterrcJ.ned in proceedings under section I45 of the
Criminal Procedure Code. However, in spite of defects
in the !~~!'~ed Township !-.~2-g!st:~!e's pro(:eedings I do not
consider that this Court should interfere with the order
,of attadtrm::at dated the 7th September I96t . In the first
place, the statement of .t he Headman and the report of
the Police Station Officer did indicate that there was a
likelihood of a breach of the peace resulting from argu-
ments over. the land. In this connection i would refer
to the case of Dllanput Singh Y. Chatterput Singh (3) which
waslater approved by the Full Bench ofthe Calcutta High
-court in Khosh .Mahomed Sirkar v. Nazir Mahom.ed (4).
There it was held that. where a Magistrate had directed
the po~ice to enquir~ and repor~ whether :'there were
sufficient grounds for proceeding , under .section I45
Cri,minal Procedure Code, and having receivecl a report.
whi.c h ~t~ . suggested the ne~essity for such and set forth
$~bs~a~~a} rea~OJ1S in s:upport-of the suggestio~:, made SUCh
(3) I.L.R. zo; Cal: sq.. . (4) I.L.R. 33 Cal. 352 (F.B.)
c.c. report the foundation for the proceedings which he in-
1965
stituted and it was contended that the Magistrate had no~
MAuNG BA
Tan-: complied with the provisions of :the Code in omitting to
THE UNioN state the grounds of his being so satisfied of the imminence
oF BURMA. of a breach of the peace, the contention was not accept-
able inasmuch as the police report contained evidence ~f

the: 1ikeli-hood of a breach of the peace and it was su.ffi
dent for the purposes of notice to the parties for the
Magistrate to cite it as the ground of his proceeding on
which he was satisfied that a dispute within the terms of
section 145 existed. Besides, it is not the practice of this
Court to interfere in revision when the application filed
is more than 6o days after the order complained of unless
it is accompanied by an explanation of the delay and the
necessary affidavits (see Paragraph 766 of the Courts
Manual). In the case now under consideration there is
no explanation for the delay in applying :to the Court with-
in 6o days of the "date (7-9-1961) of the order complained
of.
However, 1 would like to point out that it is within

the jurisdiction of the le<!.rned District Magistrate himself
either to act under the proviso to sub-section (r) of sec-
tion 146, Criminal Procedure Code or to transfer the case
to a Magistrate of the first Class having jurisdiction over
the local area of the land in dispute. Satish Chandra
Panday v. Rajendra ]farain Bagchi (5) a Bench of the
Calcutta High Court held that a proceeding unrl:er _Chapter
XII of the CrirniJ:lal Procedure Code is an " enquiry ''
within the meaning" of secti<;m 4 of the Code .and that
therefore the. general power conferred by sections i92
and 528 of the Code upon a District or Subdivisional
Magistrate to transfer or Withdraw any case for e~qmry
or tr~al by any\~1agistrate subordinate to him is not taken
away o~ cut down by anyt~ng in section 145. If .tlie
,
(s) I.L.R. zz (x8gs) Cal. 899.
learned District Magistrate thinks after due enquiry that c.c.

1965
the attachment should be withdrawn it is well within his
MAUNG BA.
power to do so. Let the proceedings be returned to the THIN
DistJict Magistrate with these remarks. "

THB UNION
OF BURMA.
APPELLATE CRIMINAL
Before U Sa:t Maung, J.
c.c .
1965 MAUNG THA A\V
MAUNG NYEIN MAtiNG
l (APPELLANT)
Jeb. 3
v.
Confession-retracted confessiot of one accused--not Sl({jicient to corroborate
confession of' other ace;u.wd.
Held :A retracted confession of an accused person should not be regarded

as sufficient corroboration of a retracted confession of another accused so as
to w~nant the latter's conviction.
Ali Meah v. The Union of Burma, (1954) B.L.R. 6:; (S.C.), referred to and
followed.
The Unioll of Bun11a v. Maung Hla (a) Mau11g Hla and two others, (1958)
B.L.R. Zl) (H. C.); The King v. Nga /l!fyo, (1938) R.L.R. 90 (F.B.), r~ferred to and
distinguished.
However, in the case of the Appellant, there can be said to be sufficient
Corroboration, without taking into consideration the confession of his co~accused.
-for the appellant.

Ba Pe (Government Advocate) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNG, J.-ln {:riminal Regular Tri.al No. 64
of I 964 of the 2nd Additional Special Power Magistrate,
Ye-U, the appellant Maung Tha Aw and Maung Nyein
Maung were convicted of the offence punishable under
.section 395 of the .Penal Code and each of them was
sentenced to live years' rigorous imprisonment. The
appellants being dissatisfied with the conviction and
sentences have now preferred. these appeals.
The facts leading. to the present appeal are: briefly
these: On th~ 7th lasan of Kas.on 1326 B.E. (I?-4-64.)
at about 7 p.m. a number of dacoits raideq Aint Village.
Criminal Appeal No. ~~of I 964; Appeal from the order of the 2nd Ad4itiona1
Special Power Magistrate of Ye-U, dated the zxst day of July, 1964, passed
in Criminal Regular Trial No. 64 of 1964. . .
in Ye-U Township and took away a radio, a sewing
machine, etc. from the house of Maung Ba Ohn (PW 1),
MAUNG
a pair of gold nagats from Ma Khin Ei (PW 2), a THA Aw
gold pendant from the house of Ma Than Shwin (PW 3) 1\ifAUNG
NYEJN
and a torch, a lamp and clothings from the house of Ma MAuNG
Mya Sein (PW 4). Ma Khin Ei and Ma Than Shwin THE vumo~
(PWs 2 and 3) were taken as hostages and it was noticed oF BuRMA.
that the dacoits exceeded seven in number. The First
Information Report was lodged by U Po Hman (PW 5),
an elder of the village, and U Hla Pe (PW 7), Police Station
Officer; Depeyin.. took up investigation. The appellant
Maung Tha Aw was arrested on ;:he 21st April 1964 at
SaidaVI' Village on suspicion and his confession (Exhibit :;l)
was recorded by U Aung Tun (PW 6}, Township Magis-
trate, Depeyin. On the rst May 1964 U Hla Pe (PW 7)
arrested t be- dischareed accused Maung Nyein Aun,g and
on inform~tion received from him, the police officer pro-
ceeded to Letti Village where an absconding accused Zar
Maung resided. He summoned Ma Nyun Yin, the acquit-
ted ac~used from the house of U San Mauk (PW 9) and
asked her to produce the radio which according to his
information had been brought by her husband Zar Maung.
Ma Nyun Yin went and searched for the radio and brought
it to U Hla Pe, who seized it as per search list (Exhibit m )
On the same day, the discharged accused Maung Nyein
Aung took U Hla Pe to a field apout a can away from
Waba ymage and there produced a local made gun from
inside a rubbish heap. .I.t was seiz~d by U Hla Pe as per
(Exhibit c ) . . The radio set seized from Ma Nyun Yin was
identified by Maung. Ba Ohn (PW r) .as that looted from
his' hous~ on the night of the dacoi.ty. .
The case against the appellant '".(ha Aw, the discharged
accused Maung Nyein Aung and the acquitted accused
Ma Nyun Yin was sent up dn the i.znd May 1964. The .
appell~~t Maung Nyein Maung surrendered himself at
Depeyin Police Station on the 25th May 1964 and on the
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. 27th May 1964 his confession (Exhibit o ) was recorded

1965
by the same Township 1\hgistrate, who req:>rded the con-
.~~;_, fession of Maung Tha Aw. Both the confessions were
MAuNo retracted, but the learned trial Magistrate, holding that
NYEIN
MAtiNG Tha Aw's confession was corroborated by the fact of the
TBB vUNroN finding of the radio set which had been taken away by
oP BtmMA. one of the dacoits, namely, Zar Maung, and that the con-
fession of Maung Nyein Maung was corroborated by that

of Maung Tha Aw, convicted the two a)?pellants and
sentenced .t hem as already stated above. ~.,
Now, the confession of the appellant Maung Tha Aw
which was given by him a few days after his arrest men-
tioned the fact that one of tile dacoits was Zar Maung,
and that among the property obtained as boot}r was a
radio set from Maung Ba Ohn's house. The confession
is also full of details as to the manner in which the dacoity
was committed and the properties obtained by the dacoits
as booty. However, the most important piece of corrobo-
ration is that the radio set which was produced by the
wife of Zar Maungwas identified by Maung Ba Ohn (PW r)
as in fact stolen property. Ma Nyun Yin in giving evidence
on behalf of her own defence no doubt ~aid tha..t her hus-
band Zar Maung who one day brought a bundle along with
the appellants Maung Tha Aw, Maung Nyein Maung and
one Hti Paw did not give it to her, but took it away and
that when the police station officer came to ask her to
produce the radi9 set, she made a search in a likely place
and found the radio hidden in a rubbish heap about a call
distance away from her house. However, as- it .is im-
. p9ssible to .imagine that Ma N}run Yin would have been
able to find the radio set unless she was at least told
where it had been hidden, it is cl~~ that :the possession
of t?e radio set must be traced to the absconding accused
Zar Maung. Accordingly, :the fact :that Zar Maung was
in possession of the radio set which was one of the stolen
.properties, and that Zar Maung was mentioned by the
BURMA LAW REPORTS
appell<!nt Mating Tha Aw as one of his fellow dac;oits,

taken together are in strong corrobaration of the retracted MAerro
confession of the appellant Maung Tha Aw. As regards Tai).:Aw
the retracted confession of the appellant Maung Nyein ~~~~c
Maung also, it is full of circumstantial details as to the MAuNe
manner of committing dacoity and of the propertie~ THE vUNroN
'Obtained as booty. Maung Nyein Maung's confession also oF BURMA:
mentioned the fact of a radio set having been obtained

'from one of the three houses attacked by .them that night,
although Maung Nyein Maung did not mention the name
'Of Zar Maung in his confession which was to .the effect
that there were also two unknown men among the dacoits.
Nevertheless, the fact that the possession of the radio set
bad been traced to Zar Maung, an absconding accused must
be taken as a fact in corroboration of the confession of
Maung Nyein Maung. Furthermore, Maung Nyein Maung
mentioned in his confession that he had entrusted a gun
which was used by the dacoits with his younger brother
Maung Nyein Aung with the instruction that it should be
delivered to Ko Hti Paw, who according to Maung Nyein
Maung, was also one of the dacoits. The fact that the
discharged accused Maung Nyein Aung did produce a local
made gun vide Exhibit" c " is also in corroboration of the
confession of the appellant Maung Nyein Maung.
Regardifl:g the question whether the copfes?ion of one
.accused can . be used as in corroboration of. another, . I
would like to point out tha.t the observations in Tbe 'union
of Burma v. Ah Hla (a) Maung Hla and two others (r) to
that effect were based upon the dictum in .the case of
The King v. Nga Myo (2) whose authority has been
weaken-ed by the decision of the iate Supreme Court in
Ali Meah v. The Union of Burma {3). Accordingly, a
'l"etracted
. confession of an accused person . should not be
(x) (1958) B.L:R. 29 (H. C.). . (~) {1~)38) R.L.R. 90 (F. B.).
(3) (1954) B.L.R, 65 (S.C.).
4
c:c. regard~ as sufficient corroboration . of a retracted con-
-
I96S
MAUNe
'.('HAAw
fesSion oFanother accused so as to warrant the latter's
conviction.
MAUNe However, in the case of the appellant Maung Nyein
NYEIN
MAUNe Maung, I have already demonstrated how there can be
THB.UN.ION said ,to be sufficient corroboration . without taking into
OF BuRMA. consideration the confession of . his co-accused Maung
ThaAw.
Both the appellants conten~ed that they had been in_.
duced to give false confessions because of threats and
illtreatment meted out tq them by the police officer
V Hla Pe. Bowever, . there. is no sufficient reason to
accept their. defence in this connection. Tne confession
of the appellant Maung Tha Aw was given only three
days after his arrest and as deposed by U I Ila Pe (PW 7),
two days were spent on .t he journey from Saidaw to the
police station. As for the appellant Maung Nyein Maung,
he gave a confession. three . days after his voluntary sur-
render at the police station. The story of their illtreat-
ment .by .the police was probably the result of an after-
thought.
For these reasons, I consider tha.t both .the appellant~
have been rightly con:victed of the offence under
section 395 of the Penal Code. The sentences of five
years' rigorous imprisonment call for no interference.
The appeals
.: . .are accordingly
. . dismissed.
BURMA LAW REPORTS si
CRIMINAL REVISION
Before U San fV!aung, J.
PEER MOHA.MED (APPLICANT) c.c.

96.5;
v.
Jan. 16.
Foreigners Registration Act, s: 5 (I)-non-renewal of certificate-Uni07l Citizen-

ship A ct, s. 4 (z)- not incumbent to produce. certificate uners. 6 (z).
Hfld: There seems to be considerabie confusion in the mind~ of some
magi3t:-c.te~ =cg~;~ir;g t!&c ccrtific::~~ g~"utc~ under s. 6 (4) of ~:,.<~ VJ)io~
Citizenship Act, to persons .' \ho arc deem~d to be citizens under s. 4 (2) thereof.
It is ,\oi ;,lc.unbent on !i person daiming to be a citizen under s. 4 (z) to
ask for the issue of such a citizenship c<>rtificate. If he can prove that he comes
uncl.cr s. 4 \.z} ill any pr.:)Ce~:!din.g ag... ~,,~t j,;_.u, ;te i~ no~ bound to pruci,ucc the
;ertificate under s . 6 (z).
i.lrid aiso: In such a serious m~tter invoiving the question of citizenship the
recording of evidence by a Magistr~tte should not be so cryptic. T he case
against th'! Applicant should be retried careftilly by another magistrate.
-for the applicant .

Khin Sein (Government Advocate) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNG, J.- In Criminal Regular Trial No. 3621

of 1963 of the 9th Additional Magistrate, Rangoon, the
applicant Peer Mohamed was convicted under section 5(1)
of the Registration of Foreigners Act, 1940 for failure
to renew his . Foreigners Registration Certificate
HTY. 13484/ 49 when it expired on theIst.October 1956.
The defence of the applicant was
that since he must be
d~med. to be a citizen of the Union as provided for ili
Sub-section (i} of section 4 of .the U:nion"(:itizenship .Ad,
l:948. he was tiot bound to renew the Foreigners Registra-
~n Certificate. Tiie applicant gave evidence on. behaU
of his own defence and cited tivo witnesses in support of
his claim. He. was nevertheless co~victed under sectio~
Criminal Revision N o. i65 (B) of z-9(i4. .
Review of tht- o rder of the 9th Aaditional M.a.gistrate of Rangoon, dated the
~9th.day C?f N pvernbet x3. PI!SSe<J-in:Crimltu}lRe~l!lr.'I.'riai No: 362 of 1963
as~ recomtnended by the. S essions Judge, Hanthawaddy and Rangoon.
c.c. 5 (r) of the Registration of Foreigners Act and sentenced to
l965
a fine of K 35 or in default three months' rigorous im-
PEER
MoHAMl!D prisonment. The applicant being dissatisfied with the
v. order of the trial Court filed an application for revision
UNION OF
BURMA. before the Sessions Judge, Hanthawaddy and Rangoon, and
the learned Sessions Jwlge by his order dated the 7th
October 1964 recommended that the conviction and
sentence on the applicant be set aside.
I agree with the learned Sessions Ju.dge that the learned
mal Magistrate had not carefully considered whether the
claim of the applicant that he must be deemed to be a
citizen under section 4(2) of the Union Citizenship Act,
1948, should be accepted. From what I can see, the
learned Magistrate had been very slipshod in the manner
in which he recorded the evidence of the witnesses cited
by the applicant. In such a serious matter as this, his
recording of the evidence should not be so cryptic. I
would accordingly set aside the conviction on the applicant
and direct that the case against him be retried more care-
fully by such learned Magistrate as may be selected by
the District Magistrate .
.In this connection, I would like to o~serve that there
seems to be considerable confusion in the minds of some
Magistrates regarding the certificates granted under section
6(2) of the Union Citizenship Act, 1948 to persons who
are deemed to be citizens under section 4(2) thereof. It
is not incumbent on a person claiming to be a citizen
under section 4(2) to ask for the issue of such a citizenship
<:ertificate. It is no doubt to his interest that he should
be armed with a certificate which will be co.nc~usive
evidence as . to the existence of. his citizenship under
section 4 (2) vide sub-section (3) of section 6. However,
he
if em prove that he comes under section 4 (2\ in any
proceeding against .him, he is not ~ound .t o produce the
<:ertificat~ under section 6 (2). These observatJons should
be borne in qrind by t}le Magistrate who retri~ this case.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
ORIGINAL CIVIL
Before U Kyaw Zan U, .'f.
PEOPLES' BANK No. 9 (PLAINTIFF)
v.
MESSRS. NATIONAL CIGARETfE Co. AND FIFTEEN OTHERS
(DEFENDANTS). *
Pmctice-lt:tter of Request---when gra11ted. Claim by Go~:l.'mment Ba11h agaimt

debts 'due by firm before its nationalization. Whether decree ca11 be passed
o/
out compensati011 payttble. Claim for interest after nati011alization ~chether
payable. Costs of Suits-payment of proportionate cost~ by DcfmdanJ..
Thl.~ Defendants ow(!d the Plaintiff Dank moneys granted under OYcrdraft
f.tr;i' :tics and h:.td al..:;o pt.:dg-...:J ihcit: stock; \ith the PIJintiff. On nationaliz~~tion
of the Dcfendantl'; cq~r.::m, th: Gov<:rnmcnt took o~er the business wi<h !l ll the
.assets j;;;;.li1ding the ~tocks plc. .!g,:d. 'The Defendants~ conc:;~u can1P. under the
newly form:::! Cig~l'c<:~!> N(ltionaliz:1tion Admin.i strative Committee and the
Defendants would also be entitled for pr,yment of Compcns~tion by the
Govetninent. .
The Plaintiffs filed thE' present suit a~ the Defendant failed to repay the
ffi();ley due ~Q it, and interest accruing after nationalization to the date of'
institution of the suit.
After filing of the suit, the Plaintiff Dank applied to the Cot:rt for a Letter
of Reqttest to the Com;,ensation Adjudication Committee to witho!d pa:).ment
i;lf Compensation to the Defendants until further notice from the Court, and the
Defendants took no objection to this application.
Held: The Letter of Request could not be sent to the Committee as it is
neither a Prohibitionary Order nor an Attachment Order. Moreover, .as the
Committee. is not a party to the suit it could not be boPnd by such a Req,uest.
Also, a Letter of Req ,est car: be issue~ only for the. examinatio~ of a witne.ss
abroad on Commission ; or to a Defendant of rank in~teacl of issuing summons
to him.
Held alsu : A decree for payment of the moneys out of the compensation
payable cannot be allowed. It is.not known yet how mtich rl-e Defendants will
.. get as compensation. The Committee is also not a partY to the suit ~d no
proper legal steps can be taken to prohibit it from p~ying out the corr:pen'5ation
to the Defendants. The prop,.r place to take up this point is in the executioa
p roceedings.
Regarding th'!: f.'~)I'T"(:f:~t oF in... o ...o~~ n~ ~t:t ~h~ ~qt-? f'r ~~tjf:n~ion 0f su.!t:~ t~.e
. Government had already held the stocks pledged by the Defendants in the name
of the Pl aintiff Bank at the time of nationalization. It would therefore not
to
be eql!it~tble 'for the Government den: and intere.s t on.the debt.
Civil Regular No. 55 of 1963.
BURMA LAW ,REPORTS
C.C. Held ftnthl'' : Regarding the costs .o t,the suit, it is the .rule and practice
1964 of the Courts in Bunna thai: if the Defendant files his written statement wherein
, he confesses or admit, a part of the claim, and rais,s his defence for the other
POPLBS . 'ff, t h..e Advocate ' s
BANK
No. 9 parts, proport10nate costs o t' t h e. su1t
. are a11owed to the Plamt1
t/, fee heing calculated on contested scale on the amount decreed.
Ml!SsRs.
NATiONAL
co. Aim Daw Mya Than Nu (Government Advocate) for the
CtGARBTm
l'tFlEl!N plaintiff..
OTHERS,
Wan Hock (Advocate) for the defendants.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-The defendants Nos. 2 to r6 are
tJ:te partners who were carrying on the business of
manufacture of cigarettes anti operating a banktng account
in the name of their firm (Defendant No. r) with the Bank
of China now known as Peoples' Bank No. . 12 after the
nationalization by the Government. This Bank granted
loan facilities to the defendants for their business, and on
26th September 1963 it assigned the debt of the defendants
amounting to K 1,09,24533 to the plaintiff bank which
was formerly known as Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
Corporation before the nationalization, and two days later,
i.e., on. 28th September 1963 U Kyin Sein (Defendant No.2~
the Managing Partner of the defendant firm ex~cuted an
fnstrument of Pledge and a promissory note in favour of
the plaintiff Bank " in consideration of the plaintiff bank
~ontinuing to grant the defend?nts _general banking fa.cili-
~ies to a maximum of K 3,oo,poo" with interest at the
.rate of 7 per cent per annum. The prqperties pledged
were their stock in 53rd Street, Thukha A venue, K<U11ayut,
~~ngoon. .
~ . . . . . . .
. ..on 19th October 1963 the Government nationalized the
defendant firm a.Jso a.nd took ovet the business With .all
die ~ssets ini:lild1ng' the stock .pl~ged ... k vii!! . b.e, seen
that .the s.t ock had already been pledged with the Govern-
. ment:-in the . name of the..plaintiff
. Bank
.
or: in other. words,
., the Govern!flent. now holds the s~me ~tock in two
capa-
cities, i.e.,as-'plaintiff :Bank (Pe~p}e~. Bank No . .-9) and
. .,
.: . .. . .....
.BURMA LAW ~PORTS 55
.
.Ctg~rettes Nationalization Administrative Committee, c.c4.
,i
formed under the Business Nationalization Act, 1963 being ~.
Th~ Revolutionary Government of the UD.ion of Burma B~:~ 9
!Act 33 of 1963. The defendants are entitled to claim r..~~.
compensation
.
from the Government under the Act. The ~~T~oiolAL
ARFl'T:B
plaintiff Bank claiins that the stock pledged has now Co. AND
merged with the compensation the defendants are to ~~=
receive from the Government.
It called upon the defendants to repay the sum of
K 1,34,62470 due on 26th October 1963 within seven days
but the defendants failed, so this suit was instituted for
the recovery of this ~mount with the accrued interest of
K 1,36565 from 1st O~tober 1963 to 2oth November 1963
making a total claim of K 1,35,99035
The contention of the defendants in their written
statement is that inasmuch as their assets now in the
hands of the Government are far in excess of the claim,
they had replied to the demand made by the plaintiff Bank
to realize the amount claimed from those assets. They
submitted " inter alia " that the suit is premature though
they are liable to pay K 1,35,16999 only up to the date .
~f nationalization, i.e., 19th October 1963 with n.o further
interest from that date and no costs of the sUit as their
assets and cash in hand are no~ being used by the Govern-
a
ment. They pray that consent.decree forK 1;35,16999
only be passed against them without. costs out of the
compensation payable .by the Government .to. them, and
i,n case the compensation payable is found to be insufficient
~~ pla~ntiff Bankpe giv~ permissio:r;t.to apply for personal
9~cree agaiJ].st them as praye<l for. . >
. . . . '
~ .. : ~~ ..21st .t:-Jov:~mber 1963 the plaintiff Ban~ applied to

~'J:le Court for a Letter of Request to ~the Compensa.tion
Adj?dication corriprlttee .formed und,er the atores;ti~ .Ad
No: 33 of 1963. _to Withhold. the compensation that. may
l>e paid by the Government from paying.t'0thedefendants
c.c.
l964
untii furtlier
,
notice from the Court. The defendants ll;t
;.;::_;;._ their affidavit dated 13th Decemper 1963 pleaded that they
-PEoPi:Bs' .
'BANk. :No'. 9 'have no objection to the Letter of Request if K 1,35,16999
"
MESSRS, only, whkh they admit, is deducted from the amount of
N;..'tiONAL compensation that may be paid to them by the Govern-
ei:o1.mTE
:9::.A~b ment. To this theplaintiff Bank replied in their affidavit
FIFTE!lt'of
OTHERS. dated 25th February 1964 that the tobacco leaves pledged
by the defendants have deteriorated and consequently
their value has now come down from their original value
of I( 2,17,440- The defend<mts denied their value has now
come... down as. the .Govemm~nt has, after the nationaliza-
t~on, been manufacturing cigarettes out of the same
~obacco - and selling them as before as the same rates.
The plaint1ff Bank a,dmitt~:d that it is now a department
of the Government. 1 do not quite understand how this
Letter_of Request could have been sent to the Committee
Wl:len it is nei'tlier a Piohibitory Order nor an Attachment
befo;~ or after judg_m~nt. , The Committee is not a party
to t}le suit-and it is not)mown how it could be bound by
such a request. So .far as I_ani aware a Letter of Request
can: be _issued only for the examination of a witness abroad
on ComnriSsi<>n under- sectiori 77 read-with Order 26, Rule
5 of the Code of Civil Procedure or to a defendant, instead
o.f. a supimops if he, in the opinion of the Court, is of a
rank entitling him to such mark of consideration under
Order 5; Rule 30 of the_Co~e.
I have heard the arguments of the learned Advocate
for th~. defendant and of the learned. Goverr..mc:rrt Advocate
fo~ 'the piaintiff Bank: _The poi_~ts for determinan~n ~e
(1) whether a decree for the admitted amount of
~ 1,35,169-99 only up to the date of the nationalization
$:;hould be passed in favour of the plaintiff Bank as payable:
out of the compensation, e>r for the whole amouD:t claimed~
that is, with inter~st up to the date of institution o f the-
suit, and (ii) whether the defendants are liable for costs c.c.
1964
of the suit. I have considered the matters very seriously. P
EOPLES'
As regards the first part of the first pomt I am of the BANK No. g.
view that the Court cannot allow the plaintiff Bank to M:SRs.
realize the admitted amount of K 1,35,16999 only, out cNATIONAL
1GARTTR.
of the compensation that may be given to the defendants co. AND
FIFTEEN
by the Government. It IS not known yet how much they oTHERs.
will get as compensation. Under section 3 (3) (b) of Act

33 of 1963 the Government is not liable for all the liabilities
of the defendants. It takes responsibilities only for those
liabilities that are fit and acceptable. Again under sec-
tion 5 (2) (b) o.f the Act the Compensation Adjudication
Committee is empowered to pay such compensation as it
thinks fit and proper, and under section 7 (4) and (S) of
the Act there is neither appeal nor revision against its
order but the Government may amend it. As I have saiq
above the Committee is not a party to the suit and no
proper legal steps have been taken to prohibit it from
paying out the compensation to the defendants. I think
the proper place to take up this point is in the execution
proceedings. As regards the second part of the point it
cannot be denied that banking facilities were originally
granted to the defendal)ts fpr their busine~s by the Bank
of China (now Peoples' Bank No. 12) which assigned the
debt of the defendants to the plaintiff Bank, which is
admittedly a Government Bank, and when the defendant
firm was nationalized later the entire assets fell again into
the hands of the Government. The defendants were liable
to the pl~intiff (Government) Bank up to .the time of the
nationalization of their fir~ by the Government. W4en
the Government nationalized t_he. firm it had already held
the stock pledged by .t he defendants in the name of the
plaintiff (Government) Bank, so it will not be equitab!~
for the Government to demand iriteres.t on the debt, which
is comparatively a very small amount, from the defendants
when it had held the defendants' stock in one h~nd when
58 BURMA LAW . REPORTS
~9f~ 'it nationalized the Banks, and !ater the defendants' assets
P 0P:C,.ES'
in the other when .
it rilitionalized the 'defendant firm.
BANK No. 9 The defelldants are now unable to.use any more the bank;.
~~. ing facilities granted to them for their business and co'n-
~:~~=E sequently they are now out .of their business. They are
<;:o. AND deprived of money on which they actually made interest.
~:S. When the plaintiff (Government) Bank gave notice of
dema..YJ.d the defendants were by force of the statute pre-
vented from enjoying the assets as the Government had
obtained the enjoyment in its way. The defendants had
been deprived of their property and the Government had
enjoyed both their stock and assets. The relief given to
the needy was founded in part upon an enlarged equity,
flowing from the principles of natural and social justice,
against the designs of that calculating capacity, which
the law constantly discountenances. Indeed in cases of
this sort, Courts of Equity have extended a degree of pro-
tection to the borrowers. The Court has to find that in
the cil:currJ.Stances cf the case the claim for interest is
harsh and unconscionable or in other words " substantially
unfair." In order to find whether the clai.m is substan-
tially 'unfair the Court has to consider whether the
creditor is guilty of taking improper advantage of the
weakness or distress of tlie borrower. The learned
Government Advocate must be taken to have conceded
these principles when she, in the course of her arguments
rightly submitted that she could not press this point
seriously, .and I .am gia:d she does not insist on her extra
. . pound 'of flesh." My answer therefore is that interest
should not be allowed on the deb:t after the date of nation-
.3lii:ation of the .firm: . . .
In regard to the last point the rule and practiceof the
Courts in J?urma are that if the defendant files his written
statement wherein he confesses or admits a part of the
dair~n, and raises hi~ defence fo:r: the otb~r parts; propor-
tionate c9sts of the suit are allowed to the plaintiff the
BURMA .LAW REPORTS 59
Advocate's fee being calCulated on contested scale on the

.amount decreed. Costs awardable are entirely in the
.
discretJ.on of t he Court but t h.IS d.xscretion . P.EOPLES'
must BANK No. 9
~e judiciously based on . rule and practice. The present ~.
suit cannot be said to be frivolous or vexatious nor can ~~J~
the plaintiff Bank be said to have made dishonest pleas. Co. AND
FIFT.BEN
My answer therefore is that the defendants are liable for oTHERS.
the amount decreed with proporti9nate costs with
Advocate's fee on the amount calculated on contested
s.cale.
In the result, a decree is passed for the admitted amount
of K 1,35.16999 only as stated in the written statement
on the calculation made by the defendants on the amount
-of debt due on the date of the nationalization of the
defendant firm with interest at 7 per cent per annum with
<:osts of the suit inclusive of the Advocate's fee on the
aforesaid decretal amotint on contested scale.
INSOLVENCY JURISDicTION
Before U K_vaw Zan U, J.
c.c. IN THE MATTER OF RA;MNIRANJAN LHILA (DEBTOR}

1965
Jan. 13. v.
DAW THAN (CREDITOR).*
fnsolvency-Rangoon Town lnsolvency Act s. 9 (e)-attachment nf propcrt) fur
2! d<:~ys in c.w:cution r-j decree--act of insolvency. Need for applica tion by
r.reditvr <tithin 3 m.mths of such act of insolvency- s. 12 \1) (c) of the Act.
Continuation if attachment-not crmtinuous act of insolvency.- Annulment
flf Adjudicati;nt--t"ight of debtor t.o apply for- s. 21 of the Ac;. , Pozt:ers
of revien'- 1. 8 (I)-Scope n.f.
Held: Under s. 9 (e) of the Rangoon Town Insolvency Act, a debtor

commits an Act of Insolvency if his prr.perly h.l;s been attacht!d for a p<-riod
of nm less than zx c.!a-ys in execution of the decree for the paymen.t of money.
lJnd<r s. 12 (x) (c) of the Act, t he creditor must apply within 3 (three} months
of sucn act of insolvency.
Accordingly, where the attachment was made on 1963 October 2x th: debtor
would have cornnitted the act c.!insolvencyon 1963 November u. The creditor
nmsttherefore appi y ly.:fore 1964 February 12 Wlder l!. 12 (x) {r.) of the Act.
As the creditor presented the petition on 1964 October 9 the petition was
clearly time-barre::!, ancl the (1ebt should not have been adjudicated an
insolvent .
Held al!o : Ivfcrely because the attachment continues, it is not a continuuus
act of insolvr.ncy, nor is it a rereated .oct of insolvency on the happening of each
fresh period of :.:r days . Wor Lee Lone & Co. v. V.E.R.M.V. Chettyar Firm
I.L.R. 7 R~.n. 8rs ; Amepama Devi Gurudas Chatterji, I.L.R. 57 Cal. 1274,
referrec to and followed.
Held furt!u!>": The debtor need not appeal agains\ the order of adjudication,
but can apply for annulment of the same. Under s. 21 of the Act, the Court has.
jurisdicti<>n to annul adjudication;
Obi!le7 : Th<\ powers given to th.: Coun under s.. zr (t) of the Act are more
~pecific th~n th<:>~e
give;: under s. cl (I) of the Ac!, which gives wider powers of
r~view than one cor.fer.r.ed by the Code of Civil Prncedur.::.
Jivraj GiJrdhamias Goiadia and fnFJhN v. J\ll.,:.r~. Gngan.mal Ramdumd'
a firm, I.L.R. (1953) Born. . nl:i8 ; Sooniram Ramniranjandas v. S.A.R.M .
Chettyar Firm, I.L.R. 12 Ran. 64, referred to.
H. M. Fisher for the creditor.

Wan Hock .for the. Insolvent-Applicant (debtor).
* Insolvency Case No. 6 of x964=.
U KYAw ZAN U, ].- This is an application under c.c.

1965
section 2 I ( r) of the Rangoon Insolvency Act by the appli-
iN THE
cant who is the debtor for annulment of his adjudication M ATTER OF
-on the ground that he ought not to have been adjudged an RAMNIRAN-
j."u'I LBILA
insolvent on the application ex parte of his creditor Daw o.
D .w;THAN.
Than which was time-barred under section 9 (e) read with
section r2 (c) of the Act.
On 9th October 1964 the creditor applied ex parte to
this Court for the adjudication of the applicant as an
insolvent alleging that he had committed an act of
insolvency under section 9 (e) of the Act when his freehold
land was attached for payment of K 46.ooo being the
decretal amount with costs in Civil Regular Suit No. r I of
1959 of this Court "for a period exceeding 21 days, viz.
from 21st October 1963 till date" (9th October 1964) and
the Court by its order dated 2oth October 1964 adjudicated
the applicant as an insolvent under section 13 (S) of the
Act. About a month later, i.e., on 2oth November I964
the applicant presented the present application.
The point for consideration now is whether the appli-
cant ought not to have been adjudged insolvent. The
Court should scrutinize the actual position at the time of
the applicationmade by the creditor. Under section 9 (e)
of the Act a debtor commits an act of insolvency if his
property has been attached for a period of not less than
2r days in execution of the deer~ for the payment of
money, and the - ~reditor must apply within 3 months of
the act of insolvency under section 12 (r) (c) of the Act.
In .the instant case the attachment was made on 21st
October 1963 ad the applicant would have committed the
.act of insolvency 2I days after the attachment, that is to
say on 12th November 1963. The creditor must therefore
.apply before 12th February 1964 under section 12 (r) (c)
of tpe Act, .which says that a critor shall not be en,titled
to pr~ent an insolvency petition against a debtor unless
the act of insolvency on which the petition is grounded
c.c. has occurred within 3 months before the presentation of

1965 the petition. Since the creditor had presented her petition
IK THE
MATI"E.ROF
on 9th October 1964 it was clearly time-barred, and the
RAMNmAN- applicant ought not to have been -~djudged insoive..11t dn her
JAN ~HILA petition, which I consider was based on a misconception of
DAwTHAN. the law. The learned Advocate for the creditor atgiled
that the attachment being continuous it was within time,
but in Wor Lee Lone & Co. v. V.E.RM.V. Chettyar
Firm (r) it was pointed out that " merely because the
attachment condnues; it is not a continuous act of ilisol-
vency, nor is it-a repeated act of insolvency on the happen-
ing of each fresh period of 21 days, an'd consequently a
creditor who wishes to adjudicate the debtor for S1.1 ch an
act, must do so within 3 months from the completion of
the first 2 I days of attachment. In a subsequent ruling of
the Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Anupama Devi v.
Gurudas Chatterji (2) the same vie.w was taken when .if
held-
...
"Attachment of property in execution of decree, for 2r
days and more, is not a continuing act of insolvency. It is
completed when 2r clear days have ~apsed from the date of
attachment".
It is therefore clear that no petition under section 9 (e)
of the Act can be founded after the expiration of 3 months
from the completion of the period of 2 r days of attach-
ment. The act of insolvency is complete j_f the attachment
subsists for .the requisite period, ~.e., 21 dear days, and it
is not a continuing act during the subsequent period of
att<ichinent.
.Another point. raised by the .learned Advocate for the
creditor in hjs argument is that the applicant should have
app~aled agaittst the order. of adjudica~ion and not have
appl~ed for anmilmerit. ' Under section 2 r of the Act the
Court has dis_cr~tio~ary jUrisdiction to a~n,ul ~ adjndica~
non;
.
Where,
.
in the opinion. of .the .Coirrt, a debtor. ought
' ., .
.
~ ~
. (1) I.L.R.'7 Ran. 815. .,. ' (2) U;.R. 57 Cal. u74
not to have been adjudged insolvent, it is within its dis- c.c.
1965
cretion to annul the adjudication, or it can review, rescind,
IN THB
or vary the order of adjudication made by it under sec- MATTER OF'
RAMNIRAN-
tion 8 (r) of the Act. The applicant is not bound to prefer JAN Lmu
an appeal against the order o~ adjudication. The learned v.
DAWTHAN.
Advocate for the applicant submitted that if no application
for annulment lies under section 21 the applicatiun may
be treated as an application for review under section 8 (r)
of the Act. I. do not think i.t is necessary. Section 8
gives wider powers of review than are conferred by the
Code of Civil Procedure. The section is wide enough to
allow the c ourt to act suo motu to rescind its previous
ordex: in a proper case under its inherent jurisdiction. I.f
the Court is satisfied that the order made by it formerly is
not a proper order and that it should not have been made,
it has got jurisdiction under section 8 ( r) of the Act also
to rescind that order. See ]ivraj Gordhandas Goradia and
another v. Messrs. Gaganmal Ramchand a firm (3). The
powers given to the Court under section 21 (r) are more
specific than those given under section a (r) of the Act~
According to Baguley, J., in Sooniram Ramniranjandas v.
S.A.R.M. Chettyar Firm (4) section 21 is a special section
and it enables an ins~lvency Court to reconsider an order
which it has already passed, and, if it ~hinks fit, to set
it aside. . .

In the result the application is allowed and the adjudi-
cation is hereby annuled with costs. Advocate's fee five
Gold Mohurs .
.(3} ~.L.R. (x953) 'Born. n68.

BURMA LAW REPORTS
CRIMINAL REVISION
Before U San Maung and U Tu11 Tin, JJ.
c.c. u AH KIT (APPLICANT) '
I96S
:Jan. xs. v.
Attempt-attempt to smuggle Burmese Currency-Foreign Excluznge Regulation
/let, s. 9 (1) and 24 (x) and 24/1-Sea Customs /let, s. x6?B--tUJt relevant
for purposes of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.
The Applicant, a resident of Myawadi ( a border town separat ing Burma
and Thailand), was arrested on his way from Myawadi as the sum. of K 90,000
was found, secreted in the gear ca~e of his jeep. Th.e Applicant's final explana-
tion was that this sum. of K 90,ooo was carried by him from Myawadi
to Kawkareikfor the purpose of enabling him to make a bid at the auction ssle
for excise licenses, and that it was being brought back to Myawadi because
-the auction sale was postponed.
The trial Judge rejected the defense story and accordingly convicted the
Applicant; the conviction was upheld by the Sessions Judge, Kawthoolei. On
Revision.
Held: The evidence on record, supports the findings in the case. There
was no reason why the Applicant should have taken K 90,000 for paying for the
excise license, if he was successful at the bidding, as the excise license was sold
for K 4o,ooo and according to the rules, a successful bidder need pay only a smal I
percentage of the purchase price.
Held further: S. x67B of the Sea Customs Act which defines" attempt" is
only relevant when action is being taken under s. r67 (8) of the Sea Customs Act.
It is irrelevant for the purposes of s. 24A of the Foreign Exchange Regulation
Act.
However, the Applicant's action amounted to more than a mere "prepam-
'tiori" to smuggle the currency into Thailand, and the stage of" attempt" had
been reached.
Pun Za Cin (a) P. Khup Za Cin v. The Financial Co111;missioner (Commerce)
and two others, l 1960) B.L.R. 142 (S.C.), referr.e d to and distinguished~
Bla Pe (2) for the applicant . .

, Toe Maung (~overnment Adv:ocate) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNG, J.-ln Criminal Regular Trial No. 157

-of 1963 .o f the Additional Special ~ower Magistrate,
Criminal Revision 146 (B) of 1964.
Revi~w of order or' the Sessions Judge of'Kawthoolei,dated_the 27th day of
fune, i964, passed in his Criminal Appeal No. 6 (A) of 1964~
Kawkareik. the applicant U Ah Kit was convicted of the ';9~5

offence punishable under section 24 (r) of the Foreign
Exchange Regulation Act read with section 24A and u A::. Krr
section 9 (2) thereof for attempting to send out of Burma Tg:B =
Burmese currency notes to the value of K 90,000 and was
sentenced to one years' rigorous imprisonment. The
applicant being dissatisfied with the conviction and
sentence appealed, but the learned Sessions Judge, .
Kawthoolei, in his Criminal Appeal No. 6 (A) of 1964
confirmed the conviction and sentence meted out to him
by the trial Court and dismissed his appeal. Hence the
present application for revision.
The facts which have been fully set out in the judgment
of the trial Court are briefly these : The applicant U Ah Kit
resided in Myawadi, a town im~ediately on the border
separating Burma from Thailand and he had a miscel-
laneous store in which goods to the value of K 2o,ooo
were stocked. He also owned a house at Kawkareik
situated in the vicinity of the police station. On the 14th
December 1963, U Soe Tint (PW 1), Preventive Officer
of the Customs Department stationed at Myawadi received
information that U Ah Kit was on his way from KaWka-
reik to Myawadi. It would appear that since about April
1963, the officers belonging to the Land Customs Depart-
ment were instructed by the Collector of Customs, Ran-
goon, to be on tht;! lookout for persons on ~he way from
Kawkareik to Myawadi to see if they, without any good
reason, carried large sums of money in Burmese currency
notes. In November 1963 also, the Ar.ea Commander of
the Burma Army had issued instructions tq officers belong-
ing to the Immigr~tion, Customs and Police Departments
to see that attempts were not made to smuggle Burmese
currency across the border to Thailand there to be exchang-
. ed into foreign currency at the black market rate. It
would also see:qt that the applicant U Ah Kit had acquired
a certain reputation of being engaged in such black market
5
66 B~ LAW REPORTS
c.c. activmes. Accordingly, U See Tint passed on his infor-
1965
mation to Captain See Win who was jn charge of the Army
u AB KIT
" detachment at Myawadi and tried to enlist his help.
Tml UNION
01,' BURMA. Captain See Wh1. accordingly detailed Lieutenant Hla.
Myaitig (PW 6) for necessary action. U See Tint stationed
himself in the wood about a mile west of Myawadi and
he had a number of Riflemen to assist him. Lieut. Hla
Myaing. Customs Officer U See Myint (PW s) and some
police officers stationed themselves in front of the police
station which was near the spot where the road from
Kawkareik entered Myawadi town. At about 3 p.m. Jeep
No. C/3426 belonging to the applicant U Ah Kit and
driven by his co-accused Maung Aung Myint was seen
approaching the police station. It was stopped and a
search made on the Jeep proved fruitless. Then Maung
Tun Myint (P W 4), a subordinate in the Customs Depart-
ment was instructed fo look underneath the Jeep. He
found that the gear casing on the front part of the Jeep
had been plugged with rags. He pulled out the plug and
found 2 "Rupee" coins. He reported his finding to
USee Myint (PW 5) and Lieu.t. Hla Myaing (PW 6). These
two officers then directed the Jeep to be driven into the
police station compoun'd so that the vehicle c,ould be tho-
roughly searched. When the Jeep was inside the police
station compound a thorough search wa's made. The cover-
ing of the gear case was opened by unscrewing the bolts and
inside were found 9 packets of K roo currency notes each
packet containing 100 sheets. Two mote "Rupee" coins
were also found. Because the applicant U Ah Kit could
give no satisfactory explanation as to why such a vast
quantity of Burma currency notes had to be carried into
Myawacli in such a secretive manner the Jeep and the
currency -notes were seized and a repor.t was made by
Liel,lt. Hla Myaing by wireless to Kawkareik and from
instructions received the applicant's house was searched. .
Ov~r 300. Bahts in, Th?i currency notes were found in his
BURMA LAW REPORTS 67:
house. The applicant was then prosecu~ed in this case ~~s

for an offence under section 24 (r) of the Foreign Exchange u .
. d h . d (
Regulation Act rea Wit sections 24A an 9 2 tnereo .) , f . AH KIT
v.
M . dd d .
Th.e Jeep anver Aung ymt was a e as a co-accuse oF BuRMA.
..l d THB UNION
by the trial Magistrate for abetment by conspiracy. Both

the applicant and Maung Aung Myint were convicted.
Both appealed to the Sessions Judge, Kawthoolei but their
appeals were dismissed. Maung Aung Myfut who was
sentenced to 6 (six) months rigorous imprisonment only,
did not file any application for revision, he having served
out the sentence by the time the presept application was
filed.
On the evidence the learned trial Magistrate

found (I) that when Maung Tun Myint \PW 4) on remov-
ing the plug from the gear ca.sing found the two " Rupee "
coins the applicant U Ah Kit told the Customs Officer
U Soe Myint (PW 5) that there was nothing more secreted
in the Jeep ; (2) that when Lieut. Hla Myaing ordered
the Jeep to be driven into the police station compound
for the purpose of a thorough search, the applicant became
crestfallen ; (3) he (the applicant) asked Lieut. Hla Myaing
to allow the Jeep to go first into the town 'for the pur-
pose of discharging some passengers before being brought
back to be searched but that permission was refused ;
(4) when the gear casing was opened K 9o,ooo Burma
currency in K I oo notes were found secreted theretn ;.
() when this large quantity of currency notes was found
the applicant disclaimed ownership and volunteered to find
who Vo(ere the peop~e responsible for secreting them inside
hi~ Jeep; (6) he later .said that the mqney was intended
to be disbursed as salary of Government officers stationed
at Myawadi ; and (7) finally, he said that this sum of
K 90,000 .was carried by him from Myawadi to Kawkareik
for the purpose of enabling him lo make a bid at the
auction saie for: excise licenses. \ .. 1
6& BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c: The learned trial Magistrate also held that the appli-
a96s
cant's story that he took K 90,000 from Myawadi to
u AH KIT
tl. Kawkareik for the purpose stated by him an'd that he
THE UNION
OF BURMA.
brought the currency notes back to Myawadi because the
auction sale was postponed, was highly incredible.
Accordingly he came to the conclusion, considering that
Myawadi town was on the bank of the fordable river
which formed .the boundary between Burma and Thailand,
that the appliCant had brought up such a vast quantity
of currency notes to Myawadi from Kawkareik with the
intention of smuggling them over to Thailand, and that
but for the combined action of the Customs and Army
officers. he would have succeeded in his plan. Hence the
conviction and sentence mentioned above.
We have carefully scrutinized the evidence on record
and we consider that in so far as the prosecution case
is concerned, these findings are supported if the evidence
of the witnesses for the prosecution is believed. As for
the trial Magistrate's rejection of the defence story we
are of the opinion that it is not perverse. According to
t.he applicant U Ah Kit he went from Myawadi to Kawka:
reik on the 8th of December 1963 in the Jeep driven by
Mg Haniff (DW 5). He took with him K 90,ooo in
K roo currency notes. Some of the bundles of currency
were taken in his own box while the rest were entrusted
to the driver Haniff. At Kawkareik he found out that
the auction sale for excise. licenses had been pqstponed
till the 27th of December 1963. Therefore, he went to
Moulmein to. fetch his daughter who would be coming
home for her holidays, returning to .Kawkareik .on the
13th of December . 1963. ..The next day (14-12-63);
he. re~urned from Kawkareik to Myawadi_after secreting
.K 90,ooo in currency notes in the .gear casing for fear .
of robbers on t he way. H~ was never questioned . on
. leaving Kawkareik whet.lJ.er he had any Burmese q.rrrency
with him. As soon as. he was stopped at. M:yawadi, he
informed the Customs Officer there that he had brough~ c.c.

1965
with him K 90,ooo in currency notes belonging to him.
As a matter of fact, however, the excise auction sale u ~KIT
was not postponed from the roth December till the 27th -x;:~~=
December 1963. Furthermore, there was no reason why
U Ah Kit should have taken with him K 90,000 for the
purpose o1 paying for the excise license if he was success-
ful at the bidding, as the excise license was in fact sold for
K 40,000 and according to the rules the successful bidder
need only pay a small percentage of the purchase price.
U Ah Kit told an untruth when he said that he was never
questioned by the Customs Officer U Maung Maung Yi
{PW 9) before leaving Kawkareik for Myawadi. He told
an untruth when he said .that as soon as his jeep was
stopped at Myawadi for the purpose of being searched,
he had declared the quantity aild value of the currency
notes carried by him. Accordingly, it was a fair inference
on the part of the trial Magistrate that the applicant
U Ah Kit's story was not~g but a tissue of lies.
The learned trial Magistrate in coming to the conclu-
sion that the action of the applicant U Ah Kit amounted
to an attempt to contrav~ne the provisions of the Foreign
Exchange Regulation .A:ct which was made punishable
under section 24A, had referred fo section 167B of the
S.ea Customs Act, 18.78, as inserted 'Qy the Sea Customs
(Amendment) Act, 1959 (Act XIX of 1959). This section
reads:
"I67B. For the purposes of Item 8 of the Schedule to
section 167 and section 167A the word
At_tempt. 'a~empt' means any act of conceal-
ment, keeping or conveying of goods under such
circumstances as are sufficient to satisfy the Customs-collector
that the goods are being concealed, kept or conveyed with
intent to import or export the goods contrary to the prohibi-
tion or restriction under section 19."
However, it i$ clear that this section which defines
" attempt " is or1Jy relevci.n,t when action is being taken
7.0 BURMA. LAW REPORTS
c.c.
under. Item 8 of section I 67 of :the Sea Customs Ad.
1965 .
It is irrelevant for the puipose of section 24A of the
..u ~ KIT Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. Nevertheless, in our
~-r.B=-~ .opinion, the findings of fact arrived at by the learned
trial Magistrate are sufficient to warrant an inference that
an attempt had been made by the applicant U Ah Kit to
smuggle Burmese currency notes of great value across the
border into Thailand. The learned Advocate for the
applicant has strongly reliedupon the decision of the late
Supreme Court in Pun Za Gin (a) P. Khup Za Gin v. The
Financial Commissioner (Commerce) and two others (r)
for the contention that in the case now under considera-
tion, the applicant U Ah Kit cannot be said to have done
anyt-hing more than " preparation " to smuggle the
currency notes out of this country into Thailand. How-
ever, the facts in Pun Za Gin's case are distinguishable
from .t he presen~. There, gold bars and gold plates weigh-
ing 945 tolas were found in a wooden box described falsely
as " books." and sent as air-freight from Rangoon to
l(alewa by air. When the plane landed at M~1dalay. Air-
'port on the ,5th of July I958, this box was seized by Army
perspn.nd and search!:'rl . Th.e gold was fo..::nd. <U!.d action
.was .taken against Pun Za. Cin by the Collector of. Land .
.customs and the gold was confiscated under Item 8 of
sec~ion .167 of the Sea Customs Act. The Suprerp.e Court
jn quashing the order of the Collector of Customs, held
that it could not be said that in sending gold from Rangoon
to Kalewa which was r 6o miles away from :the Indian
.frontier an "attempt " to send it.out of Bu...rma had been
made, and tha~ as the offence took.place before the coming
'into force of section r67B of the Sea Customs Act, the
provisions
.
therein were inapplicable.
.

.. Jn_the case now tmder consideration Myawadi was right
o~ the ~order between Burma and Th~land. The appli-
. :cant's. 0~ house was ab~ut two .furlpngs ~way. from the
. .. . _ (r) (x96o) B.L.R. 14z (S.C.).
fordable river forming the boundary between the two c.c.
xg6s
countries. The applicant undoubtedly had dealings with
people from Thailand as he was found in possessiOn of U AH KIT
"
over 300 Bahts in Thai currency. The applicant probably TaFBBUMJoN
0 URMA.
tolu tiJt:: t:n.lth when the currency notes were first unearthed
from the place where they were hidden ; he said that the
notes did not belong to him but that he would try and
fin4 out who were responsible. The applicant had admit-
fedly just come from Moulmein where a large number of
foreigners resided. His story that the currency notes be-
longed to him was probably an a~terthought. _ Therefore,
in all probability the applicant was acting as a carrier for
the tx;;~n.sport of currency notes to Myawadi for the pur-
pose of their being sent across the river into Thailand
where they could be readily exchanged into Thai currency
in the black market. In these circumstances the appli-
cant's action amounted to more than a mere " prepara-
tion " to smuggle the Currency into Thailand. In this
.connection the c:>bservation in .Pun Za Cin's case (r) that
in some cases the line between " preparation .. and
" attempt ., is very thin sho11ld be borne in mind.
Althon~h in Pun Za Cin's case the. fa-cts might not ..h~tv~
warranted. an inference that there was- an '.' attempt ., to
smuggle the gold out of Burma, in our opinion, the stage
of" preparation" has been passed and that-of " attempt"
has been reached in the case now under consideration.
...Vve see :no s~ffident - reasoir for interfering with . the
convlction passed on the applicant U Ah Kit under
section 24 (r)' of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act
read with section 24A and 9 (2) thereof and the sentence
. thereunder. The application for revision fails and -it is
dismissed. .
72 -BURMA LAvV REPORTS
CRIMJNAL REVISION
Before U SanMaung,J.
. c.c. u AH KYIT (APPLICANT)

1~5
Jan. 8. v.
THE UNION OF BURMA (RES.PONDENT). *
Trade Disputes Act, s. 20-{ailure to carry out terms of Award-imposition of
fine-legality thereof.
Held: On reading the provisions of s, 20 (4) of the Trade Disputes Act,

with s. 32 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is clear that a Magistrate of the
zsr Class is competent to sentence a person convicted of an offence under
a. 20 (x} of the Act to a fine not exceeding K x,ooo for every day on which the
tenns of the Award are not carried out by hitn.
The Trade Disputes Act being a special law, it overrides the general provi-
~ions contained ins. 3:i of the Criminal' Procedure Code, because of s. I thereof.
Though s. 20 (1) of the Trade Disputes Act contains no provision for any
ip:tprisonment being awarded in d_efault of payment of fine, by virtue of the
provisions of s. 40 and s. 67 of the Pena I Code, simple imprisonment not exceed-
can
in g six montl).s be imposed on def~ult of payment of tine.
Sukde,o Singh v. Corpt)rati~ 'of Calcutta (1953) C.L.J . .x96 (Calcutta),
referred to.
Kyaw Htoon for the applicant.

Khin Sein. (Government. Advocate) . for the respondent.
, U SAN MAUNG, J.-1-n Criminal Regular T:dal No. 6ar

of 1963 of the Second Additional Special Power. Magjstrate,
Rangool)., the applicant, U Ah Kyit was coJ;tvicted under
. s.ection 2o, su.b-section Jr) of ~h.~ Trade D~putes Act, 1929
f9r fmling to carry o~t the te.rms of tl;le award of '1:4~
ln4ustri~l Cour~ and he was sentenced to pay a fine of
K 3..3<?o or in def~ult .t o .undergo six . months' simple im-
prisonmen~. Being dissatisfied ~th the conviction and
Criminal Revision ~o. z68 (B) of 1964.
Review of the order of the 2nd :Additional Special Power Magistrate of
Ra,ngoon, dated the 23rd day of July, 1964,-passed in his Criminal Summary
No. 68I. o.f I96J, and confirmed by the S~ssions Judge, Hanthawaddy and
Rangoon.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
sentence .the applicant appealed to tl1e learned Sessions c.c.

IS)6S
Judge, Hanthawaddy and Rangoon Town District and the
learned Sessions Judge by his judgment in Criminal Appeal u ~. Kn,.
No. 89 of I964, confirmed the conviction and sentence ~sB~=.
passed upon the applicant and <ijsmissed his appeal. ,
Hence the present application for revisjon.
The only point conltnueu ucfore this Cou:rt by the
learned Advocat~ for the applicant is that the sentence
is illegal because .under section 32 of the Criminal Pro-
cedure Code, a 1st Class Magistrate cannot impose any
fine exceeding K I,ooo. However, sub-section (I) to
section 20 of the Trade Disputes Act, 1929, pro-
vides that a person guilty of an offence under that section
shall be punishable with fine which may extend to K I,ooo
for every day on which the terms of the award are not
carried out. Sub-section (4) of sec.tion 20 of the Act pro-
vides that no Court inferior to that of a Magistrate of the
1st Class shall try the offence. When these two provisions
are read together it is clear that a Magistrate of the 1st
Class is competent to sentence a person convicted of an
offence un'der section 20 (r) of the Act to a fine not exceed-
ing K I ,ooo for every day on which the terms of the award
are not carried ou~ by him. The Trade Dispu.tes Act, I929,
being a -special law, it overrides the general provisions
contained in section 32, Criminal Procedure Code because
of section I thereof. Therefore, the fine of K 3,300 im-
posed upon the applicant is not invalid in law.
The learned Advocate for the applicant has further
contended that the imprisoment in default of payment of
fine was. illegal as section 20 (r) of the Trade Disputes
Act, 1929 makes no provision for any imprisonment being
awarded in default of payment of fine. However~ section
67 of the Penal Code enacts that if the offence be punish-
able with fine only there can be imprisonment in default
of payment of such . fine although the imprisonment '
imposed.
must be sjmp~e
,.
Ci!Q.d
. mu$t
.. .
no.t exceed six months.
c.c. Section 40 of the Penal Code enacts that the word

1965
" offence " occurring in section 67 d~notes a thing
U AHKYil'
v. punishable under the Code or under ariy special or local
TlmUNlON
OF BuRMA.
law as defined in sections 41 and 42. The Trade Disputes
Act, 1929, is undoubtedly a special law.
In t'Pis connection, I need only refer to the case of
Sukdeo Singh v. Corporation of Calcutta (I) where it was
held that in an offence under the Calcutta Municipal Act
which is punishable with fine only the Magistrate has
jurisdiction to impose a sentence of imprisonment in
default of fine by virtue of section 64, Penal Code.
In the result; the application for revision fails and it
is dismissed.
(r) (1953) C.L.J. 196 (Calcutta).

ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Before U Kyaw Zan U, J.

c.c.
u AYE MAUNG (APPLICANT) 1965 .
v. A pl. 8.
DAW AYE KHIN AND TEN OTHERS (RESPONDENTS).*
~rbitration Act s. 33-Applicaiion challenging validity of the award-payment

of Court Fees-Article 1 (b) znd Schedule, Court Fees Act-Lirmtation Act,
Article 158, Non-maintm"nability of " objection " instead of Application.
Held : Under s. 33 of the Arbitration Act, a party to an arbitration agreement
desiring to challenge the validity of an award, should do so by making an
application to the Court. The said Application should be stamped according
to the genera! Article I (b) of the Second Schedule of the Court Fees Act, asitis
not elsewhere specifically provided for.
A petitio!! to set aside the award on which Court Fees has not been paid,
should not have been allowed to be filed, by virtue of sections 4 and 6 of the
Court Fees Act.
Anne Venkata.subba Rao v. Anne Bhujangayya and another, A.I.R. 1946
Mad. !t:-1, <:'!f~rred to.
1\1.;-'"~""~'" ~:-.~<:!" Article IS~ of t"" T .imitotion Act, an application to set
aside a.11 award should be made within 30 days from the date of service of the
-n otice of fiHr.:;: the award. An application made over 4 months after service
of notice is barred by the Law of Limiuuion.
Jo.~.!!+.rm!! J!!!Jalkishore v. Kashiprosad J!IGj!UJria, I.L.R. (1942) z Cal. I6o,
referred to. .
Held also : Where an" objection" instead of an application is filed, it must
Tail by reason of s. 33 of the Arbitration Act.
lviungitu(J I<.am v. Firm Girdiurri L..l-Rum Chand, A. I.R. 1936 Lab. 951;
Gadiraju Bangarayya and another v. Gottemukkula Ramab!UJdriraju, I.L.R.
(1948) Mad. 123; referred to and distinguished.
..
G. N. Bap.erjee for the applicant .
Subhan for the respondent No. 3
B. K. Sen for the respondent No. 4
Dr. Maung Pyu for the respondent No.7
Rest
. unrepresented.
. . ,
Civil Miscellaneous No. 39 of 1958.

U KYAW ZAN U, }.-Stripped of all ~he unnecessary

details for the purpose of the matter now before the Court
UAYE
MAUNG for determination a.11d going dire!=t to the point :the facts.

DAWAYE
are these: -
KBJN AND
TBN oTHERs. U Aye Moung, retired Chief Engineer and one of the
heirs of D~w Noo {det::e?..sed) by :bJs a_rn~nd,:;>d fl.pplkation
dated sth May 1958 under section 14 of the Arbitration
Act, I 944 caused the award and the necessary documents.
to be filed in Court as the arbitrator. There are I I respon--
dents and it was alleged that nine of them signed the
arbitration agreement while the applicant acted for him-
self and for and on behalf of U Moung M.oung Ohn Ghine
and U Thain Moung (respondents Nos. 4 and 5) by virtue
of the General Power of Attol;'Iley dated 2nd Augu.s:t I946
granted to him as their agent. The Court gave notices to
the respondents of the filing of the award. Of the I I
respondents only the 4th and sth respondents mentioned'
a:bov:e al'e not s<;ltisfied w.i,th the award, and this matter
now before the Court mainly concerns them. " Notice
to file application to remit or set aside an award " un.de:r-
'' s~on .14 (2.) of tl;u.~. Arbitt:ation Act." ~11,: printed For-m
Original Side/Civil 96A wa-s served on these two respon-.
dents on 24th May 1958.
I shall take up the case of U Tha~n Moung first. On1
26th ~ptember 1958, j.e., . over ~our months after the
service of n'otice. on' him, he filed a petition through an
Advocate to set aside the award on the ground that the
Power of Attorney. granted to th~ applican~ h~ving no:
relation to the.estate of Daw Noo he considered that he was
not a party to the arbitration agreement.. This pe~tion, or-
application if it can be called, is no~ $tampe{l. . The Power
of Attorney is a Ge~eral Powe~ of Att;qrney a:qd so long
as it bas not been revoked the applica11t n;ni.st be. held'
to be competent to act for him. He was a;fl ?,!gng aw~e .
of the arbitratiqn p:r:oceedings, 't.Fld did not object to the:
c.c.
same. In Saturjit Pertap Bahadoor Sahi v. Dulhin Gulab 1965
Koer (I)i the point for consideration was whether the u An
defendant was aware of the reference to arbitration and MAUNe v.
acquiesced in the proceedings before the arbitrators, and, ~~w A~
. h b' ..,...IN AND
if so, whether he can now be allowed to raise t e o JeCtiOn TEN oTHERs.
that his agent was not authorised to consent to the

arbitration. It was held that the defendant having been
aware of the proceedings and tacitly ratified the action
of his agent he counld not raise the objection even though
the agent was not authorised to consent to the arbitration.
Under section 33 of the Arbitration Act 1944, any party
to an arbitration agreement desiring to challenge the
existence or validity of an arbitration agreement or an
.award "shall apply to the Court." The section clearly
says that the claim to set aside an arbitration award or
challenge an arbitration agreement should be made by
.application to the Court. In Anne V enkatasubba Rao
v. Anne Bhujangayya and another (2) it was held that
since an application under section 33 of the Arbitration
Act is not provided for in the Cour.t Fees Act the cmrrt fee
under the general Article, viz. Article 1 (b) of the Second
Schedule of the Court Fees Act must be paid for such an
application. While section 4 of the Court Fees Act pro-
vides that no document of any of the kinds specified in
the Second Schedule as chargeable with fees shall be filed,
exhibited or received by the fiigh Court in any case coming
before it in the exercise of its extraordinary original civil
jurisdiction, section 6 of the Act makes similar provisions
for any Court of Justice or public officer. The petition
or application dated 26.t h Septe~ber .1958 . of U Thain
Mo~ng should not therefore hav.e been received or allowed
tobe filed. Even if it is acceptable it cannot be considered
:at all as it is barred by the Law of Limitation. Article
r,58 of the Law of Liniitation provides 30 days frCim the
<l~te. o~ . service of th~ notice ~f 'filling ~~~ award,. for an
(2) A.I.R. (1946) Mad. 104.
78 BURMA LAW. REPORTS
c.c .. application under ~he Arbitration Act, 1944, to set aside

1965
an award .or to get an award remitted for reconsideration.
UAYB
MAUNG In ]ohurimull jugalkishore v . Kashiprosad ]hajha;:ia (3}
DAwfJ. AYB where the notice of filling the award was served on 21st
KmN AND November 1941 and on an .application to set aside the
TBN OTaBRS. award was made on 22nd December 1941 (2rst December
1941 being Sunday) it was held that though there W'lS the
right to make the application on 22nd .December I 941 if
did not follow that the -time for making that application
had not expired on 21st December 1941. The learned
Advocate for the respondent No. 5 argued that Article 91
of the Limitation is applicable. I do not agree. It only
deals wi~h setting aside an instrument in a suit not other-
wise provided for in the Law of Limitation. Article 158
is specific. It deals with applications under the Arbitra-
tion Act to set aside an awar.d or to get an award remitted
for reconsideration. For all these reasons U Thain Moung
the respondent No. 5 must fail. .
Now I come to the case of U Moung Moung Ohn Ghine
the respoiident No. 4 He did not file an application
under section 33 of the Arbitration Act. On 2nd June
1958 i.e., 9 days after the service of notice on him he
filed an "Objection" without any prayer stating that the
Power of Attorney granted to the applicant could not
include the application made by the applicant under section
14 of the Arbitration .A.ct, 1944, and that it could not be
constmed as giving consent to the arbitration. Since this
is an "Objection" and not an "Application" mider .section
33 of the Arbitrattion Act, 1944, he must fail also for 'the
reasons .given above. Being an " Objectioi" it was not
stamped with ."t he required court. fee stamp . . The learned
Advocate for this . respondent referred to me to Manghoo
Ram v. Firm Girdhari Lai~Ram Chqrid (4) but this is a very
old authority decided long before the amendment of
Article.158 o'f ~he Limitation Act. This au~ority is otiose . .
(3) I.L~R. (1942) a Cal. x6o. (4) A.!.R:(1935) 4h. 951.
He then submitted that this " Objection" should be treated c.c.
1965
as an" application." I do not know how 1 can do so when
U AYE
the notice served on the respondent clearly shows that he MAtmG
was required " to file application to remit or set aside an DA.;An
award" under "section 14 (2) of the Arbitration Act" in KHIN AND
printed Form Original Side/Civil 96A. In Gadiraju Banga- TEN oTssRS
rayya and another v. Gottemukkula Ramabhadriraju (5) an
objection instead of an application was no doubt accepted
by the Court but the facts are entirely different from mose
in the instant case. In that case the party was misled by
the order of the Court posting the suit for objections, and
the objection not only was in substance an application to
set aside the award, but almost so in form. This
"Objection" in the prese!!t case was signed by both the
learned Advocate and the respondent No. 4 and in .the
verification the word "application" was purposely deleted
and the word "objection" substituted as in the heading.
U Moung Moung Ghine the 4th respondent must therefore
fail and he must also fail on the other point, viz. the Power
of Attorney granted to the applicant, which I have
discussed above.
There are no grounds as specified in section 30 of the
Arbitration Act, 1944, for setting aside the award. In
exercise of .the power given under section 17 of the said
Act the amended application of the applicant dated .51#
May 1958 is accepte'd with the award filed with costs of
the application against the respondents Nos. 4 and 5 in
equal shares, and consequently a judgment is passed in
the terms of .the award with particular reference to
paragraph No. 4 of the said award with the direction that
the arbitrator be released forthwith. The respondents
Nos. 4 and 5 shall also pay 2 gold mohurs each as
Advocates' fees for each of the Advocates representing
(i) the applicant, (ii) respondent No. 3 and (ill) respondent
No.7
(s) I.L.R. (1948) Mad. xz3.
:80 BURMA LAW REPORTS
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before U San Maung, :J.
c.c. u KHIN MAUNG (APPELLANT)
X96S
Feo. x8. v.
:r. A. E. MADHA. } (RESPONDENTS).*
2. MADAM CHWA SHIN
Ul"batl Rent C6ntrol Act, 196o-Breach of obligatioo of tenancy under s. 12(1) (a)-
Whether assignment of premises a breach of such obligatiOIZ. Assignment
before expiry of 1948 Act-11ot breach of obligatiOn under 1960 Act. Ejeet
ment decree-Whether valid.
The rst Respondent (Plaintiff) had filed a suit fo.r ejectment against the
Appellant and the znd Respondent on the ground that the Appellant as tenant,
had vacated the suit room about the year 1953/1954 after handing over the
same to the 2nd-Respondent (2nd Defendant).
The learned trial Judge h.eld that as the Appellant (lSt Defendant) had
committed a breach of obligation of tenancy on which an ejectment decree
,should be passed against him. A decree was therefore passed against the
.Appellant, as tenant, and the znd Respondent as sub-tenant. The said decree
ws based not onlY. on the fact that there were arrears of rent lawfully due but
on the fact that there had been a breach of obligation of tenancy.
On appeal by the Appellant (xst Defendant):
Held: As the Appellant (xst Defendant) had assigned the suit room during.
:the year 1953(1954 when the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948 was still in force,
he stillremains a tenant of the I st Respondent (Plaintiff) and a suit under s. 12(1)
(a) of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960 for non-payment of arrears of rent
lawfully due, is maintainable against him.
Held further : It is a moot point whether the failure of a tcnantto give notice
that he had vacated the premises which he had been occupying as required by
clause (e) of s. x6 AA, constitutes a breach of oblig-ation of tenancy under the
Urban Rent .Cpntrol Act, 1948.
A"Ssl:Ulling that it does constitute a breach of obligation of tenancy under
the Acto{ 1948; it cannot constitute a breach of obligation of tenancy under
-s. 1z (1)(aJ of die Act of 1960. This is because after the coming into force of
1he Acto~ 1960, the provisions of the 1948 Act can ()nly be invoked for cases
which ha:ve ~en pe~ding at the time of the ~iry <if the 1948 Act.
Ko Lan ]Jarr v. Prafulla Chandra Palakkar and two others, C.M.A. No. 18
of 196-z of the Chief Court, referred to and follo~ed.
Accordingly, the decree for ejectment based on the breach of obligation of
"tenancy of the Appellant (1st Defendant) is bad in. law.
The decree was therefore confirmed in so far as it related to ejectment for
non--:.payment of r-ent.. : . .. . .
Civil xst Appeal No. 128 of 1964, against the decree of the 4th Judge
City Civil. Court of Rangoon in Civil Regtda-r SuitNo. 49x cif 19"64, dated
"the 17th Sept;mper 1964.
Mauna Maung Aye for the appellant. c.c.

1965
M.A. Subhan for the respondents. UKHJl'll
,,
MAUNG
U SAN MAUNG, J.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 491 of M!;!:

196r of the City Civil Court of Rangoon the plaintiff z. MADAM
CHWA SHIH.
Ismail Ahmed Madha Waqf by 1ts Managmg Trustee
A. E. Madha sued the defendant-appellant U Khin Maung
and the defendant-respondent Madam Chwa Shin for their
ejectment from the premises in suit for non-payment of
;arrears of rent and for alleged breach by U Khin Maung
o f the obligations of the tenancy, the suit being one under
-section r2 (r) (a) of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960.
The plaintiff also impleaded as co-defendant-the Control- '
Jer of Rents, Rangoon, without having issued to him the
statutory notice required by section 8o of the Civil Pro-
-cedure Code. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court
on the ground that the statutory notice being wanting the
suit not only against the. Controller of Rents but also
against other defendants was not maintainable in law.
The plaintiff appealed and this Court by its judgment
in Civil First Appeal No. 17 of 1962 set aside the judgment
and decree of the trial Cour.t a.nd remanded the suit under
-<:;>rder .XLI, Rule 2 3 of the Civil Procedure Code for trial
..af~er striking out the name of the Controller of Rents from
. the array of defendants. The suit has since been decreed
.and hence the present appeal by the rst defendant U Khin
.Maung.
Theplaintiff's case in brief was asfollows: The Waqf
was the .owner of the premises known as No. 264, Lewis
Street, Rangoon and the rs.t defendant U Khin Maung was
the tenant in respect of Room No. !2 thereof at a rental
of K 45 per mensem. In Civil Regular Suit No. 1099 of
1956of the City Civil Court of Rangoon the plaintiff Waqf
sqed U Khin Mauilg under' section I I (r) (a) of the Urban
.Rent Control Act for his ejectment for non-payment of
6
c.c. arrears of rent. The 2nd respondent M~dam Chwa Shin

1965
sought :to be made a party-defendant to that suit on the
~~: ground that the tenancy had been made over to her by
v. , U Khin Maung. Her application was rejected and a
~A~~: decree for ejectment under section I r (i) (a) of the Urban
ciw~~~~- Rent Control Act, 1948, was passed against U Khin Maung
. 4lone. This decree was subsequently rescinded under
section 14 of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948. There-
after in Civil Regular Suit No. 327 of 1957 of the City
Civil Court, Rangoon, .Madam Chwa Shin sued the plaintiff
Waqf for a declaration that she was a sub-lessee of U Khin
Maung. She failed and her appeal to the late High Court
against the decision of the City Civil Court was unsuccess
ful. .Thereafter, the plaintiff tried to move the Controller
of Rents, Rangoon, to :ta~e action against U Khin Maung
and Madam Chwa Shin under section 16B of the Urban
Rent Control Act, 1948, read with section 1~AA and for
ejectment summarily Of Madam Chwa Shin from the room
in question. However, while the proceedings before the
Rent Controller were pending the Urban Rent Control Act,
1948, expired by. efflux of til?J.e without the Controller of
Rents having passed any order on :the application filed by
the plaintiff. Therefore,. the present suit was filed against
U Khin Maung, Madam Chwa Shin and the Controller of
Rents who, as I have already pointed out above, had since
been dropped from .t he array of defendants.
The defence of U Khin Maung was that during the
interregnum after the expiry of .t he Urban Rellt Control
. Act, I948 and before the coming into. force of the Urban .
Rent Control Act, 1960, he a~signed the tenancy of the
suit roo;m to Madam Chwa Shin as provided for in section
.r o8 of :the Transfer of Property Act: Therefore, the
plaintiff's suit as against him was not maintainable in law.
Madam Chwa Shin's defence was that . since the tenancy
. had .been validly assigned to .her she was willing to. pay
the rent t0 the plaintiff. Moreover, :the present suit was
bad as the notices under section 106 of the Transfer of c.c.

1965
Property Act and under s~ction 12 (r) (a) of the Urban UKHIN
Rent Control Act, 1960, were served not on her but on MAuNe
UK'.
nm M
. aung. o.
1 .A.E.
Several issues were framed of which the most import- 2~~. nJAVAM
ant for the purpose of the present appeal are: (a) whether CHV:'A SatN.
the tenancy vras validly assigned by the defendant-appellant
U Khin Maung to the defendant-respondent Madam Chwa
Shin during the interregnum as contended by these de-
fendants ; (b) whether the present suit was maintainable
in view of the fact that notices were served oniy on the
1st defendant U Khin Maung; and (c) whether the two
defendants were liable to be ejected for non-payment of
rent and 'for breach of the obligations of the tenancy.
The Managing Trustee of the plaintiff Waqf alone gave
evidence, none of the defendants having appeared in the
witness-box to prove that the tenancy had been validly
assigned after the expiry of the Urban Rent Control Act,
1948, and before the coming into force of the Urban Rent
Control Act, 1960. That there were arrears of rent law-
fully due was an admitted fact. Therefore, the learned
trial Judge came to the conclusion that since it had been
abundantly shown from matters appearing on record that
the .rst defendant U Khin Maung had vacated the suit room
about the year 1953-54, after handing over the same to the
2nd defendant Madam Chwa Shin the Ist defendant had
commjtted a breach of the obligation of tenancy for which
an .ejectment decree should be passed against him. Re-
.garding the validity of the notices u~der section 106 of the
Transfer of Property Act and section 12 -(r) (a) of the
Urban Rent Control Act:. 1960, the learned Judge held that
in law U Khin Maung was still the tenant of the plaintiff
Waqf: Therefore, he was liable to be ejected-for non-payr
m~nt of arrears o~ rent lawfully due. Accordingly a
decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff Waqf as against
U Khin Ma:ung as tenant df. the plaintiff and Madam .Chwa
84 BURMA LAW REPORTS (1965
c.c. Shin as sub-tenant of U Khin Maung. This decree was
96s
based not only on the fact that there were -arrears of rent
UKmN
MAUNG lawfullv due but on the fact that there had been a breach.
'
x.;:E. of obligation of the tenancy. Being dissatisfied with the
2 .~~~ judgment and decree o~ the U:ial Court ~he. defendant
cawA SHm. U Khin Maung appealed 1mpleadmg the plamnff and the
2nd defendant Madam Chwa Shin as respondents.
Now, I am in entire agreement with the learned trial
Judge that the defendants had failed to prove that the
tenancy of the suit-room had been validly assigned by
U Khin Maung to Madam Chwa Shin during the period
when there was no Urban Rent Control Act in force. On
the contrary, there are abundant reasons for corning to
the conclusion that it was during the year 1953-54 that
U Khin Maung had vacated the suit-room in favour of
Madam Chwa Shin. Therefore, U Khin Maung still
remains a tenant of' the plaintiff Waqf, and a suit under
section r2 (z) (aj of the Urban Rent Control Act for non-
payment of arrears of rent lawfully due is maintainable
as against him.
A more difficult question arises ,as to whether the eject-
ment decree can be based on the fact of the existence of
a breach of obligation of tenancy as envisaged in the other
part of section r2 (z? (a) of the Urban Rent Control Act,
1960. This section corresponds to secti.o n 11 {z) (a) of
the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948, which re.ads:
" Not\yithstanding anything con'tained in the Transfer of
Property Act or the Contract Act or the Rangoon .City Civil
Court Act no order or decree for the recovery of possession of
.any premises to which this Act applies or for the ejectment
of a tenant therefrom shall be x:nade or given unless-:-
(a) any rent lawfully due from the tenant whi~h accrued
. after the resu-:nption of civil government on the conclusion
of hostj.lities with Japan lias not 'been paid to the landlord
or deposited with the Controller (under section 14B) after
-a written demand for payment of such rent has been
sent to the 'tenant by registered post and has not been c.c.
I96S
comp!id with for three weeks from the date of such
demand, or any o~her obligation of the tenancy, whether u KHIN"
MAUNG
under the contract of tenancy or under this Act, so far v.
as the same is consistent with the provisions of this Act, x.A. E.
MADHA.
has been broken or not performed; " !Jz. MADAM .
CHWA SHIN.
No doubt, the section speaks not only of breach of obliga-

tion of ten<2ncy under the contract of tenancy but also
breach of condition of tenancy under the Act. However,
it is a moot point whether the failure of a tenant to give
notice that he had vacated the premises which he had
been occupying as required by clause (e) of section r6AA
constitute a breach of obligation of the tenancy under the
Urban Rent Control Act, 1948. However, assuming
though not deciding that it does constitute such a breach
of the obligation of tenancy under the Act of 1948, it is
evident that the failure of U Khin Maung to give a notice
in the year 1953 or 1954 when he vacated the premises
in favour of Madam Chwa Shin, cannot constitute a breach
of obligation of tenancy under section 12 (r) (a) of the
Urban Rent Control Act, 1960. As pointed out by a Special
Bench of this Court in Ko Lan Barr v. Prafulla Chandra
Palakkar and two others (r) after the coming into force of
the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960, the provisions of the
1948 Act can only be invoked for cases which have been
. pending at the time of the expiry. of the 1948 Act by
efflux of time. The provisions of the t948 Act canno~
be applied to cases instituted during the interregnum, or
to cases instituted after :the coming into force of :the 1960
Act. For these reasons, I am of the opinion that the
decree for eje.ctinen:t of the defendants based on the ground
that defendant U Khin Maung had committed breach of
the obligation: of the tenancy, is bad in law and must be
set ;:tSide. .
(x) Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 18 of (1962) of the Chief
Court. . .
86 BURM_A LAW REPORTS
c.c. . Accordingly :the decree appealed against is confirmed

r96s
only in so far as it related to the ejectment of the defendant
~~~~ for non-payment of arrears of rent lawfully due. As this
appeal succeeds in part, I would direct that each party
x.A. E. .hi C
MADHA. should bea:r its own costs m t s ourt. The defendants
c~w~~~:!. must pay the costs incurred by the plaintiff )n the trial
Court.
BUR1'v1A LAW REPORTS 87
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before U Bo Gyi C.J., U Son Maung and U Tun Tin, JJ.
I. U MAUNG MAUNG) c.c.

2. DAW.TIN NYUN
3 DAW SEIN NYUN
j' v. U KYAW THEIN
-
196s
Feb.23.
Admitlistralion suit-Court should not embark on enquiry as to the disputed item

at time of passing of preliminary decree-function of official Referee.
Held : ln a suit for accounts and administration, the Court should bear
in mind the two stages contemplated by the Code of Civil Procedure, 'Viz. the
passing of the preliminary decree, and then embarking on an enquiry relating
to disputed items of accounts.
At the stage of the preliminary decree, it should not embark on an enquiry
as to whether the disputed items did or did not form part of the estate of the
deceased. A much more satisfactory result will be obtained if a detailed inquiry
regarding the matter is made by the Official Referee.
Myint Tin for the appellants.

Ba Gyaw for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNG, J.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 28 of 1962

of the Original Side of this Court, the plaintiff U Kyaw
Thein! who is :the respondent in the present appeal sued
his two sisters, Daw Sein Nyun and Daw Tin Nyun and his
younger brother U Maung Maung. for the administration
of the estate of the deceased U Po Saw, who died on the
12th May I954 The plaintiff's case .was that the deceased
di~d possessed of immoveable and .moveable properties as
detailed in Schedules A and B annexctl. to. the plaint, and
that although after the death of ~heir father he had asked
the defendants to giv:e him. his Ijghtful share of the
Civil tst Appeal No. 33. of 1964 against the decree of t.he Original Side
(U Kyaw ZanU) of this Court of Rangoon in Civil Regalar Suit No. 28 of 1962
dated the nth January 1964, .
~9;.5 deceased's estate, they had refused to do so. It was corn-

-;-;:
I. u Iv...,..UNG
mon ground that all the parties to the suit were entitled
MAuNG. to equal shares of the estate. There was also no dispute
T~ :?.~:.". regarding the fact that items I, 2 and 3 of schedule A
ss~~ [?~~~- belonged to the estate. The point of difference between
v. the parties was whether item 4 of schedule A, which was
UKYAW
T~BJN, a wooden building witt~ conogated iron roofing known as
No. 17jr9, roLl-t Street, Rangoon and the site on which
it was situate belonged to the estate and whether all the
three firms mentioned in schedule B also belonged to the
estate. The learned Judge on the Original Side who tried
tl).e suit instead of passing a preliminary decree straight-
.a\vay, after the framing of the issues, embarked on an
:inquiry as to whether the disputed items did or did not
_form part of the estate of the deceased U Po Saw. After
examining witnesses cited by both the parties, he came
to the conclusion that whereas the building known as
No. I.7/I9 in roth Street_belonged to the estate, the site
on which it was situate belonged to the defendant-appellant
U Maung Maung personally. Regarding The items men
tioned in schedude B, he came to the conclusion that all
the firms, namely, U Po Saw and Sons Limited, U Hla Pe
and Son and Ba Kyin and Company belonged to the estate
of the deceased. U Po Saw. Being ciissatisfied with the
judgment of the learned trial Judge, the defendants have
preferred the present appeal.
Now, as pointed out by a Bepch of the Calcutta High
Court in Balakbala Dasee v .. ]adunath Das (r) unless th.e
distinction .between the two stages tha.t the Code con-
. temp~ates in a suit for account and administratio~ is
strictly borne in mind, the result may be some confusion.
Normally, what a Court should do in an administration
. suitat the stage of the preliminary decree, is to direct that
necessary accounts should be taken and inquiries mad~. . It
s~ol.ild .riot, at _that stage, embark on an inql!-iry relating
.(1) LVII Cal. p. (1j58).
BURMA LA'vV REPORTS 89
to disputed items of accounts. However, in the case now c.c.

1965
under consideration, the learned Advocates appearing for
I. U MAUNG
both the parties . to the appeal have asked us to give a MAUNe.
decision regarding the owpership of the bu,ilding known as T~ ~~.
No. 17/19, roth Street, Rangoon. We shall do so leaving,
3 NJ?Aw
8 BlN YUN~
it to the Official Referee to make a detailed inquiry re1at1ng v.
1 . h . . 1 d
to two of t he tnree 1tems s own m sene u e . 1 B u KYAW
THEIN.
According to Daw Khin Aye (PW r), wife of the plain-

tiff U Kyaw Thein, this building was built by the deceased
U Po Saw on a piece of land which he had taken on lease
from a Chinese lady at a rental of K 400 per annum.. After
constructing the building which was originally a godown,
U Po Saw himself made use of one of the rooms therein,
while he leased out the two others to tenants. When in
the year 195:c she and her husband U Kyaw Thein came
to se:ttle down at Rangoon at :the request of U Po Saw,
they at first resided at No. '27, r rth Street. About four
or five months later, they shifted to No. 17/19, IOth
Street, Rangoon and with the permission of U Po Saw made
alterations to render it suitable for residential purposes.
They spent about K 4,000 in making these alterations.
They had to pay K 300 permensem as rent fo U Po Saw
as U Po Saw said that he needed the money f or charitable
.purposes. U Kyaw Thein owned a godown in Stevenson
Street which was given to him as a shinbyu gift by an old
lady who regarded him as an adoptive grandson. This
godown yielded a rent of K 300 per mensem, and the rent
was taken by U Po Saw in payment of the rent which they
had.to give him for occupying building No. r7/I9 in roth
Street. After the death of U Po Saw, the defendants pur-
chased the land on w;trich this building was situate from
.its owner in the name of.the defendant U Maung Maung,.
without informing U Kyaw TheiJ;J. .
. U Ba Tin (PW 2), a ~fness dted by the plaintiff was
employed as a driver by the Chinese lady from whom
U Po Saw had taken lease of the land .. on which building
?;~; No. 17/r9 of ro:th Street was constructed : He could state

-
I. U M AUNG
that it was U Po Saw who had constructed this godown.
MAUNe. The defendant Daw Sein Nyun in giving evidence sub-
T~ ~~- stantially corroborated the story of Daw Khin Aye that
sJ~ ?~. the godown known as No: 17/19, roth Street, was built
o. by her father U Po Saw in the name of her youngest
UKYAW
THEIN. brother U Maung Maung. She also admitted that after
U Kyaw Thein shifted to Rangoon he occupied this
godown, after making suitable alterations to make it fit
for residential . purposes. She also admitted that as the
godown, which was subsequently converted into a residen-
tial building belonged to theestate, the plaintiff had to give
her father reQ.t at the rate of K 300 per mensem. Daw
Tin Nyun, while admitting :that No. 17/r9 of roth Street
Was constructed by her father U Po Saw, said that it be-
longed to the defendant U Maung Maung as it was built
in his name. The defendant U Maung Maung also claimed
thaf the house w~s his as it was constructed in his name.
He admilted that the plaintiff paid U Po Saw K 300 per
mensem as rent for occupying this .building, but said that
after the death of his father it was he who. collected the.
rent. It was an admitted fact that while U Kyaw Thein
remained owner of the godown in Stevenson Street, the
rent received for :this godown was utilized as payment of
rent for the building occupied by U Kyaw Thein. This
.godown was however sold by U Kyaw Thein during July .
1956. So, U Maung Maung said that he had to be com- ..
pensated by the rent received from the godown in 9th
Street. This godo.wn appears as item I in. chedule A.
From the evidence narrated above, it is dear that
.although the building known as No. r7/19 in roth Street
. was assessea to . municipal :taXes in :the name of .the
defendant. U Maung Maung, it was buil~ l:>y U Po Saw on
the land which U Po Saw had taken on lease from a
.. Chinese.lady, and that dUring U P~ . Sa~'s lifetime it was
he who had collected rent in respec~ of this building. It
..is also clear that this building was a.t all times regarded c.c.
1965
.as belonging to U Po Saw. Therefore, in our opinion, the I. U MAUNG
learned judge on the Original Side was quite jt_Jstified in MAuNo.
z. DAW
Jhe conclusion arrived at by him that the building -known TIN N'YUN.
3 D AW
as No. 17/19 of roth Street belonged to U Po Saw's estate. SEIN NYTJN.
Regarding the three firms enumerated in schedule B, fl.
UKYAW
the learned Advocate for the defendant-appellants has THEIN.
now conceded that the firm known as U Po Saw and Sons
to
Limited may be considered as belonging the estate. He,
however, contends .that the two other firms belonged to
strangers, namely, Maung Hla Pe who was husband of the
defendant Daw Tin Nyun, and U Ba Kyin who was a
distant relation of the deceased U Po Saw. and that there-
fore these firms should no.t have been considered to belong
to the estate of U Po Saw. In this connection, we consider
that a much more satisfactory result will be obtained if
a detailed inquiry regarding the matter is made by the
'Official Referee. We would therefore direct .t hat the find-
ing of the learned Judge on the Original Side regarding
these two firms be set aside, and that a fresh decision
should be arrived at thereon on the receipt of the report
of the Official Referee.
In the result the preliminary decree is confirmed except
'in so far as it relaJ:es to the declaration regarding items
2 and 3 of schedule B. As the appellants are only partially
successful in .their appeal, we would direct that each party
:should bear its own costs of this appeal.
CHIEF COURT
Befote U Kyaw Zan U, J.
c.c. u SAN KYA w (APPLICANT)
1965
Sept. xo. v.
MAUNG MAUNG KYWE (RESPONDENT). *
False evidence-Application under s. 476 of Code of Crimiual Procedure-wlum

to be made. Alleged false evidence in civil suit which was uitlzdrawn un-
conditionally-~ondomztion. Handwriting-as a mode of proof.
Where the Applicant made an application under s. 476 of the Code of

Criminal Ptocedurc to hold an enquiry agsinst the respondent (his own son}
for giving false evidence in a civil suit before the Chief Court filed by the
Applic:mt; and which suit was con1promised by the parties and was dismissed
as withdrawn by the Applicant.
Held : Ordin.arily, an order under s. 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
~hould be made during or on or ~hort\y after the conclusion ~of the proceedings.
In the present case, it was made nearly z months after the compromise, and no
explanation has been given for the delay.
Maung Ba Hla v. Emperor, (1917) Vol. XVIII, Cr. Law Journal, p. 331,
Rahimadulla Suizib v. Emperor, LL.R. 31 Mad., 140; Hwe Eye Hain and One v h
The King, 1948 B.L.R. 40 ; Lalji Hari v. Emperor, (1919} Vol. XX, Cr. Law
Jour:nal, Patna, p. zz6 ; and Harilal (a) Hiralal Dhanuka v. Tin Tin U, 1959
B.L.R. (H.C.) 268 ; referred to and followed.
Held also : Even if the DefendaP.t gave false evidence, it was condoned'
by the Applicant, as the suit was withdrawn uncond itionally. Mouli Durzi v ..
Naurmzgi Lall, IV C. VI/. N. p. 351 ; referrred to.
Obiter : A comparison of handwriting is an inconclusive mode of proof..
A handwriting expert should observe not the extent of similarities but the
extent of dissimilarities.
Tin Shew v. The Union of Burma, 1954 B.L.R. (H.C.} 358 ; Ravjappa v..
Nilalianta Rao and others ; 1962 (1) Cr. Law Jo'urnal, p . 441, referred to.
. . .
lUshi RQr.r for_the applicant.

.T1:1n Aung (2) for Ute respondent.
U KYA~ ZAN U, ] .-This js an ~pplic~tion under
section 476 of the Code of Criminal Proce<iure to }:10ld an
inquiry int9. an offence under section ~93 of the Penal Code
against the respondent, who._is rio other than the son of the .
* Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 54 of 1964.
BURMA LAW 'REPORTS 93
applicant, for giving false evidence in Civil Regular Suit c.c.

1965
No. 91 of 1961 of this Court, which was a suit for a USAN
declaration by the applicant against his children including KYAW
f),
the respondent that he was the sole owner of the premises M/.UNG
MAUNG.
at No. 47, !26th Street, Rangoon. It was alleged that KYWB.
the applicant produced certain letters in that suit, being
Exhibits oo 01 and co which were said to have been
written by' the0 '
respondent, who denied, but the hand-
writing expert deposed that the signatures on these letters
were those of the respondent. These letters were not
hand-written but typed. The respondent gave evidence
on 24th July 1963 in that suit. The hand-writing expert
was examined on r rth December 1963. Before the close
of the suit the parties, however, came to a compromise
outside the Court, and the suit was dismissed by U Maung
Maung, J., as withdrawn by the applicant without costs
on 25th February 1964. The present application was
filed about four months after the expert had given evidence
and nearly two months after the compromise. No
explanation whatsoever was given for the delay.
In Maung Ba Hla v. Emperor (r), it was held that

ordinarily an order under sectjon 476 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure should be made during or on or shortly
after the conclusion of the proceedings. In that case there
was a delay of nearly three months. Following the Full
Bench case of Rahimadull<! Sahib v. Emperor (2), it was
held in Hwe Eye Hain and one v. The King (3),
.. section 476, Criminal Procedure Code does not fix any
time limit within which a complaint should be made but
the tenor and the spirit of the language of the section
indicate clearly that prosecution for any of the offences
's et out in section 295, Criminal Procedure Code, should
be made at the terffi:ination of the proceeding in which
. .
(t} (1917) Vol. XVIII, Cr. Law Joumal, p. 331.
(z) I.L.R. 31. Mad. p. 140. (3) (1948) B.L.R., p. 40.
c. c. the offence alleged has been committed or soon after the
1965
termination of the said proceediiJ.gs." Ba U, J, {as he then
USAN
KYAW was} in that case went on to say, "Therefore the delay in
MAUNG"' taking action under section 476, Criminal Procedure Code,
MAUNG is in my opinion fatal to the case of the respondent. The
KYWI!.
respondent apparently did not move the machinery of the
law so as to vindicate His Majesty but to satisfy his private
grudge." In Lalji Hari v. Emperor {4), a delay of three
weeks was held to be too long under the circumstances of
the case. Again in Harilal (a) Hiralal Dhanuka v.
Tin Tin U (5), it was observed that it is most desirable
that a prosecution basing upon section 476 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure should be "initiated as early as possible,
especially when the matter ic; not suo motu.
The learned Advocate for .the respondent contended
that since the suit had been compromised the present
matter should also be deemed to have been compromised
and as such, the application is misconceived and not main-
tainable. The point for consideration is, in the circ-
umstances, whether it wiU be expedient in the interest of
justice that an inquiry sho~ld be ordered. Since no
.mention whatsoever was made as -to the alleged false
evidence in the order of the Court, it was condoned by the
applicant, who, in fact, withdrew the suit altogether
against his children including the respondent -uncondi-
tionally. By withdrawing the suit altogether the applicant
did not desire to -take any action. or proGeed with it and,
I am afraid, he cannot now rely upon a certain evidence-
in the suit to take action against the respondent. With
the w~thdrawa~ of the suit the " proceeding " has ceased
to, ~xist. The dismissal' _o f. 'the suit operated as a with-
drawal of the same un'der Order 23 Rul,e 1 {I) of the Code
of Civil Procedure. In Mouli Durzi v. Naurangi Lall (6)
where the complainant did not desire to take further
'(4) (1919) Vol, XX, Cr. Law Journal, Pat. p. i26.
(s) (1958) B.L.R. p. 268. (H;C.). (6) IV C.W.N., p. 351.
BURMA. LAW REPORTS 95
proceedings and applied to withdraw the complaint, 'it c.c.

xs
was held the Magistrate was not competent to order under U S,u'j:
section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the prosecu- KYAW
v.
tion of the complainant under section 21 r of the Penal MAUNG
Code, for making a false complaint, on taking evidence MAONG
KYwe.
suo motu as there was no proceeding before him, it being
withdrawn by the complainant. I do not quite know what
these denials of the signatures on the exhibits documents
had to do with the applicant's suit for a declaration. If
the false evidence made was dearly immaterial and if
nothing hinged on it, then dearly this is not a fit case for
holding an inquiry with a view to make a complaint for
the prosecution of the respondent. The application rests
mainly on the evidence of the hand-writing expert but this
sort of evidence. as held in Tin Shwe v. The Union of
Burma (7) is not very reliable. A comparison of hand-
writing is at all times as a mode of proof, hazardous and
inconclusive. The science of the study of calligraphy is
yet very uncertain and inexact and instances are not
rare when even the best hand-writing expert had not been
able to find out the forgery. I have read the evidence
of the hand-vvriting expert who had dwelt upon mainly on
the similarities of the signatures of the respondent in his
written statement, power of attorney and specimen
signatures with those appearing on the exhibits documents
to come to. his findings that the signatures on the exhibits
are those of th~ respondent. I think it was a wrong
approach. -I should say the true test is not the extent of
similarities observed, but the nature of extent of dis-
similarities noticed as forged documents or signatures are
good imitations. Ravjappa v. Nilakanta Rao and
others (8).
It is for the .Court acting in the matter to determine

in the exercise of its discretion whether or not to make an
(7) (1954) B.L.R., p. 358 (H.C.). (8) (1962) (x) Cr. Law Journal, p. +41.
c. c. inquiry. I have seriously considered the matter and I am

1965
of the opinion that the circumstances are not such as to
u SAN warrant a finding that it is expedient in the interest of
KYAW
v. justice that the matter should be inquired into with a
MA.UNG
MAUNG
view to make a complaint against the respondent. The
KYWB. application is therefore rejected without costs.
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS
Before U San N!aung, J.
u TIN TUN (APPELLANT)

c.c.
1965
v. Jan. 9
U SHWE HTOO YIN (RESPONDENT).*
Workmen's Compensation Act, s. 12 (I)- liability of principal-right of uorkmm

to recover from contractor under s. 12 (t)--procedure to be adopted to enforce
liability of principal.
Held : Where a workman who is employed by a contractor is injured, it is
open for him to recover compensation from the contractor (his employer), under
s. 12 (3) of the Workmen's Compensation Act.
However, if the workman chose to take action under s. 12 (r) of the Act,
the principal and not the contractor becomes the opposite party. In such a case
the principal is entitled under Rule 36 of the Rules to present a notice to the
Commissioner claiming that he is entitled under s. 12 (2) to be indemnified
by the contractor employed by him.
''Vhere liability is imposed on the principal without giving him an
-opportunity of contesting the claim, the order of the Commissioner must be set
aside.
Mon San Hlaina for the appellant.
for the respondent.
U SANMAUNG, ].-This appeal by U Tin Tun, owner

of Morton Lead Mine, is against the. order of the Commis-
sioner for Workmen's Compensation, Mergui, dated the
r6th July !964, in his Workmen's Compe.nsation Proceed-
.ings No. 6 of 1957, wherein the learned Commissioner
<>rdered the appellant to pay K 2,040 out of the compensa-
tion of K 3,240 a'arded to the respondent U Shwe Htoo
Yin as compensation for the death of his son Maung Tint,
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 28 of 1964, against the order of the Commissioner
1o): Workmen's Compensation, Mergui in his .Workmen's Compensation Pro-
eeedings No. 6 of 1957, dated 16th July, 1964.
7
C.C who was employed by one U Hmu. The facts leading to

196 5 .
- the present appeal are bnefly these :
U TIN TUN .
v. On the 25th September 1957 U Shwe Htoo Yin filed
USHWB
-HToo YIN. an application before the District Magistrate, Mergui, who
was ex-offiCio Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation
to the effect that his son Maung Tint, who was employed
by U Hmu at a daily wage of K 3 in Morton Lead Mine,.
died of injury received while he was working in the mine,
and that the owner of the mine was U Tin Tun. Notices
dated the 30th September 1957 were apparently jssued
both to U Hmu and U Tin Tun as they filed statements in
Form "Y ., on the IIth December 1957 before the Addi:_
tional Commissioner for Workinen's Compensation, Tavoy
and Mergui, to whom the case was sent for enquiry and.
report. . In hjs statement, the present appe~lant U Tin Tun
said that the deceased Maung .Tint was not his employee
as the mine was run by a contractor Saya Hmu, and that
in any event the deceased who was under the influence of
liquor at the time of the accident was working in spite of
the prohibition made by Saya Hmu. Saya Hniu's state-
ment was to the effect that Maung Tint did not die as a
result of an accident received in course of his employment
as he was working in spite of the prohibition made by Saya
Hmu, and moreover, Maung Tint was under the influence
of liquor at that time. The learned Additional Commis-
sioner who. inquired into the -case apparently treated
U Shw~ Htoo Yin's application as if it was a daim against
Mau,ng .:Tint's employer Saya Hmu. He framed only two.
issues, riamely:
(I) Wheth~r ' Maung Tint was a workman as
defined in clause (n) of sub-section (i) of
section 2 of the Workmen's Compensation
Act, 1924 and
(2) Whether Maung Tint died of . injury . caused
. by _an accident ~g out ofa,nd in the
course of his employment within the mean~ c.;;-

ing of sub-section (r) of section 3 of the Act.
u
~
TIN TUN
v.
U SHWB
After examining U Shwe Htoo Yin, Saya Hmu and HTOO YIN.
witnesses cited by them, the learned Additional Commis-
sioner made a report to the effect that the deceased Maung
Tint was a workman employed by Saya Hmu, and that he
died of injury caused by an accident arising out of and in
the course of his employment in the mine which was
worked by Saya Hmu under contract with U Tin Tun.
He recommended that compensation of K 3,240 should be
paid by Saya Hmu to U Shwe Htoo Yin, and that if this
sum cannot be recovered from Saya Hmu, :the owner of
the mine U Tin Tun should, under section I 2 of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, be ordered to pay whatever
amount remained unrecovered from Saya Hmu. This
report was dated the 12th October 1962. On the 6th
November 1962, the then Commissioner for Workmen's
Compensation (U Tin Maung) passed an order for the
payment by Saya Hmu of a sum of K 3,240 to U Shwe
Htoo Yin. The amount was not paid and recovery pro-
ceedings resulted in the recovery of only K 1,2oo from
Saya Hmu. On the r2th December 1962, the. successor
of the Commissioner who passed the order dated the
6th November 1962 sent a notice to the present appellant
U Tin Tun asking him to show cause why he should not
pay K 2;040. which remained unrecovered from Saya Hmu.
U Tin Tun by his letter dated the 11th January 1964
co~tended that he and Saya Hmu did not stand in the
relation of principal and contractor within the meaning
of section 12 (r) of the Workmen's Compensation Act,
1924, and that therefore, whatever compensatio~ that was
awctrded to U Shwe Htoo Yin for the death of his son
Ma_ung Tint should be recovered from Saya Hlllu alone.
This-cont~ntion was rejected by the learned Commissioner
who passed the order dated the 16th July 1964 to the
effect that out of the compensation of K 3,240 awarded

to U Shwe Htoo Yin, U , Tin Tun was liable under
fl.
section 12 (2) of the Act to pay K 2,040. Being dis-
USHWE satisfied with the order of the le,arned Commissioner,
lhooYm.
U Tin Tun had filed the present appeal.
Now, it is clear that both the Additional Commissioner
for Workmen's Compensation, who inquired into the case
and the two Commissioners, who passed orders thereon,
were not familiar with the procedure involved in a pro-
ceeding under section 12 (r) and (2) of the .Workmen's
Compensation Act, 1924. For the purpose of ready
reference I shall reproduce below sub-sections (r), (2) and
(3) of this section. They read:
"!2. (I) Where any person (hereinafter . in this section
referred to as the principal) in the course of or for the
purposes of his trade or business contracts with any o~her
person (hereinafter in this section referred to as the contractor)
for the execution by or under the contractor of the whole
or any part of any work which is ordinarily part of
shall be li::thle to pay to any workman employed
in the execution of the work any compensation which he
would have been liable to pay if that workman had been
immediately employed by him ; and, where compensation
is claimed from the principal. this Act shall apply as if
references to the principal were substituted for references
to the employer except that the amount of compensation
shal~ be calculated with reference to the wages of the
workman under the employer by whom he is imme!;fiately
_ employed.
(2) Where the principal is liable to pay compensation under
this .section, he shall be entitled to be in4erimified, bY. fl?.e
<:ontractor or any other person from whom the workman
could have recovered c.ompensation~ and Whe;e a contractor
who is himself a principal is liable to . pay compensation or
to indemnify a .principal under this section. he shall be
entitled to be indemnified by any person standing to him in
the relation. of a contractQr from whom the. workman..would
have rec<?vered compensation, and all questions as to the
right to and the amount of any such indemnity shall, in c.c.
default of agreement, be settled by the Commissioner. 1965
(3) Nothing in this section shall be construed as preventing U TIN TuN
a workman from recovering compensation from the u :~ws
contractor instead of the principal. Hroo Y1N.
* * "' "
Under sub-section (3) above, it is open to a workman to
recover compensation from his own employer, namely,
the contractor mentioned in the section instead of the
principal. However, if the workman chooses to take
action under sub-section (r), the principal and not the
contractor becomes the opposite party. In such a case,
the principal is under rule 36 of the Workmen's Campen
sarion Rules, 1924 , entitled to present a notice to the
Commissioner claiming that he is entitled under sub.
section (2) of section 12 to be indemnified by the contractor
employed by him. On the receipt of such a notice of
claim, the Commissioner must issue notice to the con
tractor in Form '' J ". The person served with this notic~
can contest either the applicant's claim for compensation
or the opposite party's claim to be indemnified. To ao
this, he ml)St appear before the Commissioner on the date
fixed for the hearing and when he so appears he has all
the rights of a party to the proceedings. In default of
appearance he will .be deemed to admit the validity of the
award made against the opposite party and also to admit
his own liability to indemnify the opposite party for any
compensation recovered from him vide sub.rule (2) of
rule 36.
Now, in the case under consideration, both the Addi
tional Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and
the two Commissioners who passed the orders dated the
6th November 1962 and the 16th July 1964 had apparently
treated Saya Hmu as the opposite party in the case. The
learned Commissioner, who passed the order dated the
c.c. 16th July 1964 now under appeal, had misapplied sub-
1964 .
-- sectwn (2) of sectiOn 12.
u TIN TUN
v. The net result of the procedure adopted by the Addi-
USHWE
HToo YzN. tional Commissioner and the two Commissioners concerned
in the case now under cor..sideration was that the applicant
U Shwe Htoo Yin's claim .for compensation for the death
of his son was proceeded with ex parte jn so far as the
present appellant was concerned. The appellant was not
given a real opportunity of contesting that he was not a
principal within the meaning of section 12 (r) of the
Workmen's Compensation Act, 1924, or that the deceased
Maung Tint was a workman of his contractor Saya Hmu,
and that the deceased died of injury caused by an accident
arising out of and in the course of his employment. The
order appealed against must therefore be set aside. The
Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation must now
proceed with the application of U Shwe Htoo Yin in so
far as it concerns U Tin Tun according to law, in the
light of the remarks made above. There will be no order
as to cost$ of this appeal.
Y . ..
uaooemc:c , L --
coococ c.ccoc.oa1er~ i!. " r 1~ i!. J . "'l.-
a:>c.~:<:>COCCCI:>I'lf'JO 1e:<:>:wco llo~wo
.> oe o .,) ~-.> .> .J '-'"
~
cob cr rob10 l'lOO~ l<~~e
et,; tJ, .)
b~VC.
;J
0~ bbc . .:>co~'ri:Eolf'J:cbco
.> LJ
I .>G~~ ct~tlc I
;.J T
.
.) .
11 ob col,es 'rie~bec e5o e:cbco 1e~e bgtJc ;;)
* .)
_,_ "
IWOQeCOCS
.)
I~

tn
.I>OSICO::Ifl .l
'- ,
0 .)
,
COI:ll<l!CSC.CO~O 0~ I 0
o.)C).)
gCCCOCI:>OCI:>OCOI'
'
.) 0.)
1
0
,. \YJ
v JCSCC
0
.)
.-,
.) 0.) 0
1
cc.1~.>0
1
11 cccccorooroocot'l'...c
1~v r
1<> 1 ..-
o~t e : o coo oc.ce~corowcecof'JCS
o~:
.) .) .)
.) .).) .) 0
g
I oGJcc,hl :hli;b~c.ccll'lre:a5lj'cd:o I@ccrobe<bc:clo'cec:c ICO:h.l&:dxo 1cbo?:ecocc
.)~ 5::J . ejo .> .) .)O.> .> .>o . t,.,o Ll .>o.>
ro~ .l~cbc.~c.~COC\XOCe
~.) .>
fukclCccehl
o .J
I'>~ c.cc~~:lK.cc.co~oo;
,~a.; o \ o .>
coc.~ob
.>o .> .>
u.)@ccecoP6lcooWwc
\.) .) 0 .)
..tJ
.>'J
.so~..J;lobe:db:o~,Q
~.) o .)
,.J:Jccb::o:lPcu:s
.J~ ~...l .>
o~oe'c.cc:aPe:l'lQcc& IG~e c~:~tlc d~cb
.) .> .> .JOJ.> .> ;) .>
d:c.~ 'colb~:ob
:::::lo ~- .> .)
o~;::~cob
.>
tJ roc.cccoCOG
1 :> .
1 c~:~tJc
;J
1chooe~
.)
ooecolPe:t\:cbco
o .)
11Go!l-rco~e
S'.> to;f'JCSiocoooc:c
0 .>0 l...)
o~wc,QI!>I'lfl
.) .) r~~foo .)
1a?ccrobecbc:ctokc:c
.) 0 l,. 0
:~coW:rn
.) ~
ll@ccro~:c.cohl
.)
16l~I OCI:>C:CCOCC
:,:)..J.., .) 0
: ,)oc.EOI~eWIO~ 10~ .)~0
~ \.) v .J.,
cob 0r roR:>
.) $'j
1e c~:~tlc
;:}
c.cc~co~Pe~f'JCS
.> .JO
co@oo~be:\)!Jcn:f'JCC
.) _,::J .)Q
1
GQ,""c.cik.cb:'llc:c
>~ 0
1hJ!,o
0
IOQ
l,;
16l~COOOC:C l::;lcc:oc.h.loc:c~r.:cbco
~.L .) ):" .) ~ . 0 '
ed\xec:c~&c
..) 0 ~~
ua?ccro~eeeG:cbco
J \0 \
46>00
~
cob:~c.co~::.o~
0 .) .)0
1.)~bGoca?rco~co~
.) ~
~oGQ..@cocc
~ -L. .>:1''., )OOI'l:cbco 1c.~bocto
0 60
ll~ci;bboa
;> \.0 e o
cocccoccco 1. 1 9 )_
coecec:coco " 'T _1 _
ococ.oo~=:woo o'J:oc.
r J:!>e\r(')(S
r :c.woo:s.:>ll!>:oo
,. 1 1. r 1
o\:COQ
.) .) \.0-\ > .) ..) ..) .) \ .) 0 & y .) .) .) 0
ecbc:ch:>

a?ccf'll'l
o- .> oo o
IW ooo'Cc'c .>orco'b~ coe:cbcoe~a5o

IA<:O~Pea~I'\W~OO'l
&.J .>o o _,
ll@cceco~re;f'JC:C
.> \.> .JO
I.>o'&Jhwb
.J e1
0r rofi! ~ 1e c~:~lJc
J
14bfus~cc
.>
~Q,.,CCO~C~b:~
.Jo .>:'T'"""'.J o
COO!XO
1
0
" 1
0
L __
I C1W cec .)
1 _ '1
fiCO<?::IOC(.()O~
.)
C.CO~f'JC",(O ~ IC.OO(X)fl
.) .) .)
rr
..)
11'~ II ~
.) 0
""'
a!Gt'le.GIC.C:CI
\. .)
1
:>:::>
I r, 2
~
r < < " r.-, .1_
.>
ccbooco~ :oc.
l!:9
.J .> .> ;:J l .)
1
~:c.o:>\tc-:c&o.co ooo I:IC c o~ollcci'JCS~: ccroc::ecoc:c ccoee.c:oo
:> e .> o .> ..>
u.>O !3
o\r1 a:o.> 1oe Gflec
VlT
0 \.
:>& 1o~ec::>b c:uc.4s:Ra.lncoo l:uwac~::>b- cruceR--~flec

.) """ :) .) 01.> .) 0 .) .>::.1.) .) .>:.l .)0 .) .)0
46futflcc
Ghlecc.co~c.cZccb:'a>ec "c:u!-5-CCc a chceo2 c.coMoco-;t'lec ::~ccc:afe:AQco~
.> :J .> o o .) .) .) .) o " .> .>OJ.)
* (?:cbco~tnro) b Lo ~b:L~18~
ucob oc
..) r
::>~
ro~L0l'>~()~ .)
C~tlc t (tD:cbcoe&>w)
0 o
~o:~towe~occ.o
.) .) o.)
~cS:b~m~c.w
.)
uo~~ol:ooco:~oo:2
.> o .J .) e
:Wl&,chc.u
C...J
:,~ .>:::c.<'~e:C!
.>
:8,&:d::co 1:P:tt:C!
e O...J e.:l o e o!Pc:P,bcbcc
.> 0-j
u 11 r 1
fteCOe.Gft:JOft:~co
0
0! SJ)l0d3(f M V1 VW(l09: [S96I

SC!cc~deccoccc I(~) 5'~ I~ I! sc~r:pf?s.o~~e~.w~ SDccr:prxco w
cco::>co&>:cbco
.:> .:>
~6lcce~e 0w~ro wlb:~b
;:,;::] 0 .J
Ht~ete~:cbco
::> \0 \
Y....o oCJ6cc
.J .
co&:s
.:>
~:~c=i:Cbco
(j
cco::>co~:cbco6ecn
.J .J .J
~~~bchJe;,e:cro~oro<X!wik
.J.=l .J ::::::1 \ ;:, .J -.I :crow0
ro~~(') =~~~~PecPeccoccc
.:>::::::1 ~ .> B
rf ~) ~e.s
\5 .:>
ICo. <X!ecee worw .ooo'Cc'c ;~
. .:> oo o .:>
W~ro!J~ IOfiliG'
.;) a
>e>WOOe,G 1:::>6~
t; ~,J.; .;)
10~es e:chc.o e&ec~'bo 1bS~J-.LIOe>eG
,..) ..)~ ' 0 0 .)
!nofO'iA
o.)::::J
e:chc.o e&escoc.oc.o
0 0
Cc0~1:4~~~PedecCOC:cc.
.;)~f!l.)e
f ~)~ro 1fu
J \3.:>
,@ccob:l~
.)
1s~ e:dsc.o
:> t., -.J., o
e&esft5o 1::>&,~e>wb
.., :>
Cc ax.ec~s
3
. 10~~
e .:>
uC2lc
ec.o~Pef.')1-fles
e,J .J o
&::ocn
o .J
!l :sG::>cotDcobre~ero
.J o .J
o&,bcob
.J o . .J .J
Zt rofil~ eJ 10~~
.J
c~~c
;)
~blb:ecc
' .>o
Gt;lroca8ccb:~ro
.J..J o
ibm
CCc

ecose>o2wro
.> .>
ccoe>ecx.o
.J .:>
IC.U:~oco
.J
Cb::>~c.ucc 18hlcc~co;, :;:,c~e>~b:c.0e e:Cbco ~hl:c.rodJ~b:,:ll Pw~0Rl:n
.J 0 .J .J :J 0 .:> ::::::1 0 . ,) :J .J :::b .J ~0
w!>e>IO~ro
o L o
lohlese2cc<be>dc.uoos~cco~
.J~ .J .J .J
IG::>b(JI:C.~::>OJioJ(Jihlibro
'5'.:> e .J .:>~
(r) b fll)O
.J
ce>o2wro:ocn c.u:r,:cbr.o(JIIJI IWCCccteMes besce>o2coro :b~0Q:cco

.J .J ,) 0 .J 0 \ .J .J~
e:c(Jiwb:>c.ooro
.J 0 0
e I()~~:::>S ,Q;(j)fii<X!cc:4b.:>:c.Pe ~coecees CQOO!>OC(JI::O
,J,J.; .J '5'.:>.=1.>. .:> .J .J
ccc~!5bo 13
Pec.Pec.c.oc.cc I(.)i-)::>ro
.>
ICo C.1~!J~:::>cn
.J
11~\;&:,e>
:>-o
dw ooo'~c'c
.J .:J
!J6
~hi<X!ed Pedecc.occc 1 (1)::>ro rfu t~eowcoflrok5Cb~oes:<X!~o4w~b
.:>:J.:> B .:> .:> .:> .:> oe .J .> .:> .>
ICCCe>WOW e:cbc.oeeoec
\. .;) 0 0
m:o@ i~Cb:cee>CIIGOOWOO
.;) .J 0 0
:de6Cbes
0
..)
Cb~tecocc
.)0 .)
to:cl~kc_Sd,~o~:@&') ~*w~b to&,~oo;b 0~ CDCCC~C IG~b oC2Jc

o .:> .:> W.> .:> .:> .:> 3 e .:>
11 <X!cdl0ii)l
.J \.J~ e
:2corobeCbro
.) O
o~coe>floco
.> .) .J
riGGhl:ccc~~ke~bl
'S'.:>:J .Jo
~occoe>@hl
.:>~ .> .J ~
ICCccrecre(.COCCC
.) ~
I(~):)X
.:J ..)
IC'n e:cbcoeCo~

mcos
0
ICcc~bhliG)~
.J ~..J...;
!Mcc
0
orob:>
.) o
w:cPecb:ok:l:~c~e>ro
o .J ::::1 .J :::1
tO:::>e~emtl
t- .J
u:h.lk:C! olib:Wl&:chco
Et:lo e .J ~
11:~ce tw~ ICC cco~eu uco&ese:dsc.oe&es

.:> e ~ o
SL'tlOdfni .M.V1 VW'tlflH tOI

SOl S~'tlOdtrn M V1 VW'tlnH .
1D6 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
c\ c c ~ cc c ~c c o cgc c c
o~lij ~~~OJ~G::D?
lJ J ..,
.
OI!:.(;CXJC~p:IDac
Jl. J. -,
c:~c
J 0
q0GOOCD~
~1. J
co;oroCD c~o~:~1~:::D?~
' ~ IJ ~ 0
o c rcr,:oc<;:
~~::D~ ro~:ro!.~ooD::arm~111
.m?qoSG'}:;:p
co C C' C'[OC' C' C' OC OC' OC''\(~') C' C')
;;ro?o;;;;, ~~\'$? <?~01 OJCDjC~:~I~:::D?~CSd~S s;lU$ 01 0')03~ ::> CDC! G8d'XDOI
' c c V . ..... ~ 0 lJ flo ~ L I. ll A
~c:of
..
&C
c
GOT<,t1:'}8
roCDc:
OC'
l

"
c..
0 II
C
g,?~:co?:c::n 11
'
II 0
( ) r,:
.<::
C' C'
t12GOO?car ~f~?~CC~aq 1CC::D:>: CD2:2:::D21
CC' ()C ~ OC' o ~ ~ C'
g}J
!;;
01 9" ~.s
OC'
coo:> C'C' C' C' OC'Q
.so::~~Q(l')~QX;t;OOI Q)')08Q
OC''\ (
j) CDC
C' ~ OC' C'
~~~C
To T C,.2. ~ I I"J o
.m
i.. l ;O l 6 6 C::J
c oc r.:::: r,: c c c cr,: c
1,\:))(J)<>qCG~~ [j~?f!CO?:::Drt 'f'~CD[jiD~I,lJ?:~Sd01 Sdt:)?:<:pcx:CD
r,:c o c' c r,: c c cc oc c c o
[jiD~CD~<(cq (l)JJl:"iy~a:lJCI ci~G())?C<ll tj~~?~CC GOJ'X'SJ'?G'J:8dli(:'J
. m1 rorou1
0 'l
~
:>:mc:oCD (C'
oo1,w::-:roCDro
c
co:oroCD C(,l:~l(,l:::D?~c
('@(' C' C'
L -[ JL U ~ L ~ ' lJ 6 o
r,:oc c"
DLO=(m::D211
02?1:
0
romGOO?m
C' C' 0
roar:'JG~GYQJlum
C'
0;(1 ~c
('((')
r 1 ~')O)?QJ?Qd
~
())1\l:OJ.SQG::D')
C'\ C' 0
ID'd"'') C04)')()8 01 1!::')08Q
OC' OC'\ (
0
)
01
'l C'
C?.S:QI~t?:OX
C' ('
ll 4).1 0 JlJ l L L 1:. Z3 T u ll .0
(' , (' C' .C: c8f.: (' C' 0 C' C' ((')
S::(l)Jl:OCO I:))~ OyQ~!;iJII L[j~?y:QJml:lJ?:8d'J~9C t ~I D'JC y I
~ ....'>. co C\ cr,:c c .sroc ::
-O)?CD?Qp:;:d::De;:l "'OO)W~f~C::D? 'PeoCDtjiD<;t8d~m ~:~m!S~=~J~:
.: 0 (' C'
'0)')~~ 'J~::D~ <.l;{~G002. 11
m] OO~CDC
c: tl)l SdC:
('((')
.S t
~
~')CD')QI')~ ::D~I OJO:::DGXI.)~s;l ~ID::DGCO())Q
C' C' (' :: 0 co
C::J ::. A ll T ll C.:. IL. eL l . - Jl
c 00 .C 0 C' C' 0 C' C' C' OC' OC' 0 c
:)) Cl
o
(,l~c;B ~romoo:m
U. IL a. -r .SO)~QI;)Q.S8';)(J)(l)t
I C - I J,-IT t.
GOOI')(l)CO')::i!C
lJ L
~~COO::D~'l
l L [.
1,7 '1' 'l.r c 'l'c c' r,:.: c G ccc c
tl::n:>f? ~GOt GOmGQJ II c;c:SdGOI ~ ~~~O)::GO)') lj~ooc~p: ID9C[9c:;~
c c o O(..X)QI(l)
c erg: c.91DC:OI.
'c oc r - ' c ~~
c o OOGI(l')')C; ' o o

: lli8(8)())
l tJ -l-
00
t
IC!JOO(l')
l l-..J l
~ o:>m:G>OOG::D?rr.l~(l)
. -[,)&. JLL
c c c co c ~ c o c r,: c cr,: c c
OQ(l')O)(l)GOO ?C~f?'tC~G.a:l':>tJ?t~rtSd~lJ illr1f3:>? ID2 :1D?:~:eCD!;I<j>~lt::D211
c c , c c .c: o , co . c c __ r
08(8)00::D;:D 4)())'):QOell a;lf!OIOXP 94GOOGC00(l')'):QIOOI ::: 9'::(l');J0G::?CDC
' ._\...!.I 0 LOA U l.t 6
-rr,: r.:::: (' 0 ('~ C' C' r,: C' C' Q .Q 0 C' C'
G<;I tlco?:~c:~~G:;>J 11 'Pe::D!J)::_~:j:tts~ ~c lj0smro::n:::D:c-Jt ::DCD"jCD :J?
c r,: c c . _c: ~ o . '> r;;: c o c r::;:c C'
'P51 tl~mJ il:C\.~f~ 0~2:cq. rr.;~:9::J?W?rotl10 ::D~~<J?telc:ro2: 'f..o:lm
'l c
o1oc::D~II
c o
XG::D? co
c o&S
Sct.J(J?
c c C' c o
1D~m 1l:ro.s::n~ u<D~:sn:ro:ro
.c: oc
ox.:m
c.:. .... . I. J JL tJ c. T IL ~c. l. L II.
C' C' C' . C' ' C'OC' C' or,: C' C' 0 ' C' C(,Q,
.::n2i::DG~') :))(J)G'f'mGro::D211 Gf?~c:qc 9tJIDsarJ(l't o~Jma:
. C' ' . C'
C' C' OC' C' C' 0 0 . C' OC' C
rolll:ro.sG::D? w~c
U ol JtJo
OXPOOC::D::D
l L.!.,
~::mm
4>G t..
8d!O:C)::J;(ID'J~ 0
~.-1 ar
::DQ:o.:;c~.s
--rtll
:r,: 'c C' o c C' co \ .C o C' Cf~
tjg?y:X2? 2<-IG&cq 00('1)(\)mo:>~G~c;u II eo~?~C 'Pe'::DCDeJ:
C'
08~ ::J\3f.?
c
CDC
C' C' C' C' 9 .
~:)) o.s~:ro;::>:::D::nt ~OGS8dQ <X'~:CDQ~.m Otl)tl)
C' C' . 0 C' (' .c:~
t C o ~ ..
tr. o .....T "-" C.:. C -1 gC:. 1. l 1. . ll J
C' C' C' C' C' ~- C' C' C' 0 C' O _QC'

.o:>:>: 1!)(()'):(\)l(l'):i!C OLJ:)OX\)ICI 3d :;:}'):009('11)1,)1 -:>:ro Ct
U J I~ J1 .::J U
C000~:roo:>~:m
.L Oc_:; L ll
l965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 107
:o~!:JCi.lOXI):n:
C'O C'
~~;
C' ~:;.s:oo?:G<V:o:nn C' C' ~ ~
rowiG:::m0 0
s:oco:q oeGj
.. c - .,-c --L r c Jt
('
O?QJ./)8::CJ
0('
:l...~:UX).."l:"DSJIJ..S~?CI.):O:
(' 0('
c.J
(' ('([)8(1)0::00
(' (' r,::c-
(t~OOO:O;:D II
3 ..
('
..
'\.V It, u. "'J ~ -,- .J '- m ?r._;u5G9:~p

~.
{) c- (' 0 ; ~ c- c- c- c- fO? ?Of~
O:lYY.iJ Cl.)a)IO<X>J."I; 8d([):CIG"!~.S01j0(J) ffi'-<J:?QCI.)? CC:0kY.~j ?:CY)CCC:I ,. c
c. .. .. -, ~- T u_ - D u . o , ~O'".JC:Of
c- ' 'T'f,";'
r-r- c- oc c- c-
C'(C") c-c-
GCI.)_J')<IA.'\J())C~~CjC=! 8d<X>m~ G~l tl~:x>.~8dCJI.C:I ~I 8dC f I o:>?o:>-:> "c
~c
'.OOCCCQ?:cooc J
~
~ c-c- c- c- c- o c- e-re
-QI?Q
ll
'l"C"
8dGOI :::l QIIJO)QGX"J
~ IJ J
C"\
o Jl
C:,'i\C
Jl l .; o
([)!JC8")0)"'
.. L J
O<.OOIOY...l:
U L.J
GoT~1:'lc"
r,;:c-r.::;::c-o f~<:. oc- c- oc- ~ c- o.<:. -ol9u
tlOOt::J?C:~ O'fQ<:llll CJtOf0~m~: ~~J~:OXDC: :OG::D~2<:llll
c- or,;:c- c c- (Q c- ~c- c- c c o
UX::~lj~ oe\30 ~~COl c::sro J2 9mGt'la:J~ 0J'fDGX1~ :;,013,000 O)JO~
o ccoc-
mco:OOJQ??8dl~([) OJ<:l:ux:c:nm(;)~l,)-:> ~o:>;x>~Gro?:x>,~c 008J(;)~m8dG o:pc:
c- ?c- c-o r,;:c- o oc- o c-
l I \V- :..:: ll C.i, rr: .J " " - JJ l..-J 0 (. to l -
~
S#G(~~
r::::~ o ' c- c- c-ooc- c- c- g]
([)roG:x>? m~QC:(;)?ro:O: o:>~~~C(J:O~())GO)?GOII
l .:J A l ..1L J C.:, _. J1 l C.:, L "'
c-
0
<X>G
f'l 6c- ("oc- .
'T' 'l c-
?C 8d(.l)QO) ()(1.)0(\)0)0:,i))IJ
o
r,;:c- o oc-
IL
c-(c-)
0
L
(" 0
l
("
.__,
(" g))s;xxn
Jl
0
L
, 0~
mc:o:([)ro U~(;)
-- T A l ' J
(1.)0) .~:
b
c-rs'"
~
q:,J(;)::x>?~~8d~t GOI GOJm(I.)"J:x>t'J<;I ~8d(;)~8d'JI Cf.l 8JC f 0)?0')-:>:;J?QJ
'T' (" ("' r,; (" (' Q c-r:;:: c- (" r,; c-. (" 0 (" (' r.:;:: ("
8JGOI" 5 OlJ~'O)~G:x>? B~<X>C~-:>:IIJ9C(9C:;~ tl~!)(ij~ O<.OOJ<IJG:x>?Gt::J~'
c- c- c- c-r:;::c- coc- c-r,::c- c- c- oo o
OOOX\)()')Gro?C~mac: Yl)t<tCGm"?::x>~t91!Xf' .~X~J?::o~ "'~
" t' o oo o o c oc-
.<axo:109cnm 00(1)0)U)O)C 0)1 Q CT.jGCDQiS
c- oc- c- 0 c- c-
a:l(;)~QI(;)O)C\)()';:::l):l"l II
-- -["" L L L l. tJ ' teo UJ l. C
ucd.ofl::::lao~cohl:k
.) 3" :J 0.) :,j c.~:oro:
.,)
o~Paxo
.) 0
eowreccoo
0 .) 0
o~Ft'lc.wk~
.) 0 \
,o:<~b~
~.) :,
~coooeb
.)
u.)2cco;:~i~ 'wocc:c.cc"li.oc.ooe::::lRc.cce4co:ecec
~0 0 .) ~""~ .,) 0
ol:J:c.ec
.) :J
-1 ol:lbe1!o:becctceo
~ ~
oFroliil4ea>hl:dC'l:c.cc~oc.ooe
o o .J --.J :J::J :>
@hl :>2ccoo:oboRlb
.> ~ o .> j:.lo
u@cco~be
.J .Jo
:.)oc.webe:ol:l&:becc
.J:::I ll:corocore
~.) .) 12cc:c.rco;l.lccccebccwc
.) .) .) :::::lroccce:c.PM@cc;ews
~\,; s .) .)
c:.cce:c.ooc.ohre
.>
.)~:c.rC'l~cc&:!ccb:reeao
~ .:J
cotoa-ccXo
::J .)
:c.cc:c.IJoo;ll
~ ..lO
uwrecot::l:k
.) ,) :J
r
~lg
.)
( &:crococ
.)
froe><l-b:::>re:J~l)
..::> .) .)~
ci-ftcbcftcbrocco
.) e
:ccnf)bcco
-
:X.o15e .):x:.ae:x:.a::~:C!
;; .) 0
:h.l&::cbco
~
S.L'tl0d3'tl MV1 VW'tlD<a 801

'.
60! S.D:IOdffii M V1 VW'tl09:

s~~Od3:~ MV1 vw~o.u on
Hl S.DIOdmi M.V1 VJ.An!OH
11 J;o~e't'oes hJbco:s:e
y o e
CCCiK.o~re
:>
r=c.co~:~
::). .:.
e.'l.!oe.c

olre:i',.:<bco
.;)
11oM~
l,'
c.ob cc COfl~
;)
IO~e . CS!VC
. :J -
lo&,i:O
.) 0
()() ibo i0o .
ICU .co .ru co~ ~e'l.!oro cocos mcbcola~e Cl:!VC +
ltl()
. ~ . .,) 0 0 .) ;:)
n0 0~ l:!IG .6 IC If' IC c.o:;,e.cl!ie'l.!oe.c fl:<bco:&esoee.c la~e b~:~vc *.

.) ;:1 .) .) .) ;]
O~re'&J~
II .JO to<X!cccol;w
. .) ..)
~b:flCCO~@co~hl
e:J .> .)O .> .:>
hJ<:,@()CQ~
.)~ U .) 0
ICCC~e:c.co:O~flf')
\ 00
1<beee
\.
c.oroc.ooo:
.) ~
~rooaxbooe&e.c~wccco
.) .J -:> .>
ohlw~ccecoe&le.
.)~ J \.J
@cc .>o~fle.G?~e.clfll
.)O .J
ofilln
'$ .l-.10 t- .)
nC2cc:
'.}
~
,;) .
~6
...,
W C~:~G 1 ~co~~:Cbco i:dfl:oooba@hlc.fl~Q. a.~'e tlbtlc :~c.c:C! b~ abotc
~..,.., .)G.> ::.! .>~.) o e.:> .J . eo
0
nf-Jcc~f
oc.n~:oc.n~co
.J ~ 0 ..> ::::::{
@cco~ec.oc.w~
) JO .J
c.orowre:crfle:flb:lb
.J .J .J l.o
: ccro~~:ob
..J "' 0 .J
:cc.n~o:>
.> ~
OC.QeJC.CC~b~c.oProl;@co
.> :::::f OJ O.J
(!)Qa:;:c.J~(!c;l'lb:lb
.> .l l,
1bec
\.od
(re)r flGh
J
IICCcc:2coe4bce&
.J ,J \.>
CoCCCt:!flCCOl'x~!ro~hl
.J .>o .> .> .>~o
wc.oac.o~kcc~e:o~f.
.> o '
" <X!cc .>O~P.e.c
oo >
ohlFf'l&ewc.w~c.orowce
Jo .,::J .> .> .J
:dfl
e:flb:L'o
J
J:C!cc:c.cckotewccl'l
eo .JO .>
C2ccll:eslfll
.>
'0~ ccc flcoo~oC!:oco
':5 .J .> J
o~ohl:x1l:CC2fl
'..> ~..:> o .:>
nC2cc~'4b:c.a:2~C2cc(l>Qfl
.> O.J .) O.)
Ct!ccaR:oQ:
.):j.)
flcco~C2ro4hl
.>:3.J~.)O.).)
Wca()CQ~
.):_jO .> 0
1be.c ccc I'ICb.
.)
c~~coes:b:oc.hl~~:C2~o
J~
:o:?roc.cc~erot'le.c!Gwrocooo
.) ' :> 0 ~ ~
.) .>
~cc:lbl'lesto
l..: ..> 0 0
..) ,
ec
fG--R'
~~~ 0
uC2cc:cc~t;corrob1C2oo
:J 0 > \~.)
c~:,.J;J:I'lb:Lbflw
~ ..>
nccccn:ck
..> 6- .) ~
ro:oc.hl~ ecO>Qw;c~b'l:oe:~be.c!be.cc~o2:<bco ~afi]es:df!ik:l'lb:lotbes2c.C2&.@cc
\. .) ~ 0 ..>,..: 0 "" ..>...J .) l, 0 .) 0 ..>
:1bllt;;; c.cc~~bcaCKO~ tcocb:I=Jite~w wbc.aaco~ !1-bo~:d~mS> eob:c.CO@~ccte
t.,.>o o ..> o .> 6'1 .> .> ;, o .l .> ;,..:> " o
:1bfles
l, .) 0
1bes (re) r flC(, c~oClcoes:b~on:ne:eb:,&
.) :=::! LJ .)
.) .) l,
.<bokhl~n
..>6- ~01
ncorecoR:(e
.) .) :J
1f 11 l 11 'iJ
nemes ~goocmcoes::>ees
.)
S.DIOdH'ci M V1 VW'clflH zn
11 :4-ccl"D:2n
~0 6
11 co&esegdscoe&es
~ 0 0
uo:~o~~'(!o~
.)0
'cn@a::t~b:IO<K'GI!!l
.) .) l,.;.>
aWc.Go2_,JJ:oecn
~~.>
l:c.e.c~:cbcoe~
oo c.cc~coc.a>~
~ .:J
. :ol.J,~ccee~
.,~_,. , .
,li!wrococ:e
~.3~- - .J
?~
...
:cc:ccec:&el!ne.s
0 0
co=
.)
l:oSw@cce:)()eC!nes
.) 0 .) \.J
terocc:S'
l, .)
: cbcoe:lku'l;
..)
I ohlweclcc
:..3 .) I) .)
kcoeo
0 .,) .
:oc.(:;;loo:oc.hl~
.) :::::::1 \ .) ~
:c.ooc.ccocc .)~bcoc.~~GCCI'li'E
.)
~:::;:Joroc.cc~eewc.co~co~
.) .)0- ):""' .) \.) .,) .)
Wic.f~e:Rb:IO @ceo~~ 1ek:I[Z; II o~~fu~@cc:eb:tbGCCcn hJc.Go(!~hl: oecn

0 .J l, .,) .) .) 0 .) s .) 0 .) .) '"' ..) 0 !"~ .)
.J@ccol;flcn ob!~M~ewc.co~a.xx>~ k:c.fRe:e.b:,&~u uwrecot::libeaooo
.> .)O .> :J .> .l .> o .> L.lO .J . .> ::J ~
u@ccc.4co0:>
.) .) 0
tiG:
~.)
~@bw
.) 0
boC C.@ c.co~~:cbco,:c.rfl:kobG@hlc.fl.u:t

.) .:> .) o.> ~ ,j';j
IG~b
.>
~:~ctlc ~ecoee.o .>o~~Mco
;J eo.>
ttl
S.L"'dOdffil M.V1 VW(l[l9 tlt
ugg~g~
r
,,
::1\>
,
0 )()cow
" 0
sn SJ.'tl0d3:'tl M V1 VW'tlflH
116 LAVV REPORTS
BtnU~A [r965
r,.:coc c c c c ~ o o ("(C) c 9 o o ~
oefi:~ ~tj<D~CGO II g)l8:d~Jm~~ IDOCOJ2:91 00?9Uf900 0 '~ O~IOI~f?:x>?OO? 971it
c o r,.: cr;:' o o r,.: c . c c c c c
0 "'
( ?) ~c ro~:roljo:>IJL~'P' <Xl~:ljo:>GJ~'::l~rmt~~ tl;i~G(Jlde:!ll
('fXJ) 01 ~
r;:ci,'S c '1 c c c c ' c c oc c c
~~ ~r:~~r:~-.:~2:!' 9':9~:G~p: oomcomGm'JmG~G::x>')COe:!:' ro~:XS<DGoo'Jm
c r;: c \ r,:;::: c c o c r;:c c c
G{qu 'lt ~~')ro'J:~Gr:ec:~Gt~Pc: o:;?m,;xr))etrotlc' ~co'V:g m9?:m:~et
o
c' (" 0 (" (" Q Q c (" C"~

roGI ') 0
romQOCG~:)")mcc:t
C. "1. I
0 0
roromrom~Q:ro:::n:::x>:o:>c oomcoma .:1
QGG 0 '
(" C"
ll o IL C 6 t. o
(" 0 c c (" 0 0 0 (" ') ("
~:)")('I)CC:
C r. l
GCX>')(OO:))')I rr.l())Qmro:coo:>m'J:
0
n. -- -r L ot.
rr,)QC g ([)~()([)')('!) g;):))q)C I:OG:
G l 1 l-
c OC"
~2:!~ ~~OO~CGO II
oocc
roo:>.Q~I'):m IDeto:>~co:xn
coc (" 11
ocoocoro:n:n m
~
c:jOetG.sQ~'J m~ro~::ng
QQ
tl \1 . 1 -1 J o 6 L C b:..l -~ ~I T J JL
C'
<:!?[ :p mJo r,;: ("
(" C'
tj1DGID'J~211
trY G~i # to,; {9) ~e1o ~~~ *~, >., ?o:JU

uca:;~u uco&>es
.)
(r) e:dscoe&es
0 0
ntoto:2n
o o e
11 co&>esk:chcoe&es
.) 0
* (:cr~egcbcoeebro)~~co:a
o o.:> e
nr (8~diW8ro
.:> ~b
(e)8co~
.:>
18~
J.,
IIC
ncob tlc
~
roc.c.coc
' e
11 Sl'aOdffil M.V1 YW'dfl'tl

IICOJeJCC~~
'] 11 Q 1 61 "t ':"] ,. ~ '] 11
accocccnw:c.o
o .> o
cccccccQ .;
com~:cccocc
.> . o-
1cro~
.>
:ccocc
e
rnw:w
;;) 0
(cccccc::)~:llhl~w)
.:> ~.:>
cccccco~co
.)
C2cc4-:2&4-axow
.) 0 0 .) .)
(c)
:crf'lc.orecocco~
.) .)
S.l110dffil M.V1 VWllilH 8U

6ll s~'dOdffil M.v1 vw~mi
. ,
II C>~CCO~::>~C.CCCCOC><'l
.)Q.) .)
C2cc~ro!CB
.)
S~C2cch:C2cclf,
~.).) 0.) 0
ccc'::.) Hr.e(

e.r c.ccoo~ro
.)
c.c&:ez:bd~-cco-~c0
.) .)
Bco~eo:::>b
0 -:J~ 0 .)
wB:k1,
0 ':5" .:>0 .)0 0hntv:c.ez:C2~C>
,l[;gflcc:<.!-coi .:>
w~dfl:ccc ccc~ab
.:>
59()r] SllrOdmi M.V1 VWlf09: OZl

1Zl S.DIOdffil M V1 VW1IDH
S.DIOdmi M.V1 VW~flg: ZZI
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 123-
\0 0 C' C' C' (' 9 0

!3d :>;::r.n ::0'):-JI');~').J.>)) :T.>?:xJ?:xl
tJ J ool l
Od:))~O(;GCOO?G::D')
-[
:))C(J)O)t:l ::D<:l
ll OL oe~<t
ID
c- .-e
:\Jlm;m~n;;~:>;~:o;;,lc: e c- c- c
:O::D? ::o? :no:>m::oc:
o c c c c; c; ' c;
c:1 ro :>:.s~:ro~:oro<:l: 0 cOC
L tLL..J C U J oL 0 TC q~rt:
o c
c) l.)
occ c
rc; ~ c c- c o c C' c
O):(!l:; :))O):))C:I:::~c:~ ::n~ tl8::J.l')))'):"l O:))::D~:JID:T.lG:J II COG :>Cro:n: .'ioC
Ll..J 0 0 0 C Le ~ Jl L..:.. l. ol. o L.- J
G o o c c e c c o ~ e c on c>aTJ\]m~
e:~ ~ 9~~f!G:))') ID9C<:q:5 ()~')1) m'P:~~!(:lJ:>:O?I ~me::n2
(c>::~T)
La
rc; C' 0
tl8:1J')))?Ili:OI:l IDffil
l.J --"\. l
C' C:::
CC!c:ll'Y.l ~ Od~
l H.
OC'o 0
G.SOOCUO)~
T l l l J
[i~
Ci
C'
IJ;!CI
L:"l ~.ill
o
00!
L
B 0)
C' C'~
OOCt:j!l~ct
C'
(' C' r:::: c; c; C' r.: e C'O

j II C:C:Oy~ II
'J(:l~tJt GO:T.l-fiOO'J:t:jc:tj1DG():))211
8d:O:T.>UI
C''l
:JdG
'):;:in;;>!()')
c; s-n::o:m
o
GOO?ffi\i) :OICI
c c; e9
f.?8f>:)):D
c-
tl8
c e c;
:r.>):n:>o:::me:3J c
:o~:::
J
' c ~
G::o;;o:~:n~IDc.
tJ
t.
l L
tt
o
c:. It:' '=l-uc.:o~:>omm::n
11 c...:. Jl -r t
Jl! JJ
B:m ro:. c
., . C
L
m
LQ
r;:::c o c. c~ c; o c
<X>?]t::l(;:.'t COO?Q8d:T.J2?Dt9f:))? 1JGO :n~ II
o o
<X> XJOO:
c@ (J) :;\)!~ I
c 9 9 c:::
e:.sc:il OdGI:IOd~:O'=lU:>:m
c; o QGO
' c
c:~c
c~
c um:nmc.
c I
t. L l JJ T 0 J l A J :'1
tl8J.) );)) )Q(;} ).):r.>::x:>:coe~:eoG8.TI'J ::0')

C' c c co
('
00! ffiQSc:lGO)') ).):"l"l II
0
CO .l:>OO:
0 ~ 0)
c;
lQ 0 l l -- -fl Jl C.:. ~ l OL l
co r,:;::: c o o ~ e o o c; [sc '1 [sc c-
9r~G~:>::8(l)l Ot???~G~Gfe:J: e::-q:-q:n::oe?; !3d C~(:l~I!GU II C.!GJO?
!Jd(;}:D
J
c (j)
J
C'
~:::u:n ::o.J.>~
c c;~
1 u:u );;J
r..:.
. 0
Jl it
(:j ;o~:

l!
OC'
~cmro:(:l :nm:).)
IJ -r T It
B :m1
0
m:m?:
t
QCoC C' C' CCC or,:;:::_c-
CO'):G;))') ~ceq:~~ eo;;s<:~p:;).)2Xl2~ <ffO?yGU:xl~ll at,_Gr_:P~ 1:(1?
co c c 99 c; c; c; '1 c _C
:T.l'):r)'J 9~ ).)J.)::q~m:~:IDt.:V'):T.l'JI 2:f~~~f~')!G;))')s;JQII <i:;:c:~O?'J?:Oc
9 "!' C" C' 0 oC' C' 0 C'OC" C" 0 <'0
es:
T
G81 oms::o~
.iJ C.
ooG:-n rnG~ID'J:
A
OdG~Q
6
11>:~11
C.::..
m<J.SI!).s:~c
t.TTJ
mcos~
LT/i
o c; Q e c c; oc:- c '1 c- 'l ~ r,:c:- 9 9
0:.,:xl2 t:f~ O)QCOO(:lG:))?C'f GUI~I:G.).)') :n:>:~:<:lJ?!Odt:JIDI 2:f

G:"l).>o:G:x>:>OO~I::J s;J.:;~')d~'l)C>I?:coc
1<' C" C
ffi:J)
~ o
:~I!)?~QSQ <:l000:-1)~"\
c;O 0 0 C" U::ll)S')~C
c;
a. 41 A 1 u c. o 11 n .. a T J
c; c~ c o c 9 9 or.e r,;:c rc:- o cr.: ;r c
om).):-n~l <;:::;O?l:-1)~ e:rro~ Gc~~P~911C:Pt:~~ <:l{911>~:n~!~P;>:>Go CJ?.C
(' c; 0 c; 0 0 ~ c [sc; C' C' ( ) ,.
cq'D;;,Jm:J.t 02;:>~ 1X>'J: m'P:~e3:o:>~
0
m2:n~u c:a>Jmm'1m ? ~.
c; c; c; ~ 00:
CO ).):xJC:ID::>:~>J!CI c 0)0)')8:"1)~ II
e
1...!. t; l:. :'I l C
"''
G81 Q'J)C:1J:"J)(:l
C' C' C'
::D:J.>G:))~U
f.":6 ;)):lY,J'?I C' Q Q C'
e:s~~
'1"
G81 CIO)CO)
C' 0 OC' C'
OO~GCO?C
c
muB:;:n;:na..S?:DI
jij
C
J
G GIC
~!.SC:II:-1)')8
g ! j G<..l)'),});)):-111
0 C.:.J
C'
TJ
c; c
JiJ
qc:m~C!Jd())
L
o c;
::lC ~IUQ.
c; c;
r.
0 c;~
(\)()')C\ G.SG
l .:"1
l...2, ~T
T
6 (' C T
0
')(;; II COGS ?:I.> O)QS'dO)QO)ro; :VI
. oL T
('
I.

ll

~1:
C
0
l
, lJ o
(:l~ffi~O)C
:l
il.
..'L 6
c;
\
0
80Xl)O)ffi:G
l
7 J
-r

r,;:c-' 0 C'OC' 9 G ' c c; r,:c:- fR 0 .

t}ID~G:r>? <lt<-9'\)~'\):.J.>I 2 :f&d:>: S;;l:O~~GO~M')f GO)'JC!:))t:JSI ID.:.O?O:>&LO?l
Q Q c o c:-oc:- o c:- c ( . _c o c:- c:-) o o c:-
2:r::n2 ~f~Uf:l <lt~f:GO?J? 0-~'J?;:;,~;~<..l)l!):norO) I <lt9:;:nl!) .
r.: ) ( ~ '1"'~ ~
( GjgO ;S(" CJ:[G<=l:>CG:T.>J?:D
0 (" c;
GCJj
) 0 0
o;t<lt S'dG<-91 GQI ~I ID::D')O)
"''
?P?te:i:
.
U

(:li:>:CO::O)!GQ:>,J.> iD:T.>"J:OQa>
c. -r
c; 0\6 6
L
G ?c: II (\)

c;
. :1.
g ;Qn:m C\)())G I
U
. c- OC' c; c;
oo(:l~IDGOOX
J
c oc- o o <' c; c- ~ c c; o c;
~C ()')1!):;1:)~(1) rn:r.>:GC ~IDG;))?C:O)GCO?CCO"J:a I :n?:~IDG(J)')())0?0)00?1
J o l L f. l l 4. J :'f J l
Q Q o c; ' 'r,:;:::_ c; o c-o c; ~ o c:-oc;
e!f<"qffiOO?GUl~G~:>c:ll rq::n;s~m G'i j,jOO O?JU 9~1 <"Yt<.9f1Df:m
GC
6
.
j ' 000 0)1()
tJ
c;
OG
I
6 c;
?C!. ID:D;)) C tc
......., o
c;~
me OJ c;
;:n:n
.
II
o C
o
O)QOOO)QOXO;ro
l tl ---(" L
S.UIO<Iffil M.Y1 VW)I0\1 tz.t
szr s.L~Odffif MV1 vw~ng
'::1 b'JIJ" , , ., Q ,
u~Me~ :_j~cces~~~ g-'g:sccc:crosc~=~ ~co1ne~ro c
v ( ~)
col,e:cwrewc.we~
.:> .:>,
~:~~:Cbcc:k~
e:l . lkoc'n
o
~c.r:;';\e~& uoccctnno.hlccc4b
.:>::::lo , L.~,
ce&> .cccro@ccGhl:oQe:neoee
,) ,)~,:::h. ,) :_j .!,j ,)~~d,Q.:~&,
). cohlro:hlro e:J
::od:.oroto
,) .)0 0
t ,ofro:cooa;coo~
,
k:tc~co-:C2ao,oa;ooro
o o, .:> t,.:>
'~t:>OO::cc~
. Yo.:>
1s~
.J..
~H:2
.:> e 6
w4Peroh>
_,1) o
Mwc~m:J~O~
,) y
cccee:oecee
. \ \
u<2cca:a:cfa:e
,) \ ,) .
tGtc.a;:W
'S' 0
h.:cdmh>obG
0 ,) 6
olii1C2cc
.:> ...1.)
G l,too~ahle~
.:>0.:>~
. :::f~l:CJ:XC:co'fl
.:;:::! .:>
:~a: :::ben
. e .:>
t:::t:l;oeccceccxce~
.:>:::! .:>
,) ,) v .) :_j .)~ ccc:oQ:oeoe~~~eP..S

wro tccce.cd:e u<2cci"YLcbleahl .:>::::1 \
@cc::>Q:oooe>e
,) .:>::::1 "
cohlro:hlro ~~~:~eo (r <.c.W- t:C2a:w:flPoQ:C :~~bl5e~ik.@o
.:> :J ~'I 5 e:J o ' 'S"" :. , 6 ~ o
S~~Od3.1I M.V1 VWllila: 9Zt

II @flbCPeCPhl orw 00c C2cce4e\5eg~f(}3
.) ..)~.) .) 0 ~
Jiccccwh oo: o fuecSfccbCP l~flg:x.Qeec4bea.;ro
.) .)0.) .)::::J g@cd:t:e&er.lffi
.).)0 ~ 0 .)o.) .) Oo
l~cQeccce")(fC2cccr:ewro
.) ::::1 :_j.)
:b.:&C2cc:ccccohlgte
0 0 .) .) ::1
0 .)
:::toJ.,toe>ec to
0
(d). 0 .)
.)Sf (I) (c) tc(;escdewc.we

.) .) .) e:::J gcbco~cC2m&cd!,
a.nQ&: 0
tcCc.,oa. o:: ec
0'1.1_,.) 0
oeb: 0
fl .)46ccG]:tdccoe
.) .....,
11 &ee.dbec 0 .)
~a..:cccoo::,~cdeed:o
':).) .) .) .) 0
11 C2ecC\:CLcFo: e toC2cc,owcberw ~g:::ecerc.ccc:OOJ
.) \ .) .) 1, .) .) .) .) .)
:ccCProc.c.o ::-fb:.ephltt (!.6:> 11 @flea IOCPbbc.CL~n.hl IGfllMPeer.&?<X :h-;cc~
.) .) .) ::lo \ o .) .J o 1, .) ...J .J :5::1 ':) .) 6 .J o
4~2 c.M!xvPeCLto
e e .J .J .J
IGoccccco
':).) .J
~~cccc~e:a.;:c~\vo:
.J .J .) .J
cw :cco:w:ePrJA:<?
.) .J e
)14el5~
e....t
IIPeec.cb'lc.cc~cc
.J
<cc:c.cx::c.chl~(r;
.J .J ::1 o
:::eo
.J
1oeesobccwka..:cw~
J.. .) .J .J
we~
0
JC2cc:8b!Pea.:Pecc(;
.) .):::I .) .) lba.o:
':).) .) cco ~~ccccH:oCL:Ci?aC~:c.w
.) .) .) .) nttccoe<J>hl
.) .) :L
~:J@e::>b<J> c.a..:occ:h::: b.::c.r~oeo2 fGgreeaac.&~ae tu:Jo::ec~ec cb::)bl
.).:J\:> e .) o o ~ .) o o .:> o .:>~
~:::c.Qee.s C2cc:Q(c ~<hccl~c.O?o ~~ &)]~ca:~eec uC2cdccoe ~bi~ce.:::2rc.oec
.) ::::1 .) e:J 0 .)-...J .) .) .) .)...J .)
a..:h:"&.::2
ooee:J
:Q4el5e~cC2o
o
1h:C2o: ~ccccchl:~rem
.J::lo
lb&Xdcc~O:cccne.co:C2@
':).)0.) .).) .) .)
:IGocc:tc CO:)~C24ro wcccca.<hePCLfl C2ccCLcbePw dke::cc0.: ~e.a.~C20.
:5.) 0 .) .) .) .) .) .) .) .)
0
':":! ,,
c: c.w ccccfleB
.) .)
o
l:lc.cGoa::oscccs-~
, , 1 ,., n
ew1e:)b<J> "cc:mcc6c.cc."o
1<:,):
J. tc ~
..) .:> .)0 o .J .; .) .:> e J e o
LZI Sl.'M0d3"~ M.V1 VW(l{)g:

128 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965:
C'f.": (' c
~pc-oootlcooc~
0?9?:9,
8 : e:G~?8GI:I?tG~~ .
t oe~:J G
())~')(:)J
0 (r, C" C" C" C"
LjC~C9'fG<X}J ':)())O)')g~
)
el>-x)\~ro
c
.. c-' ~c
J 0
o. 'lron
r, r,c-
(8~8')tG<X}J ')oSO)')g~9o;{)
C" C' OC" o
l'j2?,GOO')C~t:jcf(:) ')~CC :;;
0 J:"! (' r: c('r= C"! c C' r;:c 0 ) (" ' (' 0'
e-?o:>:n'l t~eGoo?e~::>:>"'t:::J4>~'11uJ"'-tleeoo-,c~::>:>.,:t:::l4>~~ ,GroJ?roctn:~"lf"'~
t: c:
t: r;::t:
-tl~OO?C~:l.)?:[j<~
c c- o o o p c- . e
s:I(T.)tOG()t{!ll:l
(G) (l)'ll ~ OO~If ~ 0) bCY.lCIG!"jf
c r;:c
G~?rooo?:
0 c:n
r::: ('
~lt:::JO?O!Jroll
(" r;::c- r.:: .
C:~S: (" ("
L.,C" (.'
. ll!ldGt:l;;, S'dCY.l20G!33XJt:::Jt!>Gt01 {jtGOO')C~::O?:etO' mmeoG$~
_<:
(' oc ('r: c:c c o ~ (' c r,:cc t- ('

::OCD<qc'f? [jg?t:;;,JCD~J?ISd'JtJOGtO I C'?0?3Xj [j~GOO?C~::O-:>:~p: tJO~::O~~::oO?
cr;:r 0 r,: C' (' J:: (' 0 c: (' 0 ('
('
CjO?I:J"I0>']9,~J?l::O~ I [j~G())')C~::O?otJ1l G~ ')())CO?I~t~~ G~:mO?~:ro '"1

c:L:Ji:!GCO')C~::O?:~p:tltOe:l::Oe
(" (" ("
II
r:::. c-~
(" 0 <: c 00 0 c 0 0 0 . (.' (.' _<: (.' ((') 0

CCIO?~SdG.Sli\C
I l lJ
I:II:IO?ellO)OCD
oL
!3 0%\I:I::O?COICI
LO-- JIJ. JJ
S'dCD:lOGSeiiOSI:I
C.- L
1!1 (ldQI
-1
aA 0)
c c OC' c '--"
;'Y.lCIOCGO/;CQ.SS'dC?CDI a6oOOO)CIGIDG::O?
c C' C'
C\)(Y.)IIO')GO>')C I<X>~C
c oc:cc:Be-D::x>:xlcII
L -Jl Q J ll.L t:..:;
r.:c c c c c CQ
tjCOOCCjf>G<X>J''.>CY.>~-:>:~~~CY.>II . ll<:l~o:>? '=~ff': II
r.:c c c c o c 0 ~ G C
tjCOOC'J<j>Gcqj -:>CY.>OO".>t~') ~a3~CY.> 11 llro~:9-;;~~t~= e=~Q)IJ
~ o c c c G o c cr,<?
O'.>~t~~g e:GI.l')CGC:)')C II IJG-x>p:nro?:~t 01 ~')::J-n?:l 9f~f~ij;_l
.sooro~:nmC'O'J.>rom::x>
c c @3:ro1 oco?::x>?:
~cc 0morosro
co co \ C'\
<:J-::D::DO:>e>:x>:o
c
T-r -r -rn. L Jl L Jl-!t
C C . <' CQC C' C ~
Sdo:>O)I SOOoC'OO!GOO?CG<OO.S 0::!COO?l~XD II G'X>I?:Y.>C:>?::x>m Sd'=lCDc
~ 6 . ~11 J c.:.. :.u ll Jl.O,
c c ~c cr,;:c "'1 c . ~ c c:o o o o
9c::x>~
C
r:l~G?;D00[j0UI:D29
G 0 C~'\. C o
~Q9J' 9~~c:JI~~~:q?:~pglf.[
C 0 . -~
:OG:D?
C
O)ffiG:D j 2~~ ())Cij~:D~II ~9~C0~-:>1)o:>'f>!~~:rol G-::Dp:1)ro?:
c ~ c . c . r,;:c .c c ( ') c c ~ c
~:n~ t:l~:;;co?:;~:n:>~t:J05trom2u;;s qsg 'i j ~c roroJLWCG~?c:
c
:D:Y.>G:x>COCCI?l
. c roC'
<:J:O~C II COG
o ?C
'c oc
~CC ?::x>?: <:J())UO)C(J)
Co co c
CO())(.)) !
fg
Jl L:fL oL o l J l L l ll
l!f c C: cr,:, c: c ( )
. oe~:~9 .~it!> I 'P~tlvOOC~ 3'diJO? 'P ~ II .
c c c c c c c~ c c <> r c
t
:>e~:~? ~io ~e:l:~~ro ~c ~JCjOOG:xl".> oe~:~? ~it!>' se::n?ro. .Jeel'l oo 'lro
'"' c ff.'? c c ~ c oc: o r,:cA; cr.::c
9~011 'Jf9tl1..' fPI:I 'f?:DCD 'f?C'O<D O?'f?:9ce:l:ea 3'4'~.~9 oocl:lc~ll t!fSJ
;1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 149
~:
1>:l):X> 1:):1):;: 0,)
~: o~: ' ~:
:\)'..l):l.S :0'X>:D II
c o 1: o _9 '
0:)):>:0:\X.O:l.S010):''1):J)I:::lC:;,
~: ~: 1: ere ?Cc ~
4><J oeli:'J
~ l J lT .. c t l J -n o 6 o Jl
(' (' r,;: ''h 1: r,;: (' 1: -- . 0 0
..
01 ~')~
mJil=~r:x>2:~ ~=e0)?(:r::tl4>:x>~n
c g c c
G:OI'J:T.>CO?::x>:nl (}) ))?0:::0~-:: Q.S:T.>S~;l:;4>:1)QC O?m::x>
c o~: c 1: 3:C'I:::O
o ~c
Inc ('
&8-
... 11 1t J - IT t T 'iJ Jl T u. 1.1 ~ L1 2;Gco'J8~
1: (' 1: 1: 1: ' 0
ro::~.n:;ro~::n-:::<:>colo:n:>:.:~
(' 3
4>:r.>:::.caxo: :x> ::n1
1: 1: r,;: 1:
~~.sro:>:t(gc Gror:>:r.>
(' r;:c 0<'
t:lf~'JtCCII
JL6 J 6 T C.:. Jl Jl -- -r IL JT LJ :JJ
'\ (' ,. 1: r o (' () r,:c ('
<X>?1:l[~O)o0>JO~:D~<J?ICjC::x>~ro~B0>20~9<t9G 00 j . n:l'jl tj2GCOJC~
,....., r,::::: ~: r,;:c ~: r,: C' C' r,;:c- ~: C' ( )
:x>?:I:J~ot::J?c:tld:>GO:x>211 t12:;;co?::;~:x>?:lj0~ roroeOG8"t91J Cf j
ro:x>?
.() C'
9:n~s : :n::r.>:>:
C' 0 ~
IG'l4'J'"O::>:O?co::x>
C'. 3:m oo: O?O>:x>:TI<J?
~:, C'
v:>:mc:
('
1. .-l2. I 1. ] T n. I. C:. 1 J o
1: r,: C' 0 (' C' g (' 0 C' .h C'. C' 0 C' A\
'0:>2? II t:J-fV?O:F:9c::n:>: 0?2::n2 ~':Ct:j?::x>?: 'jO?<-i,O?CCI?. 'j? :~c:91
C' '\ 1: 0 C' 0 C' 0
ro:n:.n<:>~:x>?l co~O?OO?-::m
L \l o LJ 1. l
. C' C'~
ro:r.>:o:no ro::o<.n:::l.S<J:OICO:>
:1
'
J
C'
-1 T
(' 0
l
0
I.
6 (' :>: SJG

6 :>c:
C'
1::::
1: C' C' - C' - _.;:: r,: C' C' C" 0
t::l-:::cpvp;ro99c:1 2:.>~8ro49c: G:op:-nco:>:~ tlc~~Gropm"l:>~
C'C":A\ <" "'' C r,:c C'O C' C' C"' C' 0
~~1Sl.9J CjC:SJ~OI 0>J'10?CO?:oo:n 9dt:j08(8'):1'~ O:.DOJm:D~OI:X>2tJ? 02:>~
(' C' ~ !; 0 C'o C
~ro~coxp:~t::l:m g)r~=O?LGco?m<:>:x>211
C'
:U
<::
G:OI?:DCO?;:x>et
n.
U;:l)?:.:lGCl~.S
~
0
Jl ~ T
B: <J00?? v.s.s: ro
C) TT
C'Q
CJ
]
m :T.>:OG:x>?SJIJ
, _9
L A
r,: ' c (' '
~
C' C' C' 0 0 01:~ C' C' ' <' 0
.g ::n).) G!Y?.T.> ?t:\)).)'{gc m<:>rm4>:x>:DOXJ) u~oo O?Co:>c:<:>:x>::nm vro
. G 0 J CJ o 4 0 C.:. Ol l LJ :1 4 o l:..~ l IL
_.;:: '(' r: C' "' 0 (' C' g (' (' (' C' C' 0 (' ('
Q:~'J4'J.:D::>
o Jt 4c:J
G0? Y:;UI.U;JCJ::x>ll
4 1~ c.:.
0;;!CQI:T.>QI(J0)COO?CO,)::x>:
-l -.1 u J -c o c:..:. 01)SJO?C:
.. L
QIIJO?
uJ
r.:::: "' C'
t:j01::0211 y:"Pyffifr
C' (''' r.::;:::
s:l~~?~:n:lO>J:T.>"J:-1{
C' C' 0 0 C'
02:0?:~00')-ftjC :
'h ('
V<j!OI~
0 "'
C '\ C' 0 C' C' ~ C' 0 OC C' OA; ((

GO:>J?T.>ro:x>211U2?~d:>:r.>~COXf>D~t::l::n2 ~T.I~::::oc GCf.?5JSJI 009:
r,::;G Q ~ oc C' . - "' 1 0 0 C'"' C' - C' oC
'O).'m;O?:'>:SJ?l SJ:O:>d1ii:;l:l.S':: GO:<.>Iffils:l~:J)
1
00?010C0?:0? OOGro:~c
nCJ C L L T Jt. L . a t
~: c c- ,.,.!; o c r.:c c-" c- c- c
.g2~::Pd2'f?' ~ -q;~c :x>?d:r.> i:JOOyGO:x>2 tJ? r.t:n<:>Jm O>J'jo:>
(' 0 c- ' 0 C' C' ~ _.;:: C'
CO?l:X>2:'11. .G(},?9:X>211 0~?~ -f0d'PO'):T.>'f?~Oo:> <D"f>:~t::J:~ G~02
C' C <."" "'l: C' C C oo C o OC' C
<QO'):J)~:O?C OOOI<JO)QI:J:>SJC'I GO?::l'X>::D II Ot>O?C O?ro:<;>:T.> O?C:C'IC::x>?:
J b l J ~ -, 4 I c.:. L 6 -L l I 0
C ~ C' 0"' C' C C' C' 0 C' 0 C' OC'

GO:>)JI? :-nco:n~ '34 OOQOI(J) (JO)()):J~O?CCO?::x>::n 11- :X>COO?C
]I L J C ot. L 4
mco:~n:>O)O')C
-- T L L
.. c- c- , <" "'C' C' ere c-r,;:c-"' C' o _c o
'i):q~ mrn;~ 9dl>l>O>~::x>?~Qirll9-:::::n2~fC:l?~00tJOOI'X>211 SJC:lc:ll GO')
o "'~' cg o ~:c, c- o c- o c-
(l)C\)o;;GG81 OOS.SO?<J?:..OQo:lX), t>:x>:n;<.g-:: CO:T.>OOCO?::x>:"l">(l) GO?":X>:">.J i1
:1B
L J b TT -t.J t.. . c.:.~ 6 L c L 6 -, c
~ C' C' r,;: c C' C' C' C' or::: c o c- l"
t12~CO:>:;~:x>?: lj~~q:r.>orop:nco:>::x>~ ~:n~ac:~ II CjC::x>2
'GCJ: ())O);:n:m m::::"c::n:>:

C' OC' c 0
v:n:n:O'):>:~
o
GO I~
'l C'
:oo:::::n:n:n co 1
1 C' C' c ::nc
. 4 -1 t "'-C L ~ J 4 G
C' GC<" C' C:: C' C'C' C' 0' 0 "'C'"''
GCO:>:.O:x>:>; ro:>:i!'lD'X>).):J.) Q:;;l':::l:;:o::; 0GO:x>::D.II CO:-D'X> GOI'OOI:
G
.
- cc:et:x>:T.>G:o 8'd:x>:r.>
:>:::m C'
l
0 C' _.;::
""" 0
C'
t-.... L
C'
L.
C
lJ
~j ~1>Q
<"0 C ; C'
v:>~;n.'ls&~c
C
ro:om oo .1iiCOO
l o ot.
C' C _
1!.
C"'O
L'l Jll .- TJ J-11
. oQ (' 0 C' (' C' C' 0 (' 0 (' C'
:}:O')O>CO?m SJGO??"D:X:>~ GCO?m<:>ro:noo CO?::o::nmro::n:
L L . 6 L ~ -l c .G0?9:0::DII
Ot) c:.
0 . 0 . ~ Q C' r.::;::: C' .. (' C' t: ('. .
O~?l) SJ~i9G~g~t::J: 2 :;0m SJ~t::J?:::ro<:>JmC:lJ?::02 tl~~ <:11
C'
..
1:
G:O?:-D:X>;:D(J) 'l o
(J~O)::!:..>III OOo
C' o
');<J:0;\:::0
.__,
' o c or.G
SJGO:>:T.>
L
c c
S'J!U: 00GOO::x>c
4 l . ot.

lt. '"if l il 4 l
B T oLD .: . . --
-9
on
* (e:Cbroemw) ::)de~~kc:)c~~, :
0 0 .) .) .) .:
r
'f'<!:
(to:dxoemes) :~ :):)~c~~Q~:)coo~C2hl
0 o .)~ o.)Q ~ .) .)
1( 11 _,
fteCOWCOO.;)CG
0 ..)
S.DIOdffi:I MV1 vmng l1

1965] BU~A LAVV REPORTS 13'3'
c f::C" r:
~~~
C" C OC" C OC" C' 0 ~ ' OC' 9 0
G~?CC~tlf:q,f~C. -lCCGOO?:n~:'ll oersj ~~4> I t::Jt~'>iCC 4>'1Ccxt:t 4)') ?r'l q
~ (' ('
9~~;;::x>~ll
2Gco,&~
0
OOUl;)o:>ro:oo~roro
ll l l l>
0 ('
II
0
IISdiD:QIGOG
L "il T
gQC' ; ;:. g~<D II
u J
~c OC'
~f~?-lCC
.id
J
0 0 ~ C' C' G~_,:xlf
~U[~o:>c;p:~m>~ro II II O)QCQJQJ II
G~J,&:u
o ~ c ~ 9 o o c c r;::c r,;:c
C' C'
006'(>f~e:_j: e:G<o>?CGIJ?C II ll n;;~:(;p)~ g)JSd~~9 O)C~:ac:~~l
o c c e-re- c o o c o c
<DO)OC<D?:o:>U)It'l<DG::D? ~'JO)Q0ffil g:GC'\G0?CD::D GOJffiG<D::D:DI X
c oC'
C
i!U T . Ll.i~I J L -L C:. ot
C'
::x>:nmm
~ C' C' (' 0 C' C'
:~c <DOOOI~>:Go:>? oxro9owc1 m o:enroc;o:ro
~ 10
m QO)
]0 0 0
~ JL J ., Ow 0 o C::J -u l L u.
C' C' C'
'PCO~:G<:pCD::D~ II
o o c c c c c ~c c 'l' c
SdO:}:;<nm:Q GY')C::DopG~I?C:::D:DI c;c:c;~~Go:>?m~ ~<D::l:? GSI GfJJ:~c
.. -- -r u r_:, ~ 1.
:D'1: Ql:8~
') r.: C' C' ' C' C' r.Q
C' C' (' C'~
Gf<:p~ ~GJC:t:J: G::DGIDGSd':!C 10)::D~roqm <:peo:>roC:J:
c ( ) oro ~ -~ o c ' o c r;:: c
<tS~ ?0 j J m~l' t'lJ J<f~ Oj0Sdq(:oxp:~t5=c:~~:~c ~~<Doom:Elc:
o' c r::;::: -: r;::c c c c~o o c c C' o
G~~:n~u SdGC:J?C:Elc:'PYJ?:~~OO)::DCDSJ~())Y~ ~c:roc::n~u o~-::11
~ ~ Q C' C' C' C' r,: (' 0
met[:oxp:~ie:l:en <D9G.;lJ~Cro~: mtj~cr;,~ Gt'll t~S:tl~l o:>tOOUYSJ

'l'~fQ C'~ r.:
C' 0 A;
0 C' 'l'r,: C' 0 (' C' t: (' (' _<: Q 0 (' ('
mG::D:<DO)G<SI t19f ~cqGo II G(J?C::DfGQJ?C:O)~ CjC=c:IC'f: (Jt;f"?~~
0 ' (' c-r::;:::A; ' r::;::: (' 0 C' C' (' -~ 0 C' 'l' "
<D~SdQt(Jo:>S@9J ~t'~?Gfr,3;))~11 (J<Df~::D~ 9c:ea(JQC G&l GS'd:QC
o o c oc c c r,;:c . "'" c c
00~ ~?:~CDG'f<X(C::D~ II SdOC:~CCG::D:>GtCD GSI GS'd:QC;))~
C' C' C' 0 C'~ OC' J:. C' 0 C'
G(J?C::DfGQJ?C:Gf'P~ :::>~?:G'PCD9J ~C!:f~<:;D 3;)00?Sd<D'J:gp:CJ{ G0:9f
C' C' 0 0 c C' ' ( 0~ ) (' ~ C' ( 0~ )
GO)?C:~~II O(~~?;G'PO::'Pa ~*o C\{t:J<> 1~ G~~-~O)C ~C::fJ
0
O?CO::D:
C' '\O):D II
01
C' C' C'
G(J?C::l'1SGQI ?C:~::l:Gco:
C' J:,G Q C' C' 0 0 C'
o~ C. C. --T U !:. t" : QI<Oc:n:;:
~ A 1
OO:DO'XOo:;:
L ll l L..
'T' C' C' 'l' G::!:' C' C' C' OC' 0 C ')C'
GSI GSJ:QCCD 0CGQJ ~e<? G~')C~fGQJ?C:Sd~~ ~?:G<:pCDG::D?SdQI@
g cc C''l..,.~ cc c c or,:;:::cr
e:GJCC~f:ro~:OI~t:::!l G(J'JC..))fGQJ?C:m :JdO(J)s;JG;?:gp:9 e,j~l91l~?
C' !;:.
(X)O)GO:~II GSI Gro:oc~C SdGt'll ~l?:::x>;x>
'l'
(' . C' C' C'
0
SdOO)Sd<D?:<JI?:Cf.Xl)QI
')
<Y.l
'l' ('
l c..:. Jo IJ '--' , tJ LJL T
C' 9 (' C' C'' C' 'Y' c 0 r,:c- .C' C' _Q
~~II e:QJ<DCXi1'f:CD Gf91D~::D~II GS! Gn;;:QCCR mtjf~C GO)?OO~:CJ{
r C'!:, r,:c CC' C' C C' ') ' C' 0 OC'!;, C' 0 C'
.\90)9) t1t9::D(9~ G(J?C::DfGQJ':C:rpl QJ:O)GQJ?C:qtJ{CSJ G-f?~ro
o c ~r,;:cc c C' C' c c 'l' C' _~
~~~II GO)?"tljCTAl21 O)Gf'P~ G(J?C::O<j>GQJ?C:O)~ .Gril Gm:QCc:t
C OC'~ ' 'C' C'OO C'C'~ 'l' C'
G~CDCtCO?G::D? (J~ .C (J('OO)C())CD GCDI?t'lO::~ G81 GOO:QC8d?:
T J L 60J. J L l IJ .
' OO OC' ' C'
C' ') C' r,;:c 'l' ')rC'
C' C'
OO~...CGOO':ICOO?GX? Gl:j9~ ~O)GCO;))~II GI:GCID'P(JJ-:>:(j~ GSI GS'd~QC
C' C' C' C' . C'' ('
~~ Gy<:pqcoc Sd;))CDGOJ :>00~~~ II .
C''l C' C'OO C' (" . C' C'
SdOO())OI SdQJCD9d00~9 ~CDG::x>S'dGo:>?CDS'dOO?:gp:mro~: CXlC
. T C' C' C' C' C' 0 C' OC' C' r,... (' C'rC' 0
1J?:4_p GOI ~GQ)O)~ II G~?C::DfGQpc; ~trotcoxv~: ec:op>19c:g11
134~ BURMA LAW REPORTS [ r965
r:: c c- c- . ' . 'lC' c- . c- 0 c- . c- r,:::;:: r,:::;:: c- c:
oee~~ G!9?~:;1J()')GO:Go:>?SJ0!51 <1c:ro SJOOOSJ4:)'):0,p:O!I <1c::ne; G~G~<fO-fO
-- ~ 'i' c- o o c '1 c or c c o o c~ o '1 c-
~~~~ c<'~
C:j~"'"""' ",.
~C
..!
G81 GSJ:QCO)SJ?:
;l
GU:a:>roOIO)::nn
t. C.
(X)!UC
oLLJ
c:c:o::m?:a:>roo
I o1,.
OOI:DXIII
L :'"I oL
(;:f
cr"'?icc
O C' ' "
n
oc c c c oc c- o o C
Ga:>ooo,.s?: GOO? ()')I.SG()')? OJUX\.? (lqJ~.s:~:::OI OXDCDQ>o:>_
'1
t__
c
?:OIO)::n II
C' J o c.:T . .. JT Ct. G
titC c C c c c c '1 ')C' c
. c: c
J ~fGCD~Gf?()')~ G()')")C~Ga:>:~~GU)'::>()) OICI3?01::D2? II GOJ?C~GCO:
~a?co:>t c- c c- c- c o "' c r- c "' , c co r,:::;:: c
f0l;)J'J8:u ~~GOJ?()')GSJ~ ~'fGCD? :::0()')'J01o:>2::11 ~fGO)')GI:1-<; 100~G~')C:
') c-"
GOJUI:::O::O
c-
c.:. ())t. G ?OOOO')::::o:::o
G
o
II co~
c c oo
('\?C.;ll()')()')
0
c oc:
ao:::c~:
L tJ ~
Be
c:~QIII
J
o o c
Q:roc
~
0(!
c-o c-
m~~0q:>2ro:::o:
c: o
i.
or c o
l
c:
0
'i'
romcnc:oc~
c- o ?oo::n:::o 11
G81 G8;;!:0cOJ:::O:"l""> ~.s:~.:::o:>:
<' oc
t:
.. u C L L L C ~L C T
c r,;;c: c- ~ . c c- r,;:::- 0 c-o c c r,:::;::c
~p::;~J~:~~GfSJ I <1cgro G()')?t:!j~::::Offi Cl:l(D~C8')C: !I GCD?eJ~:
r,;;c c '1 cc cc r;::;:: c r,:::;::c c
::Dtj~CDC: G1:<ft~?:sc:l<jQ>Ge3')C: II GOO?t:j~:G::D:>Gf'ff'J: G'ProGO)?
"' cor,: r-- c G ~ co c o " c. c o c
SJ011 ~I()')QjiU')
lJ ~
!mro::n:CO U:OJ'X'0U~::\.):::O~::DI
L:..J c. c.:. ~~ ~C ~(DO)C()')()')GSd'J~ I
A J 0 J 0 J Cl,. .
'i' c- c r,~ r,;:c f':":' c ~c A\ r,:::;:: c c c-

G81 GSJ::;~cm?: ~0)00'):Cj:[9~G~JC: t:~C99J Gt5J?ro~:r.o:a:><j;cre>?:~~
O('~c ~ r,:::;:: c o "' c- <:: 'i' c o co
m~t:JfGt:J:Gt:j')C: II ::Dro9GO)'JSJ01 CJC:CJ!8dG~8d'):l G81 G8d:QCO'.( ::rcr.G
r,:::;:: c- o ~ ~ h:: c cr,::c- c c c c- o c o~c
Gt:j?C:O~ Gt:J?CjGt:j')c: ~0)2~~ GI:)'JC:::OyGQJ?Cg()') CXJCD~:::Otx> II ~BC
c- o rr;::;::
~''r;:::?
~ c c c "' c .c c'
~(:O.r,G~:Q.S:O) Gll~IO)')gQJ:)I GCD':>,P ?:GCO()')G:::O?SJQI ()')lq: GO)')SJGQ())C
i JI 4T L w..:..:..:J -r ~ . L- ~I . () ~- 6
C' ~C'"l- c 0\\r;:::? C' c C! C' C C'
~~ 8 ::::o~pfro~ t:!COIX2::11 <:q~~ 8 :::DIJPf:D~ I ~yGCD~OJ()')(I)'J:::02::
orcA\ c c c- o c :1 ~ o c c
o h:: C' c o
q~C9JI <1jf-GCD?1C)~()')O.O:>t::<Jt Gl<j?~:::O~II ~CO')c.:J'=l::::O~G<j><f~
9j
'l c- ('
01G';D')()')
' cr.::0 "' 0 c
j9CD:n-r:~'):CO?~~:'PI <:q Cfj
c
Qlllo.r: <1C:SJ?:GQJ ")()')010)2?
c"'
~ C C 0 c . o "(' c <::. G c C . C <::
<.J.)~1roe::: o::roro:::o?:::ne::u G:::oro:::n Gst GSJ::;~ce!ll::D~: G~?co:>.pc;;gpc:~J
. ~<.:;
1
C .l l0 C. L t:. C . . 0 C '~ ll ' C C. C 0 (' C'
Of:~O?t ~~fC\?CJ?I qc:~'=iQC'<:; G~?Co:>yGQJ?C:q(::D2?, QJO"Yn~p:c:
6~ c- c c c c c r,;:cG.
c-
~~t!jl . <JC:SJGf7<?CD2?,: G;lQJC:~e~~ 0j 'Jroc,;o:nmro roGco:c;;.ye:;GO)')C:
: r,;::c o . c c oc\r;:;<' r,;:c r,:::;:: c- c- 'l A\
::nt'Jc; ~0CCO ~?:Gq>CPG'}'<X?C~~c:t'J~Gt:j 'JC:J G;lOCDSJ~?WJ -:>: 0 I~IX 'J9] I
: 'I' c ~c r;:::c rc r,:::;:: c c c c- c c o
G81 GSJ:QC()') tjf(.)?ti3C:~IDGel?C:I qc:tg G~'JC::DyGQJ?C:~ ~m:;:~p:
0 C. 0 f:'C' 0 r,:::;:: c r,;:c- c 0 c 0 c Oc C'~c . C . r,;:<' . :." \
4>0:-;;c:!Sc:~~GG 'Jc:t'lc oomooxe:: nrou:>roc~JCDC:JC:::OroGo:>l~~::DX~~
; . L c~ . . C' ; ~ C'L L cL C ~ :. l_2. Qo
()') G~?C::DfG0J?C:o:>t:; SdO()')SJQ>?:~p:~~ 922?,:~J?~Gm~2()')1 0~ 0~::D'J

.' c r,;;c"' c .: . c cc<:- .o"' r c o~cr,:::;:: ')coc
o:>'JOC t'l0UIX2? II SJ~Jro~ro~~p~?,Olll ~qc:~tj<ft:jGO)'JSJQI~f~~o:>?:
c- rc- A\ 'Y' r,;:c o cr,::c r,;:c"' c 'Y' co c c
0J2:::1900f9JroGOI 00190 ro<:>j(~CDtJc:t'JWI.:D~ II G81 Gro:~CO(Q~')CO)f
... c c c
GQItJ ?c:m~()')~::J
c-
0!()')CD: il: ,t:~c c- . c . . ~ . :." "' ~c
. L L l! L 1t. J o 0)')~:1.)~10::~

C. U J
?8d~lSJffi<:i1 :~CDCDOIII <S~
ll -[ tJ l -
') c- o c c- c ,r,:::;::c- r,:::;:: c 'l "' c cr,;: c c o c-
.. ~1::::02tGfq>roqro~c.proO?t9el~:Gt?j?C::::ooto:>22~:::nt::~<?<Xlm~::n2?.11
.mooci)(JI

c- "' IDG -:>c:mmc- 0 0 . Goo::m~~
~l L - .r~
6
c ~ o:n::>Q 0
C.:. J1
rooo:mro:::n
IL - - T
.
Jl
:roi 3
c- . c c . c- 'i' c . . c (' c c c . h:: c r::;c-
G~')CO)yGQJ?C:o:>e:: G81 Goo:ocro:>: ~O)::D~~f>Go:>?a:>t:::l G~')C:tJc:q>
o o \ c c h:: c- c-r::; c r,;: c- r,;: c- c cr;: c ~ c
9~:::01 m~moo~cr:>:Bc:~el::>~ ~rotlc:_t'l~o:>t:1~' ~~::De[t:JQ>~~ 0Gr:em
1n:>c.re~
.)
Jcc~caeJ
. r
O'Z
oo~c~~bl
.)Q j~
::>e
~
.:>
::>oeroes:3co w b':<lies
u<Ccco~
.:> .:>
11 ,
0
l,s-oo~@ . n ~11
':":l ':":l r , ] ':":l r ":::1 "'
::>~1 CC~~CCC~(.C oCOee~ :ccro::>~d:):O :::>c. to~ ICC~::JlgG~OC. ecce:::> CCOO
'1
.:> o e .:> .:> .:> .:> e .:> .:> .:> .:>
r:3vc 1 , ,
cc'):ooco cccoco
"::) 'I' J~ 0 I, ' '
tccocc
ncccceccoocc~:wcc :c.e.G:::Jc.re~.,;cc::>c.ft~
' , :ce~
' u ' 0 .:> ' '.:> 5 .:> .:> ' .:>
S~'aOdffii M.V1 VwmlH

136' BURMA LAW REPORTs [t965:
.o i: ~ r,:c:- 'l c: . s::_ c: 'l<' o c cc:r,:c' c
o~G~ ~'P~CI g)l8dCftt10~l::::D2<f'J 2tt:Df:GQIC0XJ~C I ot~fik:'!ID~:::D2
L. c
-.-- c c: . . (' -8<' (' . (' (' r,;: (' C" r;::c:
(:)~J.ll G~CD28dQJ<j>~C ~8d~J?:.!j\q_ GCD')CQ{,lg"f tiCD:::Df:~p:ro')l:'JCt
tl~GCO:lC~
t;:C OC r,;:c c c: c c c cr,; G c c c o c:
lc:Jfi*'J~CC
$,8
ti0:::D 11 :::DQCQJIDffi GfTI.>OOO:JX:tjG:::D') ID')Ccxr:m9 o~'J ~fOO-:l~o;s

2c ( ) r,:c c o c o c ~ 'lC oc c:
J
em~e J
t9>:x>211 cqro~;t3 roO?tQ~D{:::D2 2~8dQI3 rog~
G~<J<f ::Of 0 c .c c c: 'l c ~ c c !,; c c
1)G{,([)21 ~CDG(l)<)ffi:::D2 SdOO:>~OI ()) :0')ffiJC:9) O)()):Y.l~C o:>tj:T.>ID2:-
G;;>J:>6: II
o 0 C~ 'lC: C OC ' 0 Cf,G C (' C 0 C
'il:<qQJ29J GQIC~~C(.~');:-..)O:IfO:DCJ: G?,?'J:::D211 m:tym:>O:::ro?:::D2<J.t
0 c 0. (' ' c _c;: 0 c:~ ('
a;J(l)QaJro:::o:::D:::DI 000:::DOO:>SSdQ CDG 0 J)Q())(J)g::>ffi')I CC :c;n J)(,):J.>Q .$ Q.S
1l T l
C
c..:, l l tO J
(\)'):::D :nm :::D:; ::J.l?U :J.>Ct

-, 00
0
IL -J L IL
('~
l
OC"
Oro S~::;
ll
('
L- , I LIT
C
Q:DGCD:::D:D II
C 0
COL::D GO..)<n:G:x>'JG
6 ')C('
at-Lt

C.:.-l
Sd~Q:nro:roro?:
oc:
l
Gfr.l")())etgm ffi<!':::DCD
Jt -r
.:"J t
:08(:) OGC a;JQI

1\7 r
~c
TJ
c. '\
ID~.CI))G():<:>

l
erg c C ~L l o
c 0 c c c ('~ (' c
:::n2rrz1 8d~QCD'P:~o:>Go:>:Jm 0u:>(SJffi9J o:>'f':G:::OC\lCDGID:::D211
o c o 'l c c c ~ 'l c c o c:
:::nrocnc1 romgo1 ro ID3JOICD(:)I?:~c m 3J<e:OJ 3J IDSdOJ:-cOJ:x>:n
ol -l- ll l Jl. IJ lJ J o C::.J ..1L tJ "L C:,
C 0 ' 0 (' r C" 'lC: o Q CC C
m?
4
')~:::D::l1 11
~
mroc~~'J:J.>:x>
-1 JLJ
G:x>:x>:x>:x> :n?'l:::ns:G<:>JCO::. 3JQI.s~ co:ros:
o ~ L ~ ~~ T UT~ ' T
c o c~ c c c c: c rr c
G:::D'J O:x>CI))?.SCT.' G:;D':)Cet CD?:::D:D~:Y.>I G.SQC:GS':o:OCDC 8dG01 ~ ~ ?~~C
~ I!.OTt . :J L.L l! loCA UJo
-:r c: c o c: c c o c: ~ c:r;::c r,;:c c
8?~ GC I G.m:<;>cro ~'J::::n2~: G~:>:::::n;;G~pc:m cq_m9J~<nl:'Jc:tiQ:l::D211
c (" . c c c. 'lC" '' C' 00
GY?C:::DfGQj')C:ro 'il:qcm0l>O>G:::D?3JQI51 ~~:::D~?Jfm~ . (,)(,)()):D'J
c or,:c:- ~ c 1m c:- r,; o c c: o c r,: c:- c '1<:
:::D2:;~tf9J~<nGt:ecg Gtj?~G:::D'JCD :1 ~3J c GtJ?SO>J<DGO:G:x>?8dQI
2 9 3
o , o ~ oc: o' o.o c:- o c ' o c
OO.I.>::DG :>ro c: (,)QQI Y~3JG.S~C (,)O)ffi.S:::D::Oroo:>:::D:>: :G.S?())I :::DCD
c o @
Lool l Jlo TJL T 6 T
'l "l"' c cr,';lr,:c c: o 1m c:r,:c:- r,; o
')G:::D'J8d0ll G81 G3J:Qcm:>: 1::ntl:tJo:>Gf:::D2rl1 G9,?9Gt::J?C:t!S:::D:> Gtj?;;x)t
Gro:::nt II
o ~ c c c c c: c~ c c r,; c
O?._Gt::P~ G(,)XO)rGQJ?C::x>2 'P<!':::DCDt::l:(f3(,) 'e ~c tJS')t:-
G<.91'T'~G::D'J G :>c:
c C" c:rom 0
-r l mmmro::t1(,):>:CI
IL
'
6 J
~ GSJ
;'I
')"'G3J:O>c3J?:
(" c c
<;><n:x>v:>
l
, c r,: c c:- r,:coc:
~:::D2~ ~:tJCD9f Gtlo:>~CGt>ll
0 . c c c~ c: C" C' C' c: c 00 <:r,; c
. ::J?~'f'qc o:>roc;o:>m9J ([)2:1D'J:9r'P' G{,l')C:::D-j>GO>J?C::x>21 (,)(,)c:li!Jt01t>
o ere c:- c o o c: o c:- c c c c c C"
C\.{CD[9C::x>2 ~2~:::DG:Y.>?~:x>2<qG:x>:>qc:l (,)GOJ?{,)~f eoG8.!j\~ ro~CDJC
c 0 c: c: 0 0 ('~ 'T' c:
:::D:'lXDG:::D')CC: Y:::DX><D~ G81 G&;18QC3J'J: QO)Q c: ([):))GC\)") ())G:::D:>
c: '(' ('
c .. -L .I L . L 0 Jl
f,'; 0 (' (' 0 (' (' 0 (' 0 0 (' C 'lC 00 <:0 (' 0
tl:IDf'?~ o:>2:o:>?:9fCI:i:::D2II rore:;:~G:::D)I <X?~l~())0)28;JQ I3 .(,)~c:lil)(J)CJ:t
oo ococ: o c: 'l r.
.YI:l!d'JC~CI ID<DGt>I:::D0:::D:>: c:G
ll o ,,o ll
c c: C" 6
")~ ID:::DGCD") ())G:::D0
o IL
r,:c
~.S;>\(go:JC>O
TO
.
c o c:- c:- c c~ o o ~ G c c c c
::0211 Oi3dQJ<D.!}S Oo:>:x><D9J 02?~3J~:')G~Gft::l: 2:-}IDffil OO?C:::DfGQJ?C:
c c . c C'
::o:x> 3J(:).so:>mmuc mQ<Dma:>.sm'J: c
0 C' c 0 (" " ('
ro:o:x>o:>-..."Uo:>mc::::n:>:Gro'Jc:
c .
C JT . L To . o L A
' .c-r,: (" c C' (" c::: c (' 0 . (" .o 'l C' 0 c
~:>:~:x>2tJIDG:::D')CD~:J <n'POr(,)J?:c:ll IDl)Gro:~:J.>~OlJCD Y~OI II qc:rq<
. .
(J) ""~ 1 ~g, s:>:> ( 'f} 0 E9e 11 ugsp 4)') G9u

uC2cco~0hl !Gbe:c0eo 0hnlPfl:::>Q
.> .>O.>~ '$' \ &' .>::::1
ocdo~0 J:oQf,:oa.:cocc ccc::~::o: lltoro :)to bo flGO:~ccccQcb C2cc:oQ
.;) L. .> 0 .>::::1\ ;) 0 ;) 0 ;) .> e:::l.> .> .>::::1
eco~ !GanC2Qco~ a.;cccocc f,:::c ~::leD a.:::x Pe5~CC ::>Cfl::l :ce.? ::e:a: ::> IG::>
';) ':5' .> ::::1.> ;) .> \ ,} :::1 ;) ,J ;) .> ..J..,
dtu:,Pea.:cro::~
;) ;) .>
h/&:wreerm
0 0 ;) 0
uC2cc~a.:&
.> 0 .)
Coe2cc,o~
.) L. 0
:of]eeoeo
.,,__,, 0.)
e~co J:kl0a:cccc a:::>CCJero a.:e0hlfl:::>Pees C2cc:oS 1:C2a:ecbeooes
e~b 0 L. e.:>~ .) ;) .) ;) .) v 0
od:J:~ coob:mh::::::cPedcc:xe.e>
;) 0 .)0 ;) 0 .) .) .)
nCC!cc
.)
b::c.c& h-:Ci'cc,oh>"J.ClcM~:::Jca.:::~
0 .) .) L. :_j .) .)
:ces:oS
;)
:ccoofb:
;)
:::::ca.:~c.c0
.) .) 0
1C2cnm&cc~:,f~10
.) L. .) .) ....
b:cPebooco 1:8~re
0 0 eJo '1.
\
1:ce.s:::h
.)
C2cc:::::cPe5~ccoce.::~
.) .> ;) ;)
..)::::ec4P.~ro
,:>b ccce4::~:::>~::::tccc0
.:>0 .)0 .) 0
11C2CCJo
.) L.
~tc0hl:orJ:ob:::::tcc.c0 C2cc:::::cPe::~4cc::::ce5 co:::::S uC2cc6co::~ (olflero
.)~ .:>::::1 .)0 .)0 .) 0 .> ;) .> .> ;) .) 0 ~...
coo::e.scoPero
.) . .)
&!cc"J.CJ&roa.:croe>es
.) :_j .)
ecb~c0:20
. .) ;)
wdccck!JG3
0 :_j~
owcoPecc&
.) .) .)
~to~0fl
y .)0
uttcc~
.)
4b:c0:C0
0 .) .>
a.:4co4:o::::~:o::::~
.) ;)
J~c:::::Elc.c~
0 ,::::1,
:ces::::e:es::~
.) IGe>
..L
lk:ro:CC!rJco~ 8ch':l::~b:J Jcctof:le2cc~~::~~ fG:,o0hl4bcob 4co~ro:ohld)l
':5' .:> ::::1;, .:> :::J o .:> .:> :::J \ ':5' L .:>~.:> .:> o .:> .:> .:>:J .:>:J
:C2ro~fl:u40fl
.) .) .)0
:!bu~:::::S
e ::> .)
J~fl:C2a:~:1~16&!cc<?fl
0 ;) oJ, .) .)
IO::>es::>e:es::~
..L .)
IG::> C2cc
..L .)
:ocPe::~~cc::>cfl::>Jbes:cPea.:Pec.c&:cc::~c.ccc
.) .) ;) .> ;) ;)
&:'ccc.ccb::~Pco~occce:~
.) .) .) .)
4bcchl:~
~ 0;) .) 0
oc0:20 ueroccc::~M~~IG:o,o::~ll
.) 0 :_j~ . .:>...J':5' .:>L. o"'J
w:lv:cro
0
10::>0~broecwPd:ea.:&
,}~ 0 .) 0 .)
~..c.ccce:cbco
;)
Ja::~OihlbesttwPea.:eo
0 .)~ 0 ;) ;)
~::>:f CC ~lvoocbco
::>o
,,C2cckchl::~
.:> o :J
bo~fl:::>@eoPe~d~
.L.o ;,.:::h
b: cd:o
o o \ o .:>:C2a:a.>::Jl:o
.:>-o
S.DIOdffii M V1 VW~fHI
Sl.)!Odtnr M.V1 vmog
..
u~ooefuec.
~
tobwc
o e o
cccec.C~Pe
.;,
.:coo~:&
~,)
(oc~~ocfl~:2)
.:> .> e
:W&:cbco
e:J
. wccro?4 ,:,ccoboo&>:<bco.
. .) .)
1o'fhwb
\..' ~ ~c OX.Ofl
.,) 10~~
.) bSJflc
..., .):X.O CC c.o~1i:~fl:Cbco
.) e.::l 1e~h
,) .C~:~flc
::J
i
....
II(;~ C~eG ~l!oec 650 fl:Cbco I ~~e bsflc. *.
- ' <bt
e&ec
o '
wbJ:<boo
0
e&ec
. o
I ohlcce!0$0~e;
.>~ '\ .JO
:cece:cbooe&ec w~&cboooo'lli
'e.::J ' .
u.><X!cd:ee
, . : .)oc~e-
::::::1
OOR:cbco
.,) .
JX~e~Woow&!ccehl
.) ~ .) .) ;)~
ccc~:1Pfl2c@5o
~ .) 0
:cee.G:ocooeJe.G
.)
c~2c@5o
.) 0
16ec
o 1 '- e 1 "" ' Cb 11 .L .. 11
;Cifl!~COW&X' w:ro I J~CCCel~~flec J?OCGao: oo~mW W~:oow~mec
ua:!ccro~[;~OO,@flboec:oe'l:u
.) ot. .> .:> o
oCr becoeclro:oOO...c
.:> o .)
<;\)hl~
OJ 10~~'1>\CfJc
.> ;;
J@cc~:Cboo
,) o
e&ec
16ecdfl:flcoce:ob
.> .)
1:hl~d:olreh>
e'J~o .> o (:llON :lp:s) : .:.ecoce:oeb~
.>
1,)a:!cc:dfl
~:cbooe&e.c
o
1!Gbeolre
'S'o .>
(:llON lq&noa) :Rcocemow
.> .>
1.la:!cc:crt'le:Cbco

e&ec

u:of:lwc'b~
,:::J,
c'boro'!Q :cew:oc.ooeec ,@',eec~cc@fl :of:loro192c.@5o ,!i:l;eolreh> (:llON
.> ~ .l . .>(, .> .> .,,J, ~.> o S"o .:> o
:lp:s) :flcoc.e:oc'beec
.) ,)
o~ (:llON lt{8nog) :Acoc.ecooec
.) .) .)
<lc.@5o
.) 0
:c.eec: ,)ocooeec
.S.DI0d3'H M V1 VWliOH
G
C.C.OCl>ftll
S.U:IOdffii M.V1 VWWJ.H Oti

lH Sl.l!Odffi M.V1 VWlfng:
,142 BURMA LAW REPORTS
SDIOdffii M.V1 vmng;
nd~ (j) qcc G'PC:Ojl::D2;

c c 00 <:: (' c
~8~lG<;S'jC:m'J:OOm Sd:::OGOIC:
")C' ") c
Cf:'P"i!a::>fG::X)'J
c c o c ' c r,;c c ;r ~ c r;:;:: c r;::c
0ffo-g~:0f G'PC:;lJ~.:D!?i8dBCI 8d~~C GO. GOffiG:D'J SdG~JC:tJC:'f Q OC
:J)~or-
0
c c c cr,:' c r,;cRc c
8p:m9ro~: CDffiU?G'fC:O(.))~~Dl~ GCD'JC:0'J:~::X)'JDl_9f eJ~UXDfE~ :.~
L:::0'Jf
C'
8JGeJ:X~gp:
r;:;:: C
GOJ
"J" ") C C ~ C
G01(1)G(\):D~ff ~JYfOO'J ~~ f:.>.)'J(,)OO 1JC!T.3~
C' G OC'
'\c}f~OJf
ac&oo-:>d5
(G) crt,~ m9:mm?:&G::n'J Gt.Jo~ ~~ Gm:.(S) ~&(~)~~it (?.) o1 O'f.>OOSll
("
r,;cr;::;: c c c c c c c oc c c
rt<'-'e:J'J:~Jffi8J?::D~ G'fC:OWG9:0~C 0f-j>:D~8J?: otm;>JffiJ~~:CDo:>
c r,;:c 1::::: c o c or,; cr;::;: c c "l
G:D'J 8d02~(\)'JI,ji[)Ge:J JC: G921f'J:D~ If au~mt:j ')g~Jffi8J 'J:'f'J GSd'JffiO l.
oc r,;:c c
s:ICJtC: l,ji[)J:)~ II
" It may well be that the appellant was aware that in
directing a purchase to be made the respondent did not intend
to keep the shares purchased, but to sell them when, as he
anticipated would be the case, they rose in value ; that his
object was no.t investment but speculation. To enter into
" transactions with such an object is sometimes spoken of
as ' gambling on the Stock Exchange ' ; but it certainly does
not follow that the transactions involve any gaming contrac.~
A contract cannot properly be so described merely be<;ause
. it is entered into in furtherance of a speculation. It is a
legitimate commercial transaction to buy a commodity in the
expectation. that it will rise in value and with th~ intention
of realizing a profit by its resale. Such dealings are of
every-day occurrence in commerce. The legal aspect of the
case is the same whatever be the nature of the commodity,
whether it b~ a cargo of wheat or the shares of a joint-stock
company. Nor, again, do such purchases and sales become
gaming contracts because the person purchasing is not pos-
sessed of the money required to pay for his purchases, but
obtains the requisite funds in a large measure by means of .
advances on the security of the stocks or goods he has pur-
chased. This, also, is an every-d~y co~ercial transaction.
For example, a
merchant who has to pay the price of a .
.cargo purchased before he resells it obtaizls.in ordinarycourse
the means of doing so by pledging the bill of lading."

.
m~ mm:ro~
IL --T L
0 . <::
O:'D'JQ
C. ]I
o
GQG.S
'ill T
B:m . .
mm~mro::;)::n:n mo:>~mro:m
IL T C. IL T -1.
c.- 0 o

0 0 (' ')C' . (' (' ~ r;::::::: (' c
('
co'1 0Jl<J95):::0!?i Sd:;)f~if~fGII)J:O'{D~ 8deJ'.):OJl8J?: 8000q(Gee~:~~
(IS) Gs:>l .:1 s:>:>(~)l Of!?O :;W~' ~:1 q>:> 9911

(v oo~ ~~~~ ~~'flj?u q)., ?J?II
10.
u_ycecl,n
CCC<n'ICIOC
frodx.~;t;:
r
,~
S~G~g:
S~'tiOdffil M V1 VW)llg 9tl

" Interest for the. period prior to the date of the suit may
be awarded, if there is an agreement for the payment of
interest at a. fixed rate, or it is payable by the usage of trade
having the force of law, or under the provision of any

substantive law entitling the plaintiff to recover interest as
for instance the Court may award interest at the rate of
6 per cent, per annum, when no. rate of interest is speci1ied
in a promissory note or bill oe exchange under S. 8o. Negotl
able Instruments Act."
u@ccdcob:>
.:>
II;~ ;,@6 'co:roeWfl
:Jo S',:, o
t-olPe~~:d3co
.>
1(e) mf..es ~oceohlc.oOOcb
ol s~ 1e~e c"'vc toe@hJ::;lhJa M oc.~e:~ooc.ae .
.> .>~b .> ;J :J :::::Jl...::::l .> .) .) .>
u@cc~core9)hl:k
.) O.) :J ccce&C2~6:oeccb:c0
oJ .) .;> 0
":c.cs:2cca:~e
0 .JO
a.:&aQ
.)~
:c~c.oc.coe
B t:@roc.cce~a
.;, .:> o
:oQ:occ:oroe
.>~.J .)l,;
coc.4e:hl:cbl:e.oo
.) e'J ~ .;, o.)c:cca.:ro
.,)
::&~cob0:c.e
.;, .:> o .
ll~fl
~elbccoeb~c.Orroro:oc.hl;
0 .) 0.5~
rCC!a:::cra:t~oo:k
\ .) ~ " .) .) ;) 5:.:1 ~c.cecrooo~corecslill
Mcoe2coGfl.tt:l, ~ .l ;) ;) .) '$
o&>cbtt II @cchJ:coocohlib~ ohlcccecc ca::e"l!ococt:let'I:CCOfi:XO olb:J~t~"!\:oa:;:oroe
.) 0 .) ~ .) :1. .) :3 .) 5 .j -- ,J 0 .) .)(..;
:@ro@cc:c.Pt~:b:>ob<ll cccelf'ecs 11 ::;lcchJ:coo ~ooe:Wfl:lrfiCS :@roc.o:cPacbce"l!J:t~Pco

.J ;:, .) e ~' )" ~ .) ~ ~ ..> ~ .>
li:cpa:;~oo~coPees
~.., .., .> .)
ccce&..Qfl
~ 5~
Cbhl:ccoflorooo:cbco
.;, .;,
oltu\;a
.) 0
:ot:l:oa:;:otoeaXnOOflCCO
,)~,) .> li .) ,)
code:hl"l!J :oQ:ct:l:t~oo ooocoro @cc:~co:c.Pcoc.coe o~2COfl:~flll ucorecchl:'ce
.:> e'J:_j .>~ ~ .lo .> .> .) .., B .> o .:>o .:> ., ::~.
-cbooe&>cs
.)
leolPe:~:cbco
0 .)
co&:coococ.ltue
.)
n :oblcckJA@flo~cohl:kohw:hlw
., ~., -> ., o., :.:1 ., o O'J o'coc.~ccchl:.:1 eeoC!
c.ccef;eAcc
.:10
e:lPfi~CObG:C.G-tofl
.) ij~ .) 0 0
1
0
ro ~b\;;oiJ: occ:oroe&w
.) 0 .) ;:] .) .) ...
ehla;:c.cofiOCO
.) ;::! .)
.) .
rbea:t'lco:bo c.ccc.cc8~c.a4t:l-cokJflcok
.)~ ,) .)
:c.co~~co:ol:l 0
coc.ltue
.)~.)
cobG:c.coa
,) 0
i .
ucob ff
roi(.OC'~ - r..
r
:::Jlg
.)
c3vct
6tl SJ..)lOdffii M.V1 VmilH

150 BURMA LAW REI>'ORTS [i~6s
0
oeG:J oooo:oor::cc- O);;lc8 co?:co8~~~1l:3 ~ci30J ::>3$,.,~,~/00J? r,:=?~ ooGI:':oooo::rl
.... tj L L ~~ ... Ul ::. c.n L *(1. t::J -- T L C::J c.:~
r.~ oc- J: _!:'O<' <' c: !(;1:': o Q" c- '..,R,.,C" <'
:tJ:a:J<{C ~:C:'Jro~c~e~~~O) I g}ftj:X.Oi~?m, ooe:e:ro OO'J?II.I~I~C ~'LlfCICIJCI
c oc-
..
~OX:OOf:
~f
c <'
GtlX0C1;;lCII
0~
0('
~0002 II
0
0010
L
('
?C C'

C' C'
comacmro:oo
- J1 -- -r U.
e3 :~
C:: OC' 0
~.sro
10 L
('cooc('~
~oo a :ro;;~e
ll

1J 6
C'~
L
<'
[.!..
0('
oo:noomc:
L
~<~o:>?~
co9o5 ~u1 GU;GCOII
r;:C' C' C' C' -~ Go

t,C<PC<q-f Gro~ 'JOJOO':&o.tSd~CT.' II II~Ci>O)':'
(I
0<D:.!>& II
L
r;:c c c c c- g 0
tjcooc~~GC\)~'Xf.>ro:>:Q'j:A(.~~m 11 ue:Of:::D':) II
~ G C C' C' C' OC' C' C'

00"-p&~~& e=~~?CG"'?C II II GcqpmCO?!~ '>00C::Df!::D2:;1 Gropro
co'J&QQOJ
o C' Co OC' o
G~?Coc:oc~
0 C' C
C:l<D:>gaAJro~c mGOO&G>QOO
<:> C' 0
QroG mx: <Sc. C C'
-liL L J --j.Jq I ~l o
3 c
~
0 C' -~ 0 C' C' "\ C'
t L
SOJtnro:::omro~ooxnro:x m:t:~:o:>c
t. -- -r
-L- . 1\. 11 4 -r -- Groi':)O:)(Xi'J&Go:>?C:Q:::D::l"lll
:u c::.
0 r:::"3 0 C' c C' 0 C' c C'
02-:;~ axp:~8:m1 C:lW')g~ro jO mJO~<? O)G(\);0<;j0~ :J O::JO-:>O:OO'It
oc
ro~S.QI ;.\O)QO):U II C08dfd~0
. '" c o oc- c c- ?c . ro c c r:Q c
G~:>COC:QC(}) O:X.O!~ G)O)QCO)mg::pimgt:~gO)c
~ C L~l.

1
C -:;t
t..
] -[ 1L
0 C'
:ro OJO)G:x>SdGCO'Jm3dCXJ':>:<=lU ?~
Jl L n.W ''U
_,
b
C' C'G 0 C' ~ G rC' C C 0"\ C'

::D<:l:Qgco':):Sd~'l> ro~a.:;smljl:O)Ijl ;QQ0):-1)( n .:.J:/;;x:)
se;<;jl ::r.lbl::D;:i:>l1.cv;::::(J?OJ:'D
Jl ~ J l...> ~'- c:, u 1 A J GT 1.) ll ~ Jl 0 -1 :&. c:.
c- r,:;: c o c c c cr,~ c c 1C' c O"\~ . orc
9y8dGt!j'JC:'i]G~')C\:>~ZI CDmC00(3:::D~Gpm GOIC&XC:~ ~~e) II q(I9C
C' C C' 0 C' C' OC' o~ C' , C' C' ' G v C' C'
romooo::n.::m:oro~ .smrocro ro GQ:~c mo~JIOOGro:>~o:x:> rooooo:>:>
c.:.- -t u T L L- t. " , J o L -r
"" Jl J
" a G . C' OC' _<:- OC C _!;' C' . ;. C' f.: o
~ooe:m C:l~co:>r:c:\1 qcro'f:GcqpmcxY:>:QJroro9 occ.;<:pmc;t:P~
r,;:c c c o'c r--o c ~ c . ' r::::c r,;:c c c .<:
::Dl'j~l GC:l:>CCC:~cm G~')O) ~~ 0)')(\)('))COO~'J~C:l'jQ:'::D~ II sc:~::~~
o:)GO)':)O)QIO) (\)Oj(\)00-:>GO: Ca
c c c. Bc "'(J.)O)OJ[~CI
c rc ocr
OJC:l:((:l:>:W
cc YQ())
')0) "c:
0
..-J
. c
oo: ooro':l (:)0)-:>:oororr.
ILU 0
.., c _9
0
C\c
oo::~troQ:x>::n 11
l
c
mcro:G>(.;())ffiC:lro:>:
o c o
i..:IJL JIL
c c oc _c
G~>-::coc:oco;JJ
' :. L U o C l L U. l
~ c. c r orC" o r::'C' c oc C' c
<O~G;>e_j:ro O::~f~SmG~?~(SC: ~X~<? <DOC::r.l~C:roe:;GIC::Dt:: II
JJ
c
Groi')()')(X)')gO)e)) O;k':)QGOGS m:
tl
C'
'-'
o
)I '11- T
g ~OY)
~
o
<>:COl COGm:coorom QC
l
oc~
- -, :, 6 o
C'~
L
< c o c o c cr,:: c c '1 c cr,:: c
G:x>:>cv2: C:l<D?:oo.roq t."..Dt9Jroac:::x>~ ~:::r.;,:>oYmJO!I xmroo~c:
c c r,:;: c "l
<pro 2: SJCOCG~ ?~Cj<D<.: !::DCc II GYXOC!~CO'J
c c oc ~
Ge:J ':)\f'_,(Q~~
c c~
rororoo
c c
c o c c c '1 c c oc o c oc c cB c c
Q:))::l100::D~')C\):l._"l; ~(:}SO II. GC:l':)COC;OCC/.?(.l.)O)C(I) C\)O)OXi ' :::DXGf':'())I
-, C.: L C.:.J G JT L .. L u,-.
(:)O)C~s:ro
C' OC 0 00 I) OC 0
Y8o:;SdC:lO)C\)~1 G.SQ~G~.
0 C ~ C' :J'
G O??C:
C' C 0
CX)O):PQ1lO)Q(.'Jo:>p:JM
C'O C1 _t'
C' . '
G~'::>COC:<;JC</.)
.
T
()C'
l
L OL
O)G:J)')(:;O)G <T.lJ(J)C\).S
oj
U.
6
L .~
.;
c
T ~,,
C'~
14
I
C' C' C' 0
C\)O)C:C.(lO~:::D.:C:COIC
--~ ~ L JJ
c
U l .., Jt . ..._,
0
()):"l-;GQI
l -.1
0 'T'

(:):D
c;.;
C'
c "' cr,;: c . . c ' c

~~roo1 G>:x>~tl~ Gro~-=:mroo:>en
c oc c o"\ c c c c- c 9c .., c c c .
(:)O')C::D.S!O) <XXJY.;OQX::l':.<:l')l cc:J:.c GY?COC&...CCJ)O):::D ro <T.lCC\:>C<:l<D:>:
T A Lo t:..:. J .l J o L L t:..:,
CC' OC'\~ r::::;:: C' C' C' 0 C' C' C' 0 '1 C C' OC'
ro~(.) 9'<Xic::t:~GG?C31 qc:~C~<fs:l'-j~Sd0':l~G::D?8dQI~I G0?CC-c:~c
.1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 151
ro <:lm-:>:~o.~O?<.Y.f
c [sc c r;;:c
c:~UJGfX[9'?' o:>O<:lGo:>:>~lJCU ~?:Gc;pm9cro;>:
c c o o c oc c
oeS~.
' rc c
QCl!QCg c
0G ffi?C:I o
o ;;:GI!}WOJ
OOtGOOQiro c c cY o
ro m.:!OCO.$.C c Gt:UCOCgQC())
c c oc c _oc- 3 --
-JL:J
C' c c cc
GO')'X,:Q<:l:romcuoG
o
:->.xnroc
,
c o o
L l- J .~. o
oc o
o:;.,w., h.
C' - "
-L-L J o
c cocr.:;::c
m-:>c~t <:l<X>GG(i(;)J );mro~: it a:;xroQ::nc.nroGtm-:>c:t
c c c ~
~ t t c ~""t
c c oc _o . c- _c:o
G<:lJCOC:Qcm
1c-~. L.J
'T'
L
cc:~<:l~~u:>:m GQt o:>:>:

~ooc::o;;:
ols
Q~o&~
..
-Oi-lo ro.o:>romcou:n~"~~coa
L~ C!..~J:I L .. t 0
ro?
C' C 'lC C
~mromrzorc:o:>c:~J
0' C
<:lQQG m:>c:m groc:n:m oom:nQXX 11
0 C' _?C' C' 0 ' C'
C' C OC' o C' oc

G<:l:>COC:&'C())())O)C
L l L A
C' 0
L
C'
C.:. J
C C
~
C' 0
!l
cororo::D~G:>ro:>: Gm,."'t:G(\)"JffiXUJ WCJGQI II

-}I U
Jl o L
6 ' 6 l o (.:.
c c oc c G A; Sl a c c c
<pro <:lo:>co:>t::n2 ~>"1:0-:;:<Jp:SJ ~rutGo:>:> 'lw~~gp:~c; m:><:lcouu.rm
c ,--. ,-. c cr.;:c r A; c ~o c ....~ o c c:~
:ne:;~ ~:>:9>~'.)C: co:n21~~Gl~:PSJ Gc:e~;~Jroco~~~Lnr :::omGo:>mct:!
:n~u 3~G<:l:>Co8:~6o~oS9cm~ <:lrot::Bf:~{ foS~:>:~ QJ~oSOif:

~::o::ro;x:t
c C' 0 c 0 c C'
<T..O:COC\)roGrnm
')C'
Gotc:::oc:<:l~,JQQI
C' 0'
I!J"JG<m>?mro~:
C' o,
GC~Q(J.)a
~
~ L -[ 1L Jl o U. C.:. }I o ll.71
0 C' 0 C' 0 \ 0 . 'lC C' 0\ C 0 C C C'
oo:n~
I. [_-,
11
:xJrno:Jc
-ol -( ..)
como:> { ro:oGo 1c:xc:<.7
L o OL.''.'" L JL
YQ:XOtc
Jl o )J
mu..-o.:;9dcocmc
l I ......
r;;:c c oc o c c oc 1:::,9 o r ::- c c c c:
\j4.>Gf>G::D'J <:lO)Co:>f~n:r G<:l'JCOC:~cm Or[t5=Gf'PJ.9<? Gro'JC:'j~:romax>~~
C C' 0 C' OC' C :; C'f)'! 1 C' OC' 0 '1' ')
~O::GO II qc:o:r~cma:;e:: CVffiOOOtJ:Go::l')B')Q,I (:)O)C::D'f:n:r GQI 01
C' 0 C' \ c c ') c 0 r: co C' 0
::D21 <:le\:(ro:X. G~ 0,000 CDJO::D'J Go:>X:Ot::D29~:J.>2?11 a:JQ)~C0<1:(
C C' A; C C'\ C 0 C' 0 \ 0 0 C' C' C' C'O
Ge_j'=>CD')SJ romcuu~9o:>~~9jC <:qCJ?q[ <1:fWOt00')<?(J.)~?t<?)J<;;:::D?
0~ Q 0 OC' ')C C' C' 'T' C _(" C' OC'
IJf:roGro:roe:<1:f rr&qGfCX[CGUIC:o:>c;'lf GQI <:1209mGOI '=lOJCo:>~:
C' 0 0 'T' c 0 c c:: 0 c C'
"f' C'
rnG~~C OO::DGQI Ga:pc:m C~Q~lll o:>mmc qc:84')~GQI Q$Xj':)g<:J~OOO:~
C' 0 C' 0
TJ~ l t>L .. l 1 ~l.T4 i1J l:.:rL ~

occ S eo A; c cr,;:c c ~-o CQ r;;:r-
8<1<:>~ GO: :>mu ')gO)t:5JGf~ <:l<X>~<:l<X>u::>t:IOOCI o:>~~(:l2~:::DC:'JC:1 <:l~')g
r,:::: c o c c or;::c rc r--' c cr;;:c c c
G~:>c:t G~'1:>mGm:<e~:0,)ffi GmX:Qt3C:~IO~~')C: 0o:>2L<j<? G(9SJC:
~ 0 C'
Glj?~o:>~ll
. C' o
($C<:l<.D?:G 'J{DQ.Ss=JO)())
<:l':'tJS~:>o:>?OJ:ro<:>~2UGO~QI
C
&0:):
C' C' C' C' C'G
T ~0 . - L
A J !;".
c c c c "'C' c . oc c- e o c
~ICOXD
..!
~O)(\)C0u::>'):OO ~0
IL
GUIC:::nc:G.t'>mcc..s
I -l -IT
XGOJ?O)~<:l
Jt.C.::,JL.
~'-11,1~
J, - l U.
~c 'IC' cc c c o c _<:' o c c
~[9CI SdOj?GOIC::nc:;~pro~: ~'J<:l~Go:>:> Sd~JCD~ 20G884QJCD<X>'JO
C C o C:: 0 ~ G 0 G C o 0
~Gf~<? Goqj?())(X)'J:<Xj~ll O~."J';jG~Gfe_j: e:~::U?ffi CV'1CCXf:<:lp:o:r
0 ~ C \ (' C' C' OC' ( ) CCC ~ C'
m:m?:Q
. L .
GOOI')())OO::D:TIII
)J C.:. T JL !! ..._. T '-'G
{JGOO:~c COOOo:> ~
6 J o l\
OO'=lo:>CC' G~"JC'Oib).S<:l'),q:TI
c: or;;:c <: c c<: r.:;;:::c() coc
mc;p:~:QJlOm ~:19mco-;g:ne:ORc:t Gg?c~:Gm>-:>cf<? (,)Gm>:l:.:,j~ j
C'
m~o~mc oxn:roroG C CoGoo
OYJQ)::DQQ;q> C'
oo: COC'
c.so:>co'):::o::nroc;c:t ~
CC
c ~c
Jl 6 . . -L .l!l II._, tl,l . l c:. L . j 0
C'( ) ' .0 c
<: C' C' c C' C' I C' 0 c:
':>
G'-'?CG)10':> ~ S"'.,(;lffiCC: O:>:ffi')~::Dt.:."; II G<:lJCOO.S~G~JC~C <:lG~: cn:nmen
t;
. T \ JL. t, L ~, J o ,C.:. -oi
(o) oo?:w?:~<:ro?CXf'
oc ( w)"
Ql ~ ~ O?l 0? o~u
(" ('0 (' ' .
(J) 9f~)C~:~o~p: ~ O<fl 0)? j~ll
(" C' ('Q C'
(?) 0@\''t t~~l 'J~qfO)'JC~:I.IJ?:t 0)? 00\'11
152 BuRMA LAW REPORTS [1965
~
:~e!S!l
C o G o Q C OC Q 0 ')C C
Sdl:l<X>C ~XDQQgO)J G(.))')(f) ?:O)Gunoxn~c l:i.S8CDGCO:<X>;:?:O:> ::>.l<X>GOIC:::Dc:
Jt. 6 tG L U [. J o T w L IL
OC C C r"' C ~ C C :;> C C' c;- C
(' 0<.'
QO:>C:t: Gt9CX~~') CDC~(.))')8C1G)Gi3:>m9f ;).)G:::J.I?Oj(2:;X2:;~~ <X>~roo:;e:::
i~ c C.:.
c
L
~ ')c c
G.S:>C<X>CS'd8Sdl:iCOG(X)"JC , 'li:>'~~l COCI:iill:>8s;> <!:'
G)(;)l:i~~l (.))QGUIC.8:x>C:~I
T c..:~ 6 L ll . C
c c o oc c c c c
GQ?8o6:8~u 0 cr;:::;:: c 0. ,.. r,~ r;:::;:' c r,:: c c ')1 c c r,:: c 0 c
~
GtCXf~<:.~~~~~~<,; 0tJ:Ge?1:>C:I ::DG:D')o;ltlC8tS G0 C~:x>t:tlc:~:x>~
c c c c rc- cr,;:c r,::;::: c o o r,;: c c o G o
roUCDJm<X>OOfY.lO:l2:;~19091:i2:;fjQ)IO~ XW.{I{ 9:eroro:>:::oe::C'Sf e:~:::mro
cr,: c o c o c oc c ') c
f?lftJ::D~ II q(q>qc <X(Sd~~ Qf81J)GC08Gq? Gill?roJ:>:roGCO:OI 0~ q.0'1]::D:>
oc ~
Q)C!.).G.))iQll
c c. 0c <:: 0
G(J)')O),?~O)GCO:
c 0
SJG"~C { Q.S8(1)GCV8~ 0:J)(:ii')~O) CC8())
Jt~ :21 iJ i,; o ...l.: l U 1 ot
')c c ocr-- co oo 'l c C'l c or\r,::cr,;:c
GoJq::x>c:Gf9Ce:J:x>2CSf :x>~G::D?SdQI rorooouu ll:i~ Oa:>l)l ~t:Jc:fj0
c o Q cc c c or,: c c c c
:x>21i <X(S'dQJi'~ Gill'XDJ:>:rnG\.<:>: roGHS: romrrL'lt Sd:x>roa;;~t.ni:>Gq?ro
or---e c cc I) c c
G::D~I 9Ge3:>g lD~illClG~m~croG08G::D'J roo:>X?J O)(;p:oc:x>GCV')I
o
ro<X>S'do:>G:
oc c ccc g{
G~"JCQO)J:>)G:Q ororc O~:::D:>pG:S,m<SU<I.'!:.;lC:Gim:>c:
c o c ;, ,. cr:: c ,.
GCDI"JG
c :
l 01 ;, .._.
1J L JJ .C.:. ..J :...J L.:...J
c c r,: o o o ~ r,;: c\ r::'C r,;:c c
Gm 1:ie:Go::-=> o~::Dr L:l:mP9.nt' :mSdGJO)(X)'):~~:r:Jm~ 6c~e00)a
9oc 11 n
e c !;1 G c c c oc r,: r,::c ~f:~'> c
<:1~:C::lroe~~-::; Go:o:np~me:::n2 como:x..Jrot:>:r:~:>~tlc; IYLB:Gpm m:>i:>
c c ')(" (" " 0 c c c
0um:nGu!c:ox.:~ c: i:>Qo:>lc mco:occ-.:x;gu:r:n
c c
~ CJ G)O:>G:x>:> Sd~lro~c
c c
J . J1 Jl -- T IL IJ J
c CA; cr,: c S1 .'11 cr.:;::: c
O<X>OXDSJ O:>Ji:>: Dl_ ~<.pCJp~m:uC: SJCJdlg(:)ulgG9i::D:>: GOt9fr_jO:>~ II
g o cr,: cc 'l'r,:, c .'il Q c c c
2:~:.:0:> f?lftjG::D:> SdCOm~G<9 1 (j~:x>~ . Sd~ulG:J.:>') 0(...1CCX[:i:>J')~5ro2:
') c c 0 r,: c c. ~c c r,;: c r,::;::: c
GOIC::x>::;:1tl:i~.:OJC COCI:iill:>:i:>GI:J')()')~G::D:>::DGa:>:>\9~ ~~tjO:>O:n:r_j:::.D211
0 c ~ c c (" c A; ~(" c c c ~ c \
q;_,;p~c QJiffiQJro~c;ooo:x>m9J I:lf<=1-;?u:>2GmJ:1t <X(8<X>~:>8C::lJ?::x>2 Gt1')c:~
co c c 0 c .. ~ c c;- c c A; c .. c
a:>Jro~Gf.Ga:>::>c:co~~ ~GfC::l2:; u~ 2JI8dGJroq.c;om::nm9J G? ::>ro~: CX(:0?0:
o <: A; ~ r,;:c c c <: "
l:ij:>~C'Sf G::DQJ:>~:>0~G00:9J 2Ji~:ro['jiOG01 .illQ:::O:>'lJ:~o:>G<X>-::>1 <X>bfl:~ro
C C 0 C OC o G <: o C C' C 0 0
GO)');;lltU<X>lP ~GG)I QCCDG::D")I!)QCOO: Qli:>O:>OO?::x>:::OrotlJ~ l:iQG:O: II :x>ro
U Gl . L l I L tJ J C.:.. .___. .JI ol. -L
C ~ \ 0 0 C C COQ C c C Q Q 0 o
O:>C m S'dl:im:x> 0')81!)QO)I:iO)C (\)(J)QI!)QCCX>:C::ll?:~c O)I(:):S'd:x>8:x>:ro GIO>D0?
A C..J Jt. o ol -1 Jt. A Jl 1 l .U J o tJ L o LA
C C"(G C ~ o 0 ~ Q OC Q C
~8::DUGOC9f!<j:Gf:>:Y.> 2Ji'J:02::>~ <X>'tJ:~r_j g 28G0::>:::0:0f:ro me:m2:
OC C C C' c r,;;:: c-r,;;:: C: ( C C C .0 C r,:
cxtcro-;,r G~-:>c~t:Gro-:>c ~q ~aet::~f:!Go 9) m~~c1 commomCJ:I:l:>:.
r,~ c
tj~Gf?:Y.> GUIC:::x>c:Ejc: CJ1jG::D:>co~:
, c c r,:: c o c c r c s
o c: s
GID:>(J)d:>:!:j0~ro ~:if:l:ime:m:>:
oc
0:>:0Q<X>GO:QCJ:l1(.)) ~:
c aC O:>C0")8;).)"~">0)
co c OC
m~:
co
I -, c L l !:::: \. GO:>QO)::D
c. ~I w II (J)QIO)O) GC0:0:>8
t.. l 'J t
. c . CG;;C c
~') coroQ9ft:IIOGO::D~ II
rom::x> c0 c u:>G(D
0 0
0-:>:0QO)(:I(:)
<: ~ C
:~1
C' \
m ro:x>xi:>GCJG:x>-:>
0 OC ~.s:>m 0
IL L L I JL ~ . ~1 0 OL ~ .T L
1:\ <: r,e . o c r,;: co c c .c c <: o C'
SdGtJSdCDe:: 8df:f3'dt{C ~~l.'j<X>~C::D2C::l~Cf.>GQJ II .'PC!'O<ql8~C Q(.l)?:109<X>
cr,::c r,;:.c oc g c c o e o c
G'9J:>rotlc:l.'j~ i:>f:CJ~e::x>~ Gro:>Gro?rom::qG:x>') Sdo;rro2nt Gcmc:G
(9) ~eG?~~~I ~~oo~~~o jO c~)l oocp:~lq)JlSI C~Gro:)u

U~ooerocc wboc C.CC()COf,f$
~~"l~ 01 ,..,~ oee-:l.l
ec.co~:o;
~- .> e
CC:wcoa:Cbcooll.e 'lfi:Wel'l 000
,:,0 0'1 :>
C COtleDft:
.)
a:cb<O te.f:~
.>
CI:IDC I
;J T
ur~ ,)coero~roes
. a!io as<bco 101~e
.) .
bS~Vc
;)
$
;,o
i!.~ ~
. ::>oe ~w::>e
<;>
1s-lb 1mo~coro
;, v
1
;, COf>~f.XOC@
;,
r
;,
1<1
~s-cx:mee.s
;,o
rlo
"o
1b l<1'1
; ::~ooros .
::>'ll'e~eeG
;, ;,o'\;, e
'wdfl:C2~o
o ;, .
ccc~eGb<!-PW
.'\;, ;,
~:::ecc
;,-;,
cc.Uk~@ccoG~l:eccv,;:hl:::ce~:a
o . ;, t. ;,:::.1 e ::> ~;, e
11 J<l "' .., r J. ,, ., r-;11 J~
CCS'COC:OW
.).)
ccccoecoJIG~
.:>.:>
e:wco ecnesu
,.;o o
n:>c.t'l~oc.l'lettc
.) :J ee:J
:wlcc:c.asc.o
n&~cc:cu
e
uco&ese:cbcoe&le$
,:, o
II :::>eG ltomCII U<IJl.ow:c. rC'\to:cJscoefues

.:> J e ~ o
u':':Ill'
a::cco
.:> o c.ccs
16'"'~""
rec co: aeees 1~cc:c.tl'lccoeco
.:> o-, o e
...,
n11
.
co cc:x:eoo
.)O .)O
"'sc ,,
cce]cccw=:o
11 .)
.1. , ~ ,
:ce r " v
s-o- .:> ., .> J c., t..: coaaees
?'llcoo:JCO<:I:lloetce , v
o
n , v
~sc.teoceaees
ol:c.es: o :oe= ..
~. 1
cca:> . lb ,,, 1 " r, ' " ...,
11 occas :oecoooc.e: scoef)(C eco cccca
y ,)0 .) .) .) 0 0 .) .) .) .) 0 0 .)
I'll.
lc;wcoctcoe ce: .)O rr
sa:>eeeso 1 " 1~ ,,
ooco:acc o c;:ocoesoc.<o~ee.ccocoo
cccee:c.cnee C! " , r
IO'llsacc
" .) .) o .> o e \ .) .> :> .>o o .:J e
1'1 occoe~
-> .>o
tl;>O 1 ~Leeol:oe"
r> cccee..-e
,
""' r 1~ eflw
,~ .:t
r ll"
co ,.cooeflo~roe(l(Ccce
r ,. 1oc.
' o .s o.l .) "'
1ero
,,o-
nacc
:4ct!@b
.> .J
w
o
r cc dcor~e
.J
li1:X)000
.> e.>
~w~b.>
IOI~e 0btlc lr IO<O'l:o:~:a
1.,. .>
M ~QIO~fl~ .
o e .> .>OJ .J
u@cc.4c.o~ko~:cbco tr.'oc.o:-J:l:oooli::cdo olbXu'a

.:> .) .) ~0 .hj S'.) .) 0
slbme=
,)
, 1,oee coceoc.., ,co61soo <ecoooa
.) 0
, c.e: s-ro~ees
1 " " ...
cocoescocccc.<eo '
&1 1g
Q c.a..-
.) .)O .) Ci- .)
11 @ccb~ecohl:k
n lbcoI,
.) " .,) ~.
~eeaees
V<> ~ 11 1 1 ~ -~ 1 i l I 1 1 1
'
co:c.taccocecocc
.)0 .) 0
co:ct ~= cccoro
0 \. 0
tCOCOI'Is
.) ,) ,)
:oe:oeeC>e
.)
..-scosco..-
'\.,J .)
11GcoCoJ~coPero c.ccee @cco'hc.o&CC!fl hJ:::;::Ifl>() ~cc@fl u@ccb~h.l c.ccwl:o
'::/;;, o o o ;, :> .Jo .:> o- :5'"" .!'"' , .> ., ~ o o
I
c.sa:c c.ccee 1 1
cocoacoco 'II.~ 1
cccocoecoco 1 <>
CO>I'>'OOI'Iecs
' If It <> 1
to~oflo oeooecoceaees <> 9 ,
ocoee
.) ,) .,) 0 .) .) 0 .) 0 0 .) .)0 .) )
:c.coc.oc.ftoe
,)
1ecbobocoR:k
.) .) 6j -:J
w:crai4:c.roc.oc.f6e
0 .)
ce:~co~~e.cu
.)0
nc.orecohlibe
.) .) :t 0
, 1 1 , r " " , w }
.> ) .)0.)
u:o o~coooe oo:oeco :oe o~rco=ro toeto~ OOfl(')f)ec-:o

OCCIOflflCOOO
.) .)
1 " 1
:>ICOC:Ot'l
,) 0
9 ,.
.)
01
t:oCOeGCO"'C~CCGQ ~A\l'
.> 0 .)
.)
19-CIICOIO)
.) .)
G
0
(;
.)
(,. 0
I~CX>COC.tCOe
.)
I(
,)
I
.)0
9
~CIII S'OOfl~W
~
( egCbcoe&es) .J::>eto....L.m~
0 0
n~i, 'fjr
r
::>~
ro~LoJ..4>$Cl~
;)
( gcr~hncbcoet'nes)
0 o
::>C.~e>;~l::,shJ
.J .JO
II r ::>COg~CCfl
.J .J
II C r;8~c ~
.)
~e .)OC.I'I$0Cfl$t2
.) &
:h.l~'c:dxo
0,:1
1r 11 ,.. t
fteOOtsC">:>O A:CGCO
S96I] SDIOdffii M.V1 VJi"nnOij tSl

BU~A LAVV REPORTS tss:
r
II:Jeo:lj_C&
~ t>~
0
~&
:ft.alv or
~:iccft sc
S.UIOdffi M.Y1 \fW)IfHI 9Sl

lSI
158 BURMA LAW REPORT S
>;; li a8
! \ J
- e3Tro~8u
,
.r:~..LIJ~
g~
~Ct'l~
t~ ur
~jcce IIC
6Sl S~(l0d3:~ M V1 VW(ID9:

160 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
oe'~
G ?G
co c co c -- 'T'C' c
:>c:mrop:>: comoooxn n ~ G81 :x>.s:roc romororo~-:>:~r-:>:m
L '-' 6 \. c ..., T
cc c
u
o
l
c (' C' C' 0 ~C' "l C' C' C' 0 C' 'T' C' c C' c
Oil ~f&mCI Oo:>::De:?~ 1:5COI:x>e~ro~: ~CP~::De:?ll GOI o:>;;:roc s;)~O)G'I_)O) 00?
0 ('
")c c G c~ c 'T' c o c t c
Jll ot~t. G::O?s:lQI~l 9c:ru:>: e:G~?c~;Tq GO! :).)4)~CDOC GOCO?GOO?CGO:
Q"'?C ~ c Q C' ( 0~ ) 0 t C' C' 'T' C' C'
~::0211 e:GCDJ?" cq_tf9
<T.)I OOl G00.J?GOO?C~CI G81 ::Df>:o:>C
'~
19aTro~811
o c co G
O)s;)S:G~?C<X>Sd?: p:G6l?C
cg o c c c
:rom GQ~I!>CPi!'OO:> ?~.\C GC COO O)IU GO:
. c
J l Ll !.. Ol ..O:t J J 0 7 ll

(l

lo..J
c o c o o c c re oc o cc cc c o
0):1.1()) G ?000)::0.1! OOOJGO: c::n::n s;)!O~a:lOCGu:rom c:tt!!IDG m:>c:D
c. l L L..o l o:. c.:. 0 l l D l
Q c c:~ C' C' C' 0 c: 0 C' c C' C'
e:Gmpcrm 00Cr:JCQJCPGu:;))211 ~t'fq<: Go:l'JC:~J?G<lGf>rC. roqroco
c c t c~ ~c c'~' ,~~ c ~c: o
(1)0)0)!.)) GOOO?GOO:>C9JGO:r:lc:t (\)ept~t::'Jc:v~CD~: t::'JfG~<:Xt:IDro'j <f.OO
oc c c oc c 'Y' c c c o c c o c Q cg o
.\i\C::D::OII G.S?())OC:o:>c GO! :x>s:o:>C.\C mm.s:G~:>CO)::O::OI :::>:G;,)?C :o:>
L c:.. T 1.. A T J 0 l LT L G 1:. 0\.
c C' c c,!;; OC''~ C' 'Y' C' o r.'? C' Cc C
rSOC rrd~OOCPOOCP~ Gf<:XtC~~;))211 GO! O::i!>GOJ~:tl:OJetGf>:>CP~002:
e c~ c 'Y' c c _0 c c c c~ c
e:GG?C~:OJ~ G8l ::Of~<X>C<J?,. C\:JC<:>on:Tq ~~ C\)0)00CP9J Gf>OJ2?,11
G 1
C' . OC''~ C c 'T' c C' o c C' Q.
0)1)g'i :oo2: Gf>CX{C~~tfa:>2:9::D211 GOI OJ<j':mcm 0{8'1::GG?CCP f?<.'j
~c oc c ~ e c:~ o c oc o r;;: c o c '1 c c o c
tjc;;o~~~:JJI e:GG?c~: ::n.yo~cot tlto:>a=tmotOJ2~ ~m~:p)2\l
c C'~A; Q C'~ . C' 'Y' c c 0 C' C'
GQg?l:>~rrdQ;l'=>::Dq_ t.:;j9J
e:GG?C~:OJ2 GO I XJ;>:mc~Tq rrd~GGf>OOC:~?:
c 0 c 0 C' c~ '1 c c "l c c OC'
O)~~G9.0J9::D2110;1'f?~C rrdo:>f>~?G:xl?OOQI~ . OO~OC GOICti!>OGf>cxtC
~ G c~ ' c "l c- 'Y' c c c~ ~
~CP?I e:GG?Ct:j: OO::DrrdOJy f>?OJ?:G:x>?8dQI31 G81 ::Dy:o:>cmocDL~:lJI'
0 ')c c c 0 c ~ c 0 cr,::;:: c c r;;:c c
Go.:>~:G:x>?OOQI3CD~:9c:~OC ::0~())~0)eJOJ2':/?000:>Co;J~'):eJG?OJ211
Oc c 0 o cG c C' C
OOGG00:1!>? Gffil?m<XY.>:<:>GI?:o:> 00: 0)0)9CCO') GO)I?(l)OO.?:::Do:lCI
c 19
6 T -JJ Jl u l L . T3 ll IL 6
c-. oc co o c oc co o c c c
OOG~;;()()')~:.>LC~S~ GSJTq OO~~CPf':ID? OJO:>:;>cxtm~oto:> GO)>o:l Q)G:xl?
_o o c c _ c [
c c- o c oc c c c
:m.s?mm:n?
T OL
::n9o.:>.:>)ll <:>~0):1.101!>~:0? ~:>:n::nmoc::n::nr ~:>:x>::O;::l)
L ~ L.. 11 c u >C:. \. c IL l c. c:. l-3.
oc- c oc c c c o o o c~ c c'' c
OOG'=>OOCCP ~~OJOC::DCOJ:Yli!>GOJ? o;!QI(I)o:li1JtCQCP .SCP.SCP.S.S OOGOO:
A L ~ 11.. L C.:. ll oL L T T TT
o c c C' 0 ' _Q
00: ro9.s G())(J)GQIH OO:Do:>
O)).S?QI?:m 0 c OC'
:::OCPOOCOJ.I:>I?:CP OOG'=lGID
'
u,:
cT
t. U L L o oL , T U l t. U AJLA
o
00: CDGI!>CO::D::O II
c C'
S6l?t:l8~?:xl?<X>ei
0 _<: C' 0
OOG'.::ls:l.\1>Cll?:m OOG~co.s:a>?
OC'
. &. L G T le L . u J ll l A T
c ' ~ C' 0 ~ c c c C'O
GOOd)GO::J) GGSO(})CI ro;::o: 20GO:DGOOGQIII .,OOOJG0:0S::l.)C <:l::DC(I)
L T I n.:-t L u ~ L -ll
\.,..,P o L
~c~c o o c-~o r;;:c c c c o c
m1troG?t::i?C:r:lc:'P'=~J?=O{ Oi:o:>O~ ~:m~:tlOXJOJe:?ll CX(o:>G0:9tG~9JC
C' ~ ~c <?,!;; . c C' c 0 OC' c CO c C'
~O)~GG0:1:5c:m Ot9Jaxp:'1jO:> ':/f'O)f'O)i:! II qo;J~C:OC G~?COf Tq
GO C "l () C ~ 9 c r;;:c cO
e:t{8~9' 01 j j OO~~CI o:l'f?:~eJ: e:Goo:GG?CCP ~:(jmro?:::n~~
c c- o c 09 c c_. c "l ' o ~ c o . c
92::~'\;:c:qo.:>~ II CX{ID 9CCX(:~.- GOO?CPOICJ?qt ~~~ro?:OJ2 11
" The..representation of.' a Bm:man Buddhist is not com.:

pulsorY under the Succession Act and the application appeared
(' t:
( :J) 0(!9~ ~~I 'Jf~fO')c~:
~g C'
rOjll
BURMA LAW REPORTS 161"
to have been made to have a decision on the disputed claims
of Maung Sein and also of Daw Hnit settled in a cheap way.
I am not prepared to encourage this method. "
(G) oeGo ~~~~ roc:p:lol~:i~~ Gou

.(7,) oe9e ~~~ .flol?8c~'j8c4:1.lpt _fl\>f (ro'f?:~Go:>3)
f~?c~98'4:~p: :Jjl ( O:>'fl:cihGro3) u
11
n~b>J.G$
o'-
~
.rc-~
~~.r
0
1:x.o;~GC6
~ ~
IC
SDIOdHH M V1 VWW"l\1 Z91

11~ de
~l?l~5n~
9I S~'aOdmi M.V1 VW~fHI

' c- c c- e c- o o c- C'f:C' c
oetS:J CX"~:?ID?:G~JI<l::O~ "1:~:::0~1 GOOJ,ql,lGOOJ?eG::O':> <Xl_trol,l:OX)OtjiO::O~~ ~00
C'O C'"""~ 0 C' C' C:: \. C' C' C" C 0 C' C'
c: ');>~::~we::' <Xl"1:o:>l,):ll)eo.'>?till ~roo.'>f =~~ mJt'loG::o:::ne"f o.'>m..,9GOI,le:u
~~;;1l,:t o r;::::: c 1r: c
~Clt~.P~
c o
, t:JIDSaom, Clro?m'.j:m "'J't<<p:;c::::oomoc
c c: ' s c: c:
Go.'>J~GO~I mJ"'~tJ:Cl:->
.,~ 'r.'!
~?8"l I<:OOX$('6)::0
<'C:O
Go.'>ij~GOICI.S
'lC C:C:OC:~
=l,lO'XOffi::D II
~(" O('e
Of~~~cc l ll J l
~8 0 0 c
~ cJ e S3LI[~OO~tC\{acl~ro II

II
tl~t<:CO?C4l
~C' OC
l:lt~~~CCI o o C' 0 ~ G C'OC'
c:' S3LI[~OO~t~S'3~roll II:DOf:9~Gfe:lt e:QC~f II
~~fRill
G C' C' C' C' C'O')C'
('
OO&Ot::O
T
C'
ll.Er t .:>tGO?CGO':>C II
0
L.
IIG(J).S~::x>:::n
6 T .L c.:-.
C'
O)G:O:CDG())?!'Dro
'l" C' C' C'f.
GJ:~
L J 0
QOJ::OOJ(J) GOX'I,J.)')I :DG:X)')!8dG:0?8JQI cc::DGUI o::>CI OC:o::>U I roro:

t. C. L iil5 Jl JL A Jl -~ -~ A L IL
c) cr;;:::c c c
( ~~C
C' ~
o::><:p:::J.?.e:l:ml 'f>e':xlo:>e:l!<-181:>
C'~ C'
rrj ro91 8J9_Ue:~G:~qGro?C800
C'
C' o C' OC' C' C' C' o C' OC' o C'

0 .i~ ('I)IQGOO.S s;l(:l.SQIGO)(X)?:o:>:::nll I:>(J).SS:(J) !D())QOCCOI .iCCGo:>?
tJ - -IT 10 IJ J C:. -l-
0
J
C'
!Dil>:t:~roo:>ml
OC'')
a:>('I)UIGOO?Cl:lrDGO)'J
C' C'
AT lL
0
()0J'1Q8d<D:QG'-"G.S
0
!i.
:rot . 1.
8JGO)OJ
\0
l -1 A l AI C- il L ~~ qjJ T Ji. A L
~ c~ <' . r,:c r;::: <' <' <'
G~C\)'J~I 'f>C':xlo:>e:1:qs<:> rr:Jj7 t:Jil>ijtGU!cx:>?:EJ.c:::n~l 2UGS!D9 <p:qc:
(' -~(' r.: C' 0 ' (' C' c C' ..
Gf:::O~ cx:>Cr:~Cu;?<X>o:>tl~l !DOf!I;J!DGNq <:pG::oo:><?S~ ?ji:S ro91 <:>~;>~a:

!T,l')g !D
C'
OOU:O)COI('I)I('I)~C ~GO:
(' 'l (' (' C'
c:G
?C C' 0
OJOS~!DOI
('
OXn:Ga:>roo::> c:
C'C'
0 lJ JO ' LL -, L M
(' ('
G')CDG.S:D Cl
(' 0
ffi())QOC0.:>::D:TI(J)
C' ~C'
ffiQ .SGCD')Cl:QOJ:-1111
(' ' C' 0
COG.S?m
('
!T,l())Q

To a.: T oC. otT
c, C'
OCQ>:)):TI II G(J).sS:en 8J())Q.iC
(' <:
l.C.:.I.
C' 0
s;l!l):Oell
.<:
!D())QCD('I)
0 0 0
U:GUIC:
')C' ')g.S'):T.>'). iL
. c AT u. IL J L -1 n. L L iL T
~ OC' C' C' C' 17.: C' C'
g)J8J(:l~~()0)2:~q QC(:tlo:>1:>21l
(' . U (' U '

B'dG ?C~B'dQJICD<:II'J:<iitC
J
00):))0) I
(' -~ C'
8JQCJ)ffiQ.~t.1G() II
\ 0
.il
~lJJ.S3:ca
6TlL
(' J:l.
~
C' C' 0 C' oc: 0 C' 0 (' C' 0 0
G<D')m ?: cx:>.sGm?c:ml G<D'Jcro.s:ro::nm a:> cro::x>m::n:::nu oo::n
T l L IL JL T t.:.:. LoL
0
cm:x>o:> : C:9
?QCCJCC'lY C' C' C' C' OC'
~(J).s8:!'DI GO)')Ca:>.s:~c
C' o C' 0~
~(.))QCO)c:\1
0
mGa:>:CDI
L AT il T J o L oL l
o C' ') C' C' C' C' 0 0 C' ~ C' C' 0 C~C' C' 0 C' C'
U~:g gl:ft~OC~0)0)2 II ~~OC~10):xl2CJt I:>JC'Or:JC:::OCDG::n ~G0)')(\)2fl'
C' o (' OC'
Gm.ss:mmmcm c:rom
C'ss 0
:oo11 c. (' 0 (' " rsc-
('
roGa:>:mro::~..1:1 - cc:m (:l(J).ss:m gl:~c
l
C'
QO):))'):G
JC:I
6.Ttl
.
L L
C' C'
A
(:0 C' 0
cc:c:~t~QC('I)Gt:J')0)211
~
Jl
C'
.
o C' .
'i):o:>C!DOOQ'P31
C.:,
<." o C'
L
<."
G~~:m

ATIL
"
CDJI:>
Jo
1. . 6. -~ L l! 0 . 6 .L
c: S <' o <' 'l o C' c ~ oo cr,~
::n~1 mJ~Gm?mtl?:roGa:>:>c:9 G<t.?:x>~:DQII . cooo~c~Gp:e:1: ro'lmt:l~
'l <' c c G <' c oc _<:. o 'l c
GSI:)) !l>CD.S::)) Cl !D.S!o:>CGo:>GO)? G())JCCO.S:c:~troGa:>:m GI~C8J:xl')
mGro: ro:C\.1(1)1:)UI:::D:'D
J l ,C
61
Q

0 C'O ')
T 0
C'))
o 6
mL roQ:xJ:-1111
Lo G
0' C'
roGa:>:roc
6
T
C'
~-- -l
C'
St'lDC'D!D
L
g J o
:romi(D
ll
<."
'"I -~
1:>9~K':(9Jro2:
('
~m~::n211
C' 0 ('
roGro:~c
(' ('
SC1!Xj?!Dym!Df9~<( <lGUI GQJI~
(' ' '0 'l"
c- 'l c oc c ( or,: ) o c "'<' . c

?'9?0f GSI(OO)')_Il>'f)>\0 m~co:G'P())G::n":?!DQI31 !Df?:xl2 <:q_t:J-9 <Xl
C' G ') f-~17.:<'' <: C' o 'l" . C' OC'C' C' . o C
0)J()')-.3if:UI:Gftli.jil>~c:l\ll <X><:pOf<X>GQIIJ~?:QCI :D~30C ~0:>:9 GOO!OJt{
' (' c: .
GO:~(J)fO[:xl211
. n~cc~~<.O
~@cc!Ol~:~:oo tuws::>cooe> ccce>hwoo0~<.0 bro ~r es'h:~cccc:>cb
~ \.. 0 0 0 ~ ,) 0,) ~ ;:! ~ e.::l.J
c
l::>fco1::e~JJ:ces~eccc nCCCCiCOOWC~O:,e> CoiOCO~<.OCC b:.cc::>ooCCt'lC<C~~cc
~ o-.3':3 ~ .J .J I....J ,) o .J .J .J .J
co:& tw40::>e:2 :~~e>~b:1l>ro ~c@o 1'Gwcccoo :.~:::>Q::>bctaoG0hl

.JO.J e e.::l o o ~ .J ~ ~ ~::b e .J ~:..1
S9l S.DI0d'3?! M.V1 Ymfl1

166 J3URMA LAW REPORTS
S~1!0dffil M.V1 VW1IOH
89l
ii965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 169
C' C' 0 o (' _<:. \ C' C' C' C' 0 ('o
o:>roG::n:>co:n:l
1l. C cooo:ro~:,;x m0oo~:~1:>: m'~91l>G::n:::n:nm a::m~c
L l 6 CJ tJ I e,:_---L \ :>!ti~
c o , o o c c cr;;:c c c~ c
G002?11 ~rr.l~~p:~ l!>~a2tJOGSI:!I?:mco:n:
(''
.sm.SI!>? ~~R"c
$L U n. L " l:. U L C T T o ~co?C~
~ c c c o o c oc o c cr;;: c c c c
GO?--"U?~ ::nqGO)?:J.)~~ roo:>~oo;;:~r9~2tJIDGO::D211 ~f~:::n21 f~~8c
0 ('~ C' C' .'il (' C' C'
~?~~:>::n:>:SJ~J?=~ m ~'PwDL~~ 'Peom::n:>r~dl:coe:09m nw~Gco?m
0 C' C' _<:: '\ C' C' ' 0 C' ' (' C'\
~~ro:>8o
OOC\:liCI CC:c:JGSI::DSJGtnl?m~C Oa:>ll>?:GQICQ::D:'n rr.ll!>rr.lGffil')()) CQOQ OC' L
.. lJ I --u J 0 0 u l Ci, 0 --u L Bf~"~CCI
h(' C' C' 1m C' C'f,~ (' C' (' 0
~-~~SUI
eJc:::ne;1 ~?:~ClGt~.:pc: 02:;?'JGCD?ffi~tJt o;?OO::D211 9c:::r.>m'f~ "tl'a.
c c " . c ~ c ~ c ~ c L'?
~(;roe:J GSI::Dro2 :Glj 'lfGellroe: Gt:jGCO')())GO!j II
o
COG
l
f " o
"o O::D?QSJCO:mm:o:>
?Cc I!>Smml o r QI~O)OO?:::n:ncomC' GCDI?
t. C.:. Jl IL -r il
B UJ
" C
" Uo
'l~ OC' C' 0 )J,'?. C' C' 0 '\~
<C>O!~l ())~tQJ::D~t!DCOI Ci.ij~~G::D? QCO?CSm~ <e;COJ'?OOJ9J
C' C'OC' C'
mro~oxcr"'xDeu
11 xe~oe3d a~S.d5e>bs1Pe.on 11 c.o&>ec~be:c.c:oc.oc.froe 4boooohl
~ ~ e 6:J o ~ ., ., ., .,~
11 ckcu4cca2u u~c.o&>ec&ac.O)c.oc.froe 46ooooJ:l
~0.) 6 ~ ~ ., ~~
11wb (;c
~~I?C~"
Ol.l
-
~l
~ o (' . (' c- c c- c- c- r~ ~ ~
O>'f:~t=jg e8G~')CG~')C II IICDO)(l)O)Q)I:}:GrnJ:~?GtO~~ t::'JGI:J~m
0 OC' C' OC' "\OC'
O)::l()) SdG~:::OCSd 0 ::DOCCIOC())C\
~.-1.
9 C' OC' 0 C' .
(c)QCCDCro::D~CE:.SdQ>COOI:}:rnGro?::D
L lt.J .~
C' 0 C' \ C'
n.
C'C
GliX~?CIJCl.
c:
0 ~
L L
e:ej?CVC:~::n~
(' 0 (' fs(' "'
1t L
ro c:~r:Gf>~::D~
1.
~ (' II
lL:1
0
JL
~
OfSdG~t:J?X'PO'.('
0
t. ll
('
rommm0~o>:
(' ('
C'
4C
J
~ C'O 0 C' o C' C'~ 0 ~ C' ~ C ~sc:o~

GrnJ:~?Gt:JOO?GO)')(c)O)O) (X)O)QG:;;coc~rn9fl e:~?roc:ro?: Gt:J~OU)~?t ~i OC''
(' OC' (' 0 0 (' ~(' ~ (' (' (' (' OC' C<' l::ll~')~CC
C'QC' C'
'lf> ro~o>~Go:::n~u <X?O?tc.m~?:t:Jc:(c)Dtl romcomromG~mGf>OfC::Dt:J~ l;~')Ct>f~f'
o~ c- c-o a _c oc- o c- c- c- o ~ o
e:~?COC:ro?:r Grn?~o>O)c:DSd~~~ ~frof>::D~~~rn?l ~~ts\) ~~ o:J:0?t
(' (' 0 0 (' 0 \ (' 0 C'f,C?
QJOO?:G'J: romeoGSctS:J 0 j Sd'Jf 'iJ:~roc~LSdG'JI'ft~::De?H -::DroJC&l
ro c- c- ~ o o c- r,~ c- a~ c- 'T'
~f't1XpC'OO)o:xp:~~;~:mr ro~;~00GOOft::JlGf>?rnf e:~?roC:SdGO I
(' ('
Q>(c)(X)CQ?:GO)QO)')f SOOGC
0 ('
~00
('
muo: ::D(;lO')())
0 ('
GCO?CSOO j romuoolflQ.S
(' (' ('
JL JJ !) Jl A eJ.. l - -f I
0(' C'\ C' 0
Sd(c)~OlJ':fO)~::D~ II
a
::>:
?roc:$tc
c- c- 'T' c oc o c
GSI OlCCDCO)c:ll
o c ~ c
SdG(c)m0::D::DI
c- c
Lrommrn0(c):Gmr:~:~?l
L, Jo Jlol. ~QC.:. p lJ6)
~ c-a a c c- r,;:c- oc r c-a a o C'\ c-
Gt:IU)?GO)?(c)O)O) 'J~elf>'::Dt:J~f ~c:G~m?GO)?(c)O)~ G'frn~::D20!
...J;. o c o c- oc c o o ~ ~ a c- c- a
U)~CJ~:~c O~?~G~'ft:j: e:::nf>:0f>f!S 0~?1)Sd~:'JG~Gf>~: 8i0CG(c)?C
o ~ ~ ~ c.- oc- c.-a o c.-a a c.- o o
~m Gt::J?~?:~o:>~ll ~C:GCD?(c)O)O)f GrnJ:~?GO)')(c)O)OJ~ SdG't~~
('. (' (' C' (' ~ 0 r.: (' \ ~ (' 0 (' ('~~ ('
CDrnQGro?C~rn'Jfl:}~())()j?SJ ~: t:JO)GO:~G~?C:O'.(CD~:z.roct:J~::D~ II
C' C'o C C' \ OC' C'a a_t;, C' C' 0
~
\
.suxoeomo:c:1r
Lr -- -r . . . . . .11 rogroroc
.~t c. A
091:roc:
1L l
G m?GO'J?~roc:;JJ.!'.ro:~~ t
ro:;>rmmr
u L
c- c
roc::nc:co?:::n:nm
c o
Gro9::n:n
c- o oc ca a
11 coroc:G m?Grn?gro ro0:-n:roGo:::nr
c- o
C..::.
0 ('
'='coY:
L JIL
t:J.
('
C.:. L
(' C'
00 C.:,
' 0('
o::::c:c.n~&C mro a.:l~OGCJI:>: mmc:com
J
0 .0. A 0 .
l L
C'
-l-
f(\11C
- "1J
!D::Jc: ~0 G ml
('6[9 ('
c.t.
0 (' 19 ('
~ C'a a OC' C' C' OC' 0 C' C' ~ C' or~
G mJ:~?Gt:JU)')Grn?grom ::D~J:~~:co?:o:>et$d(c)~O'.( OQX?JmG~?C:I Cl?t:::J
r;; o "' r.:::;::: c- a c c.- c-~ c ~ co a
Gt:Jfl1 e:~xoc:ro?t :x>:0?:':froctroc~~Dt'Jf GO)Jl~?Gt:JU)?GO)')I:}O)Sd?:
('~ ~ C' r,;:c- (' (' (' (' 0 C' 0 (' ' 0 0
elf~?:G~?c:l~~ ~rom~:rocco?:o:>~q G9,?')::D~II OfSdOlJrnot o~?)J
LC? c c ~ oo c- o r,;: q;::c- ~a oo . c c
~fuxpeorooxp:or.~:mr ro~0'.(09c~:t:Jrooc:gDtg ::n~')G::D?ro~:t
~ c-a o oc.- c c c car.:::;::: c.-
GmJ:~?Gt:~m?GO)?;JO)(')) ::ng::;;o2:co?:::D2t SdGO)')Sd~:3 e:eecvc:m
(' r.: C'f~ r,: 0 r.: (' C' 'T' ~
Sd0l~:t:J0t:JGI:J~ ('))J ll:G()')J?OCG'{)('))OJ~~i.:~:I:Jrorn?l qc:SdGOI CliC
0 (' (' (' ('
(' ' ,C' C'\ C' r.: ('

0sro~u~ro~c:t:J0Go:n~ u 1; .
0 (' , 0
o
com::n
' o c.- C'
Q)I:}COC~:t?:GOXl
oC c- c.-
:$tc
c c
0SOOQigroco?
<: :{ o o_
:rom :-~ om<-~um
c- c-
L o ot JL JJ oo Jl J o tJ J L L:....
'-7'>
('"' (' ('o (' 0 C' C' ~ C' r,;:c.-
o:>SOIO)~ GCO?m~~~ 0~~ OOJ1jCoxp:~~trnlJ;Sd~f>Sd?li:J~
o o c.-a a c c-
SdGI:}m0rn G m?G('))?I:}O)()') 00G00:9Sd?OO?OO:OOQf $t0:::DrnSd~::D:n
o c- c- C'
6C>L T l .iiJ LC
~ (' (' r,;:c- r.:~ (' 0 (' 0 ' 0 0 ' r,;:c.- r,;:
gp:m G~'fOCOJC t:JfGt:JSJGO:'Jf;D~o:>~ll <X?Cl?~ Sd?CD')I:}~:J.)f t:JfGjg
c- o c- "~ ' ' c a~ c- ~ c-"' c.- oc-
Gu:9t<"T.f0~: ~:0?:~o:?tS 2:tj?COCfSd?t Gt:~'f~m~t~?:'Jf Sdg~
c-r;::c- C' C'a Q 00 C' C' C' C' C'OC' C' 0 0 C'~
~J'trot:::lc:::D~I G('))?;Jo:>(')) g~Cl(OC<f:ro?Of>f!S ot<>tr~~~~ CDJ![:~f~
c C'\f:::C' r,;:c c o oc c _<:: c c c
:)!.:l Gro?c~ro~l:jc:t!CI>o:>~ II ~Sd~~o:>~ euGsc:a <{S~ 0 j ~ mroJl:ocGo:>?
C'C::::: C'
C' C' OC' C'
O)C:080CO):l"lffi(;)~0)Q)IIOOG
L [i, lOL
0
c.L
?CC' ())Sd~.Bro
oL
0 OC' 0
lOL
0 c-
~CI)CPS?Go:>?G
t.T
?CC' C'
o
C'
CI>SCll) 6
C~')Cel?OOCS
~
roc ~ mroro? ~m~IO)QI~moo?:o:>::n
l.:lo:>C:~cmo C' c c c 11 '1 ~-
; , ~ 1i1 :llt~- ~l~rt"l
IJ r J. f r ;- ; ..f:t'
s-:vf;t---:!1
i ~ )Y1
~ o L ....11.:1
0
IL
(' ('J:.
J
~
UJ
C'
l:.:,
(' 0 Q r::;:::: c _<::. ~
~G<O.,el 0~?1) C1>0)1JCoxp:~e:l&~ GOO?:nG~Jro~l 2:t:::l?CI)C:~;;n G~Gfe:l:
J:':f Ot'o Q C OC' C C' C C' i,;C' 0 0 ~ e C C
t:n' ~':>lloCC e::of:CI>fro OOUGCO?C:Goo?roQ0)~3dtlCIO~~m~:')G~Gfe1~ e:~CGI.:l?C
co~ c
Gene4li'~im c C' c ~ C'Q Q ('
roco~: CI)O)QO)G:O?Oi(:O~ II G<DJ:~?Gt:'}O:>?Gro?~m:O~I ~?~~p:o?:
c c r~ ~ c c "~ c r,;: c " " o c
ffiGJC:~JCl t:JGl::1'f~UO)O)O)~ ffiQJC&t!CD~ I:Gf::D~orGtJt:J~:Gffi')C ~C!>mp
r:rR"
~C
('
G<:Q')CQO)Q
('
c: Cl>o:>::nro
C"\11' (' c 0 C'
~?:o:>O:)C:)C:X;;IGOIIOJQ')O)C G~?C~~G<:OQ
0 0 (' (' ~
:
J - ii1 o c. l .. J 6-- -r J L --r o. J A
c c r::;:::: c ce e c ~~c c r,;:c r,;: c
ffiQJC:~JC: SdG~CI:(GfeJ'P~I GO)?(:IO)SdGf~~ Gt:Jt:JI.:l:'Jf' ljoj>GtjGO:o:>~
C'O~ C' C' C' C' 0 \ 0 C' C C' C' 0 C'
rorouo
i.:l
G<:O';)GQmcs~mmG:;;lll
Ar--IT 1. U
oxr.>o:>
1. o L
Gro?cQroro
AI
mo:>roo:>ro:o
t.l
:oro
0 C' C' C'OC" C' ('g Q <::. 0 C' C' OC' C'
otm:O~cr:lGf>G'Pro~Co:>~ II Gro?~O)e'~ ::DC'6?:0~C0~: roJ~Co:>~ II
r,;: (' r,;:~ 0 0 (' (' Q C'
Bf>Gt~~ l.:l')G:D? :DG~ro ~J?:<'f11 oxp:~:~psg eoGs~~m~ CI>CDGOO:
-Q C' C' C C' 0 r::;:::: C C' OC ~ CO 0 0 0
~C')oj>:D?
o:>S,GO:D211 ~Ge::J?~CO~ll qctGEio:>?G<D?~rol OfT.>~
c C'Q Q
qcGroJ:~?Gro?~m:D2
(' (' (' c C"J:::C" f.!: r,: 0 0 (' c
ocG'fro~o:xsrol:jc:~DI.o:>J. r:lGl::19 o:>~:ro2:
r.: '
r:::c c' c c~ 'f:::C' r,;:c c f.!: r,: cor,;:c "r::;:::: c
ro':>:t:jc:~9UCI>'Jf> ~f'l~.:j':>!~l:jc:t'JCI>o:>~ II 6Gt::lCO<D1Jt'l0G::D? e:e:l?coc:
c e r,;: c c c c cr::;:::: ' c o ~
m?:co~: :D:CI>?:SdtjCI> ';I~O)C')f ~fe:J?:~GOo:>~ 110:>10~?~ G~Gy~:
(' c (' C"~ (' (' (' \ 0 ('
~l?:roco::n8 1 :DG~~~CUO)O)O)CI mm:e~:OJC ffi~O)::DG I ?::x>:n CI>OOG<:O?C
tJ t.,:. AJI.J o :1 -- ~ \J A .n.. C -u C 6 ..
c co c r,: t::::: r::;:::: (' 0 ~ (' r,: ('Q Q ('
])ro01J~:O~ GtPt:e:e~o:>21l~Ge1?~1GffiJ:~?GL:I<XOG<D?~O)::lJ~
C' C' C'\C' C' C' 00 c;: C' C C C' COC' C'
GCI>o:>.S?~C G:;x:)?CQO)Q C:OC CI>GCI>O)?I.:ll (:)~i;;l!C\JOCS:m':lOS~C COOOC~
T J.O Al o 1L l T TJo l L 6o
0 <::
())1;;11 mc c o c, c
co:>ro:D GcoroQo:> c1 co e e
Gro?~mro :::>:
?coc:m?:
c Go<9o:>Q
c ?:
ot t -r 0 0 L. J 1
J
C' C" .\ OC' C' C' 0 OC' 0 0 C' f:::C' ~\
GO:')f OIJ'J>O)~GO)')::T.l~~o:>2 oxp:~OCG:))J 11Dq::T.l~~<'f1 cqropt:jc:(:)DI.~G:x>?
or,:;: C' ~C' C' C' C OC' C' C
t:~?COC:ro?: s;ltJQ)8ClPQJ'1ma:>?:Go:>? 'PCOO)~!::r.l(:)<j;O)~C\)2! 2UGS
c Q .
~~ ~2GOII
c- '"1 r;:::;::: c o r::;:::: c o c c ~ C~
roooroOimGe:l?C:O?,Ge:J?S,I 0~?~ Q)~C~:~t:j:ro G(X)')O)Q~ I
.o::n'XI
0
roCI>SQOOG.S
0 3&roco::n:
C'
:OGo:>')oo:D:::omroc:t
C OC'
~a:x,;:eu .
_<::_
m
C'Q
CI>CDQC
C'
G- ]( L -~ - ~1- T C. IL C!. . L ll u . -1
c c ~c c c' r;::c o o c c o c ' e r::;:::: c c
~Jrorq tlCI>s~~moo?:r:lctO?t9 ou:xsJmcqroo:>2112:s?coc:ro 8<00<f.
. cL~ r,;:". "' o c o c ~~ C" cr,;: c
'GUSGQ3?Cti:tf"olrol ~l:JCS"",G~~ CJCZ3d?:tl'f~:')ftj([)~211
h b?v r 1ro
C0~(!)~6'lCC :ccea; .l
~:COCO IG'te
n bDVC ~
*
~ . ' ~ ~
v
; ~:ccc:~ce ~
ftr toe>fte.G 10 1 n
tee>c.o:crft:COe>c.o 'l
s-~coc.ocs-~
1
1:~1re~cccco~ots>
11 1
e " ..L .Jo ..L o -' eo. .Jo
t'IL ':'JJ
. roft 1a.xoe>:)(.oooccooes
r o nt 1 n 1 1L
:occ:~r Oe>ft ots>ccc.oa.:: J.. '!
coe.G~~gccre::: crc.o~c.o
.J .JL -' .J .J \ .JO -' o .J -' o
fw@r.Jb:Jft o~c.ocro~4Pees ebd oc ccbc.ob .oc cvbrod~ 1a~~ c~eJc
o " ~ " " ,1:) \e " . e{. " ;J
t~:hlcc:O:occ:~rM~eG~
e-J , ,~, , , Cc ,2ccto:ob
o , Jct\@cc"JIJ:ofJ~o@
, ~
JOeleBCCr.Jtoft
..L , ~ ,;j,,
e:cbco &be:cooc.oc!Eoe> &0R:cco~
.)~
:hl:o~cw~:ob
6:1.) :;,- .) i!Glvb~e:~cx)('~e.n
~0 .) .)0 .)
o
" 0 ,
1 1 1
C.OCO!S'CC~ OCftel!CCC
If 1!7 r (.1) o r 1
OCOOe.GGIS' 0 c OIS'!e.Gel!S'CC~ COCDe.G!~CCGIS'r
o o .Jo " " o.J .J " , " e " .
f11 C ff)
\'
J4ro:e.Ge>ft
"
!Qe.G!ftCCG~
6:1 e "
be (c) ll:l!Ob
y,
IC.O!noCrc.oe>:::ce~e>h:.:dxo
. ,, _ , o
<:c:coowc!Eoe>Jcl,cbe.c:oc
~ .l ~
r.Je>ro ~~es
;:,-
lffiu
~
11 :C!.->cPcti~:C!
eo.) e
:h.l&:::cbco
~
u.)0
otocd:o&be:coowc!Eoe>u
.) 0 .)
11 co&w&::be:ccoc.ocrro~
.) . .)
u:roelo leGe> JWe>J (0)c.oro ccoc&~u ;, .)c.o&eu&:::ccoc.oc roo~ .)

e , "
u@cc:~@b~
.) ~ ,:, 0
(OOti) g6II'N'M,':) 81 'tJ]..tnpni{U'S 'fi 'A SU[Jfi '!l '!.OI "H''T){l.t6I 'UDiC7
urol{{) UDifb a tuC)l a~ms UO.L 'ooz nv XIXX"H''l'I '1U'1 !UIJ!fS a CJPU!fi
.) e
II Occ:oecor6'lt'l
.J
w:~:<bco

olk~~cro~ r
ccc.r~=L6'lW
1 1.. 11coeao~:crecce
"
rccroS"::>t'l r n n
w:cre:ro~w
...,
r: ccroccc~:c I'"
.:> .:>
oe:~co~
.) ..>o .J
\ 0
r.:'f!ow:C!:2co
~Oo e e
cce
o
..) 0
,
0
n
w:cre:ro~ :ocoecG:coro~e
.)0
, , 1g
ccccccsA ces-
.)
e;
.)
.)
0
uj:acc~
a:!ebcoR:~
J .:>~
li3:caxoees
S" o cccto:lPw:ocw~
o~.,
ccc:ere
.>
~:cre:ro~co
':>-
ccc~co<b~e
.>
m~ro
.:J
olk~
.> 0
bee s~o2=
.>
:cr~&be:oQ:4c:ooh::
o .:J::J .)0.)
ofde&:~c:o~u
,J ,JO .>
ucclecoR:l:e
.) .l ::J
U:OQGR@~bcolJ:(e
.,:J.:.:.I.> .) :J.
li:::c.c:oooero
S' 0
ccc~:l~w:oc.oo~
0 ij' .) c.cc:~re
.)
~:c.r~:rolj~co:of:loro~e
::> 0 .,:.~, .)
&s~c:ook
.)0 .)
(&6~gcoosocrm~) S2Jro('}
11~b ~ r
~LOl6'lOO~ ::>IS'
.)
c!~ t ( ~bcoowc
.)
~ro~) g:)ocfto~:)C('}~
.) .) .)
o~!5~:C!.:>crco~:a
:J ()9;) 0
:~
hl&:<bco
1r 1 11
ftft:CGCOOOft
fll S..D:IOdffii M.V1 VJ!'rn19: [S96r

n:c.roccM~c.:;,.;)
@cchl:&:c.oo~:Xo::x.rco~l:vwc.co~
.;) 0 . .;) .;) 0 .;)
c :ro~ 1<Bcce:dxon
.;)
11 b
u:c.rocc:o~4MkobCP:c.CP b:wc.co~ c:~ccl:l:ob 1:o'hxn
.;) .;) .;) 0 0 .;) ;:) .;) .:>0
&?cccoM~;~esoto (;c 1( G.) ub co:;,a:i~~es:cc~es coo~cb

.:> .:> .:>O .:> .:> \. .:>
l @~e cs:~~cl:~ll!:l:~l:bdxocoo~cb~~ ~~~CP:oe.sl2cch:>:cbcou ~- u
.;) ~ itj
0 .;)
;:) b'J o:bo .;) .;) 0 ......
c.
u: rocc~
. .;)
lc.~ct!cctect!cc~~:occ:olo~
.;) 0 .;) .;) .;) t.
Ml-ck
.;) 0
:~cc~rw~ocA~@cc
.;) ,) ,) .;)
e:cbco tw::Xowro:ci-hocce54co
0 .;) .;) .;) ,)
I (ec~tlc)
~
CP~e
,)
crCCII ur
": oxc~~ .;)
c.:;,@cd:e
.;) 0
@cc&)e> otoa:>ccooroi::Jtococro~~Pew ebc.~ oc @;~b
.;) .;) ' .:>0 .;) .;) .:>l:l \.8 .;)
uc robrod~
ol..
1e cS~~c
;:J
luto&k
o o
;~:~crw~:x.A~
o _,:.:J_, _, b~e:cbcou
.:>
uc
:~rt'lwreaot:l
,) ,) ::J
u?~
?!
;JOS-f'co~ft
c3~
s~~Odffil MV1 vmo~ tl.l

SCI SJ..~Odffil N\.V1 VW~mi
("
OO?COO?J-:lOCI
(" "
OOJ2n
'~
BURMA LAW REPORTS 1.77
on the ground that the minor wa:> likely to be happier with =>eG::J
her grandmother. C' C' C'
<" c <" <" <" <" G~'X:GCDJ'JOC t
m~ro1~cro2: 8d~:OOG'PmGOJ:GOJ?roGro:~:~p:'f?l o~2:~:~p:ro2: ~8
0 <"r <"~ C 0 0 C' OC' <" C' <" OC' C' C' <" 0 ~ C'
l:l~:n2.9D3JI 9 ~:~:J.t~OOJf!'Jr ~t!JdO~~t~:nGO:'JtOC <:lt:\{~ tli[~ lei')!~~ II
('
:n2u ~ .U Thein Maung, J. (as he then was) in Tan Swee Kyu

v. Chan Chain Lyan (z) quoting the observation made by the
Bench of the Calcutta High Court in F. Bibes v. B.S. Dhudhuria
(3) said,
" The principle upon which the question should be decided
is laid down in section I7 of the Guardian and Wards Act.
Sub-section .(I) of the section provides that in appointing the
guardian of a minor the Court shall be ~ded by what, con~
sistently with the law to which the minor is subject. appears .
. in the circumstances to be for the welfare of the minor. Sub-
section {2) provides that in considering what will be for the
welfare of the minor, the Court shall have regard to the age.
sex and religion of the minor, the character and capacity
of the proposed guardian and his nearness of kin to the
minor, the wishes if any of a deceased parent and any
existing or previous relations of the proposed guardian with
the minor or his property. Sub-section (3) provides that if
the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference,
the Court may consider that preference. The primary point
for consideration .consequently, is, wha~ in the circumstances
o f this case is for the welfare of minor. As observed by
Mr. Justice Davar in the case of Re Gulbai and Lilbai (4)
'i n making orders appointing guardians for the persons of
minors, the most paramount consideration for the Judge
ought to be what order, under the circumstances of the case,
y.rould be best for securing the welfare and. happiness of the
minor. With whom will tliey be happy? Who is the most
likely to contribute to their well-being and look after their
health and comfort? Indeed the question of true welfare
of the minor is of such paramount consideration that the
law to which the minor is subject must, if necessary, be
assigned a relatively subordinate position."
<" "' C:::: <" C:::: C' 0 C'O \ C' 0 C' C'
moo:oor~G~?G:Gp:GeP~ rn1cr~~ orooo:rn:n2n .
(~ (1947) R.L:R. 70. (3) (x8) C.W. N. (Iaoo).
(4) I.L.R. 32 Bom. zso (1907).
12
" ,lrc.ou:cyxccccol;-~&t'l
...
.) .) 0
8'
, , " c.oeo
oeooee--ooo:o 0 ;J

, g:e-:c.u:ccoo"o
.) .)
0
L
"'
o, , ,CIJCOC.Oilfl
, ngc.ow--oeooec
,)
,
.:J O.) .) .) .) 0 0 ,) 0 00
u 11 J
ftecoe.ccoo~all
.:>
S.DIOd:nl M.V'l VW'tiOCCI 8L.l

B~A LAVV REPORTS 179
11 CCcc<lir:J d;;l:cco:::>b<li CJDG<liht
.J .J~ .J;j .J e" .,:.,j
lr v.
::::c ]~coe ccro 1~
~
1r "fl<li 1v 1111 v 1
oco~ :co::>co 1
c.c.oco :re 1 1 1
os-co: w 1W::>e::>o
.:> .)
,
0
ee ee wcow flfl
1
.)
1
.J
":"')
.)
lcccc:::>cA~:::>e:::>cee>

0
::>co cc
cb10
0 0
":"')
11 ccccoco~
.J
[ Oo 1
w:::>c
0 .J
].JO
~
00 0 ,J 0 00 ,J ,J ,J ,J ,J 0 ,J 0 0 .)
ed:: ~hl~~es &:!cceb w::>ce~:::>e::>ce~ 1~hlccw(l, !S<li c.uccc~:x.es~ga
o.:> .:>~ .:> .:> .J .J .:>~ .:> o ~ .:> .:> e
':"J ~,, J~ 11 1r ~:-r 1 n o
11 ccccewro w: cc:rnco:coes occco w:clf'lWOOe.GWleeB lOWCOeB
.:> o.:> e o o .:> .:> l...:>
, v , lr 1 oil ':":l ,
u~gesoco COLO~fl :5e??socc
cc nscccLoso~ ff
:cl;co~
.:>
wcoto
o .J
~ccc~::>cro~:a~~:l e ccc~l; :::>&:>wcoee ::>&>oh:.es C2e
::f.:> .:> e.:> l.. o .:> .:> oo .:> .:> .:>
wMhl wreco WC~:::l :C2mecbe (ll(llffi 8hl:erw oro:[!, liCCCCCeCDOO CniO
,J O.J :_j .J .:> .J .J o .J .J ~ .J o 0 .:> ,J ,J l,;
CCfl :~;,ecoe h.Jcocc 11a:!cciowtteb :hlS.rowch,l~ ::,'Rcc;ro~ e:::>te~:a
0 .) 0 .) 0 .) .) l, ,J 0 0 e~b .) . ~ ,J ~ .) 0 .) .) l, e
:ces:::>b :ccro::>&:>cb:oe>c.oPe::,chl~::::>k:lee:or:J w::::ch,l~k lloe>l;e
.:> .:> .J .:> .J ~ 0 .J:::JO ,J "'J 0 ,J ~ ,J 0
cob :,~be l:cesccc~oc.ese>:2 C2cc:ob woeocoh.J oce~oeocee>

.:> .J 1, .:> .J e .J .J .>o .:> o .:> .J .J
s.L~Odffil M.v1 vw~ng 08l

BYRMA LAW REPORTS 181
. .
11 c.u~e:<hcoe&eo
.)
II
u2ccwc.bl~;:at:~
.) .) :.J .)0 :@ro2cc:,.JJ,...CL>OS
.> :> .)'~.)
I:CLJ(\)c.oce
'$".) .)
12cckclxo
.) 0
~'&a. 'leecc.cc~J<o~ ~g:::f~:c.~co~ ~~ F~~~ .?~

u@cccoc.l:l~1j:at:e
.) .) ~ ~0
edxec.oce
.) .)
o~colbxc
.) .) 0
:c.Pcoc.co:-J
!:)
::x.~:-JcoCoa
.) :::::1 .)
h>
O
~<:c1~!>
.., ..,
cokdx.oe~
0
l:@roc.ccooecoro
.) .) \. ..)
~:,....,~:xo
~.,)
'co:c.rcoc.co!l
s l:l e e
:> 0 0
u$t!ccsoc.e~:S'g1, StJcc:~~s-.o ac.co

~~A:ta:ob
.) .>O .>
ueecc.cc~"J(JA!:,e
\, ~ .>
coa:~A
..>O
1bec :J!:1~ I~COCCo(bll
o.::J.> ucoroc.otl:'l:e
l'!Cb
.) .l :J
.>
u@ccro~kco~
., o,) ::x.~!lekcec.~:-J:ct:il~c.ec:-JGCO
.) ~ ,o~ , .):::::~ ~ .) j 1.)~o]hlco
,) (rJ
~~$()ccg:: 'co$t!cc$!'toA:c.Fcoe n_rc.J!I~~SOco ~SO[,SXX> 'co:c.~co~ ~~~

o&>ro'lit lf!cb4&:llrco
.) .) .l
coto:cbco
0
e~ lcb4eC'lW
o .)0
o~WIO!I:lQCO~:'Jt'IW
.) .):.J .)O
2Gb:c.&'b
.> \.
:c.Pcoc.coe
s ;:;:lcceoo.Je:~e
s.... 00 .) 0
c.cce~o'11.
\..l
'co;:;:lcclo!:lrco:eoe
~""' ~,) .)0
:c.ece
00
~'~ co~:cbco
0~
e'l.'ow

0
II<PCO
0
~c.ohocxX:o:c}coc.rn~tJ
'3'.) .) ~ - ;) ,) :~c.occ..o>CJ,
f!cb o:J., ~:eoe
.) 0
r
::>'tg
.)
1f 11 _1_
fteCOWCOO.Q>CG
0 ;)
SL)!Odffil .M.V1 Ymn9: Z8l

........i
8[ S.UIOdffi:l M V1 VV'rnfiH
-t84
o r
:)lg
.)
" r ,. '' IV
::xowc.A~"~cooco:goo:c:
., "cc:wco _1 ___ r
o~oc.f!$@:
2 : ~"cc:o:Jco
J_
.>.> O.>.>eo .>.> e6
$81 S.DIOdtru M V1 VW?IOH

SJ.-aOdffii M V1 VW1IfUI 981
I.
L.8l
C" C" '10 C" OC" C" C" o C" ~C" f:C" C" o.
oeli:J ClJro(:)p~~::: ot5J:D~:ldD:{C: romcom~o~:'P rr.;Jt:~:e:tio:n~2Gtrot rr.;J~Q
c o o c- c- . c- c- c- o c- c- c-
<: <:
~;a:x:~:ooc ro;;p:?:{~p:~:n2 G~'JC:::D2G'PC::D~ O()):D'J::J{: CO'JGO)-:>C::n~qc
.
"c-
t~ G:D:Dll G~'Jc:::D:nro:n:
C" 0 C" C" ~
Gmmro'Ja 0
Gem~ G~-:>cro.s:rocmw
C" C" C" @: cc:roo- C"
c.:- C -l .:1 6 lll.. 6T 1\.. -( ol
~~;co'J8~ e o r,; c- ~ c- 9 o c- ( or,; ) c- o ~ c- o c-
J;':C" O C' ? e:o::\(_: tfrop:Gt:j'J::.:: 2:2~: (I)Ltf0Cf ro ~C"00t91 1 :nmG:DQ~ ~c..
C'Jf.a':l~CC II
C"
oro:nm91 mElc:tlo22:m
C" ~ ~C" r,;:c- g
G~-:>c~;>:rocm
C" C" C"
ro-:> q
l :op~Gt:j-:>c:t
r.;:;::: C"
~ ~c
C"
c- c- c- r,; o ( or,;~"') o c- o ~ c- c- ( or,: )

G~':>CCDCC)>f~ ~139
CJ?t.ffi ~ro<X1.91' G~':>CG9d")C9 O{tj() C\{tf\3
C" o C"OC" '1 C"9
J
0 0
LG
C"
6T
C" C" l
0) :D:'DG;x>Q 0 (I):'D~OG I O')~~O)I <X>:TI()) G(;)")CCX>.S:O)C (I)')C ::n-:>: :t:
L J 6
f9
r,:;::: GJ,; C" C" g 9 C" o C" 0 r,:;::: C" 0 C" ~
~p:~ej?:JC1rGU::D2~ rr.;J:n::n: GCQ':>O)Q~O)~t:j:D~ 8;l0i_C:1 Odt'il_Cl.
o "(' C" C" C" o, C"'C" C"
roro:ro~r'):rr.;JGOI
-r L u I G~':>C:::D:TI
. c.:. G:Dro::n:n
t a Od(X)O)
o
0 0
Qd~O)
Jt. t
Oo:>CQ
o
c: 0GOJ
C"
0)211
:D1.OC"
ti)Q0)")11 (.l)Q:Jd~O)C
C" C" o 0
Grr.;J")0)Cl:()::t1')Cl())9?::n 3: 0 C" OC"
OOo:>:TIOdCDC:.
~ -J l Jl 6 ll C:. J1 1\.. L ~ l
C" C" C" C" C" ~ C"J,; C" C" 0
G:DO?t G~'JC:::D2 Go:><X1.~9:D21ic. U<X>:Dffi9) ~Jffii3Co:>O)Go:> C'i_W~5jl
0
rr.;JO)QOXO:CO~I')grr.;JG<JI
tt -r 1. u
"(' C" 0 \
cc:o:>GO:Q:D:1.1
1 \.. u
C"
G 'JCco QIO)~
u u
C" "(' C"
I "):GO I o:>') (;)()):TI
It c:.
\ 0 '~ C" r,:: C" C" 0 _c;: r,;: C" C" C" " 0 C" 0
rot;p:~<X1.~EJc:tloGo:n~ u Odtl;(:;):::D'P:colyp:r:uGtl -:>::: QJro~p:~c Ul<jl:D~ 0
OC" C" r,;:c- C" 0 C" 0 C" f,~ r,:<" C"

rr.;Jqc: ro.QJC:tlo2G;>ml 9c:O?t. om:::DL:Go:>-:>c:t1:tffroro:>G:n0ifro Od9m
OC"~ ctro<.DQcnco:m~r':>:ro
ll @
'1 0 C' C' C" o C" C" o 0 .
Y: : Gt:mca t. : 1
Gem6 L
G~:>cro.s:o:>cco~
AT J
.s<.D:::o'J:o:>
T IL 6 o u. -- -r - l U
.
~Gmt
tJ T
.soC"C"@ 0
l PC t:l
C'
o : roG.s:1.1roct G:no:>m:>:
IL
C"
G~-:>cro.s:rocroco ~c
AT
C" C" 0
J J o
C" 0 C"
:n-:>:ro:roomt
o L -r
c- c- [9 o '1 c- c- r,:;::: c- r c- c- '1 o-
G~'JCG1>')'6~?C()) B o:~:<r 91 :~:::0G1>'J"~Go:Gt:j:>c:G~'J::;, :;)Jo:>otoo:>'J:(;)p:ml
C" C" r,:c- C" C" 0 C" C' o. r,;: C"
rocpo;;~q tjCO:DffiG:D rr.;lG(X)')())rr.;JOO'):(;)p: COLGCI)')())Grr.;J')C ~Gf:Dtlq
o 0 f: C" C' C" C" '1 ' 0 C" C" OC" C'
Sdtl[<lmt;p:cq~p:ro Gtl:>q QJffi~') (;)~.pm.potn 9 ro'P~~p:2e:o-r:~ooro
C" C" 0 C" C" OC" ') C" C" OC" C" C"
o:> ce cc:m:ncGu::n:umo:>c:
l ol G L
G0:9Ut:x>:no:>
G l
o:>:;)~ au:n~:G:n:>ro:n:
t. J 1J C.
o c- c-., r c- c- o c- c- c-
~:Go:>')~ CD:T.>:JQO) Gi{g')C Ql())~l-:>:~::> rr.;JCQ!JdG(OI')O) ~.SO).SO'JGO::;):xl:TI
' c
I! J l:l o, U tJ J L U JT T A . o ~
r,;: c c- r,:: c- " "or,~ o o
Gti')~QJrn<>p:tlo:n2~ (I)(J):;)tj:t rr.;J~Qro'P:CI{~J'J:roGOI ~C:CJ?t.GO:~:D~
'T' c- o , c-
r,:: c- c- r,:c o r,:c- C'G i:, c
GB")~QJffi(:)p:~9 tj1>~G<]t~ l.j08C1DD'JC~G(I):D211
o c- o c o c- c- . c- o c-
~mqm <.D~Sd<ft:;)f,_~p:~c mgro~e:o~:'1t<:f:>l o:>roGo:>:;)QJ<"OOp:
. 0 ' C" r,;: C" C" r,:c- . C' C" ~
m91 Sdtl;(Cl:::D'P:~~p:Gu:~:n~ Gtl")~QJo:>~p:~~ltjCO ~G<.))')OffiC:5JC:91 .
C" 0 0 C" C" C" \~ CoOC" C" C C" C"
q~:~mcqrr.;JGropro 'ffrof~'J~o:~Sl 20G~m9 C0()')Q~Co:>~G[9-:>SQJffi
c- c- c- r,;:c c- . c- c- c- c c~ ~ o
~p:9o:>-~90X>:; tl~GO:D211 qc:roQJro~s_ OOJXo:>BJSdtl;(Qo:>'P:cq~p:
'9
Get:e:o:>G~l
Jl 6
"('
G ')Uio:>:n(J)
C.:, l
'1
OOo:>OOo:>:TI
6 l U.,
C"
OOGOO:G:D'J :x>1L
C" 0 C" C" g :e:o:>mm:.$,CG C' 0
t J o
C"
or,: . . .) o <:! c- c- o c- c- c-
e:::r.xz .
Q . (
Clltt~O?I ~j CJ?t.l:ll~ffiQJo:>~
9
000GO~f:Af~0 9 Go~ 2 11
C' C'
CjC:
O:>~G:n~J;:e) ~ch~:;,)joSro~ufm1t~f9:~p:~')~ 9roer~:e:G~?f~~
0~ r,~ ' A;
Q
e:::r.n~~
(
cqt:J<>OI J9) 0 '
O?tG~:")XI)?t:J: 9c:O?tm 'J::ld'P~I;)p:an: l Of1~9J
0 \ 0 Q
"T' "T' oC'

8;1 ~KD'.J;;01 GOI G~?C
' C' C' ,,....,
:4>?:D4>~!4>~GOO!QI::IC! !Oo:>::::O~?OOCC'I?!G()::::O:"Il II
r C' C' ,.
11. L L L vO Ul C:. J Jl C:.
O C'O C' "T' 'l" C 0
::D
IL BC' 0
~2 :o:>:::r.>:m:o:-n~
C' C'~ \
L
C'
C
C' C'
rod:U
JL
IJGOI -GOI
C' 0
G~? C
C'
8;1())QO)CI'">:mgJ'):0q')!
C'
It -1.T
-;o:;>::n::::o:J.>roc:
0\C' OC'
U
.g:n))4>DGro:Q::n::::o~:: oro::::o:n~ oo:noororoc rooxnm

G Ol 0 C:.J 0 ;:"J 4 f. ~[ 6 L0 G. l
o 0 0 C'OC' 'l" C' C' C' 0 C' C' 0 0
8;1())0l:JJ::O::O~JJ!8;1?~
ll l.- L U
o:>:x>JCOJ?CI GOI
l L J
C'ICI:>G())?C:::r.>:H~C!O)(J)O)C'IC
l ll ol L -1
o:o
1! 11
o~6~ G:>Go[s:>:ro2: roCft~O?'f>:~roGoT9l~~:>:~?Go1~ BfGB?
C' C' C'. A; C' C' "f~C' C' C' ' 'l C' 'l C' .,... C' '
OJ~~CI OO:.>"==9J0f0l'JC ~Q)(j"==!QJg:o:>:>~::;f~OI:>lJCOfg~IJ G~l Go:>?COJ~:
C'OC' C'
4>~COO:.O(J) G
?ro"==o:>?l
0 o'
8;1:DQo:>::OlOJ~JI')!())
0
G~l
'l"
G
?G6 ?C!COo:>OO C' C' 0
[ L LJ IL -[ L IJ A l
G;:C' 0 0 ~ 'l" C' r,; Of:::C' OC' Q (
co:>:OJtlS' cxp?t~eJ:roGoJ 9f Gt:POXft:JC:'j?l m?..'lJlJl{croe: person
) f};? C' C' A; C' r,: C' C' A; C'
tn authonty o:>l t:JI;)!GOlJ?:-D9JO:>~())I [j?:Go:>?C: G~!GOO?C9JO:>O:><j>
0 c C'
Cl:{G~?c. OlJo:>:Y.l'JCft~t:Jc:
C' 0 'f.::" r.:" r,::;:: C' 0
[j4>GfGe:1?C!G~Gf9('1)?!1
C' r;;:
9C:G[j?o:>Qjo:>~Jul:
C' C' .<il
C' C' r,:c- C' oOC' 'l C' 0 C' 0 G C'C'
OJ~o:>roG::DQ:Jd[j4>1 OJ:"DOll>2!4> ?:~CO I;)) :0?~ :;q ))~ :T.>L 04>4>9 GOIJ~ II
C'
C' OC'
OJ:DOOCO)::::O:))()JGO)Q 20G$o$g
LCi.
C' C'
1.
J9 J
C' ')
IJ'JG8;1?()JOI:T.>a:>C: 4>GOo:>p:> II
OC'C'
l -
C'
" A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant

in a criminal proceeding, if t:Qe making of the confession
appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement,
threat or promise, having referrence to the charge against
the accused person proceeding from a person in authority
and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused
person grounds which would appear to him responsible for
~upposing that by making it he would gain any adventage
or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to ~e
proceedings against him."
C' 'l C' 'l OC' 0 C' ~ c- ~ C' 'l c-
8;1:J:):J.):.Jfl<t39()1 Od'JCO?JLS:;;q~~C ~')~t:J:gp~ro~: 8;1tjl~OCIOIOC
r,:::;:: C' 0 C' C'~C' ~ C' C' r,:::;:: C' C' (' . . C'
Gt:jx::cq ~OlCGr~d?(Dt::JfiJ'Jt:J~~:~~OlJ[OO) Cel':>OJC ;q ~9cem~
Q C' o C' C' 'l OC' ~ 0 C'
( 0) <09C<Xl~~C G8;1?:x>018d9_C! t:J~OO?:GOJ::D~II
" The thuayi or headman uf a village is a person in

authority within the zneaning of section 24 of the evidence
Act. Therefore, the confession . made by an accused to ~e
thuayi on l:!eing sent for h;, him after he was told that he
would not be punished if he had not taken part in the
offence, is irrelevant and inadmissible in evidence, as what
the thuayi told the accused was an in4ucement to make a
stateinent." .
( o) 15, Criminal Law Journal, page 68x.
190 BURMA LAW REPOR TS [1965
o3r.droro-5
LJ o
U)alro<~ro8
L Jl C.
romQaxn:ngQI'):o:>~o:>~:cx5
ll - --[ -l. \.1 C.:. IL~
GoTr;;Gr;-:')~L'?:
l.j \j Ltf
c c ~ c o_ <: r;;: c c c c " " c
G,j>')roGt~CI oxp:~u:G~ 9c:~~Gtl')SalJW o:>roGo:>alro';lro 2 T~
" " o ' or;;: c c c c c
O?._G0:~9:TI'); I (X)LG!j')C QJ('I)r.dp::x>i:!l :x:l())GOJQ20GS<{S'd J"l 009
o
~ 0
c o c A; co c oc c r,;: c c c c cr,:: C
O)('))GOJQOCSJ CI)('))Qq)e:a)'):~Co:>~ G!j')~ QJ<"Dr.dJ')g 0{(1)~Jqro e1JCe!C
c c c c c c A; 'l c OG c r,:r;-:c' c C'
'JGOQI:!Il 9c:roQJro,soro:x>ro9Jt OI'JQ rocr.dlfm9c:Dlt1c~::n~ q)~g?<X[ro
C o C C C' C C C C' 'l OC' 1,; 0
::nroGo:JQ20GSq)?~o qs~=> JO ~c:roc:alJro~:>p:~c Gro')roo1roqc: t:l~
' c
~GCI)o:li:! II
" When once the existence of improper inducement,

threat or promise h.as been established so as to bring the
case within the provisions of section 24, there is a presump
tion 9f its continuance, and it is the duty of the prosecution
to satisfy the Court that the impression caused by the original
inducement, threat or promise was i;ully removed when the
prisoner q1ade the confesSion. If an accused person makes
a confession in consequence of an inducement and the con
fession is repeated before a Magistrate after due warning,
the ~onfessipn Will be !uadm.iSsible .if the iinpression cailsed
by the original-inducement had not disappeared at the time
the confession was repeated before 'the MagiStrate.
"It must be recognised by everybody, and Judges musj
never allow themselves to loss sight of the fact, that what
ever other incidents may Iollow, an incident of this kind
. is a continuing offer."
(J) 18, Criminal Law Journal, page 1o6.

t6l S~~Od'tl1 M.V1 VW)Iflg
. .
uw~cse:cb<.oemro
~
uwCocsro:<h<.oe&es
~ 0
II<'Oigewlll')
~ ... 0 :,- "
~ec.cceco~rebcoc
.) 0 0,
-:::lCIC.
~::3
oowd~e
.) :o&wro
.) 11 ;,t-ec.cce
;J
c.o~re i3wc.....:..:ol:loc.oee:oe
.) 0 .)~.)
twebw-
.)
((;~c) .,)ohw
0
oeo2cuw
,)
COCCif'lW:@ceoc.W
.) .). ~
S.DIO&ni M.V1 VW~fHI Z6l

I
11 ?cc~~~rco
to<'~ft @cctr @cd~ro lbe.t?:dftcb:~Q:~c~~'&n
1
Coftft b.:cobc:cbco
0 c:..o 0 .) c 0 00 .) 0 .) .):::J.) ~
11 C2cccoroco~Pe~ ~bco~:ee :c.G:2<Y ~"C\X(.)Ce 1bro

.) .) o .) .>o .) .) :~ .) rr .)
Goo2 ohx.oPe:ccoa.x:.rro~
.> .>
~ro:cbcoe~
:'fo
:!1l
.wr0010 16~\>,.Qft ~'JIJ
1 .> 'r.>o:>'::J .> ~
$.>
cc~ftW<:.ccdPe:~ro~
.) 0 .)0 .) .)
1 .)::J
5c::loc:cc~~<"
0
:~~&x.Pcoococcw..co:@G
.>:::J.) .) .) .) .)
IX~OCCC~
.)~
:=Ceo::ro ;;)~ c~cccc:co:xocrro~
~:>:!.> .) .)
~~b
.) .>
be ox.oO~
.)~
IG~~
.)
r ;;)~~c 1bro(r)cc :cc~
.)
of' ~fte.G8~12:to~Pcoft:cbco
.)0 .)
ICOto:cbcoe&eG
0
l~ccoc::l~oo.:b tJr C\JCOft IO~e r ~tJc C~~~ CCC~co~re br..oG~fte.G

3':1 .>:1 " .> " .::1 .> e e.>o
la.cco~co&:cbco~co o~eroro l&.occcoo Mba.mto l:ccroccc~oc::l
.> .> .> .> ~ .> .> .> e eo .> .> .> ::J
~ewb
.>
~c
;;)
o:.b1o 1 ~00~
el- v..,
10~e
.>
ilCtJc c~S.~ ccc~coMeba..m
.>
~&>~10
e e .> '$
II [li"J1
:~~
'""'ll
88 aih~d 'stupl!Ji\I 9l6l ~TV
)TI hJ
~cc:coo~l~:":5ro:5o ~co
11' 0
11 :>c~~:>etd
.> .;, 0
(86SZ d 'IOA 'lOV UO!ll!l!W!'J uo s~p~tu~~o~ ~TV].
M
.> OOJ. r o L -. sflroco:l;,emeG
of. 1r 11 ,, ~ L
11 :ocIe.o6>, s-~ccc~COI"!Ie~c 1~ roe~ecoes 1b<ll S"::~
1 ,,
:)GCC :>f!~ .) .>...J .) e e .>0 o o .) '\0 .)
.;, .)
rnL- .. 11 ,, rr.~r ,, r'::l 1"1. r~L- : .
(le~) CCC:"COftle~G !l:'C\)fta.>C03~ ::>tCUeceecoes ICC'1U.:CC<:eS'OCCC:"GOfl!e~G
, .> e e .> .> \o .> o .> e e
::>6CCX~e>
.> .;, ucccc:c.oo:~c5hl~b:coococlro~
.> .> ~.> .>
:Y...oecro
.J
s:~ Moccce;co~Pebc.us
::J .> e e
1*b'JIJ
.> ~
Cstlc ~bccee;:ooPco<llbroW;e;bws 1:Xo C0c chwcoo2coes cocc:ftW:c2G
.> .> .> o e e .> .>o .> .> .> .>
61 S.DIOd:ni /lAV1 VJAruflH [5961.

11
.) . .
cu&>ese:dsc.oe&es
II 11 cu&es
.)
l-o:dsc.oe&es
0
* (e:Cbcoe&w)
o o
oo~c~4bl~ocoo~@hl
o.)O .)~.) .)~
~
.)
SL1IOdffii M V1 vmna: t61

B~ LAVV REPORTS 195
S1.1IOdffii M.Y1 YW'tlflij 96l
.1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 197
c: 0 c: r,: c: c: c: c: (' c: c: -- r,~
~<O ~~CG::D?I (:lt:Jcqoxp3 O)Jil:~.yro~CI o:>Jjt=~r~::x>~ .8Jt:Jo:l<04) ~:>e~~
r,:c: c: (' r,;: c: ('
s:lt!Q>~o:l<Oo:>~~::x>? tlQ>GO::x>~ II (;Q~o ( (;QT)
o o "'C C' c c: C' L'?C'
~
C: C: Q (: ' 0 C: C: C C: C:
m
C:..l
Sd(:l~l(:lQ>.s:oc:u
Jt.c. T -r
Q>OOO\Im&c
A t. tJ J o
oo:>o.s:rorc::x>mG::x>OlOlrm
T tJ 0
o:>o:>GOIC:0o
-~ l
O>f!tM.c
r,::;::: (' C' c ' 0 c: oc C' c c: c c: .\C
~et~ro~c 1 qc:06 OX[::x>etmo:>lc: 1 G(:l:>com qc:m:>: mJ ll:~.y::n~~l\(009r
J
;:8~?8o
0 c OOG
::D'Xl::D=xlll
- J] C,
0
1.
6 (' c:
XI G(:lJCOSJGOI 'T' c: OOCO?:GO:>'!;OO?:
Q>(:l
J\. Jl
c:
AJo
0
L

:m0 roo:>=n('~
~L
8 ~'f' 0{''
oflniCOI
c: r,:c c: c r,:c: c: oc: c: c: o " r,::;::: c:
::x>~ II 8Jt!Q>SOO::x>~ [jQ>~~q *C:Q>:x:qjC (:lp:::x>~<J? (:lOX[::D? II CQGt:j ~I
r,:c: c: o c: '"I c r,::;::: c: r,:c o c: o c c:
SJt!Q>SOOCJ.tOOe?,: G00~1GOJ9r SJGt:}?C: (:lt:JC il 8Jq(Ol<"Xf OOOO<XfO)::D~ II .
u(c) :h"Jhl.o:2n
~0 0 0
( &be:c.oocuc ISJ~~b:xe:::>hl)
0 .) .J .) .)~
:::>:::>~C<"~Q~:xco~cchl
0 .J 'j .)
.)0 .) :_j
usub
ar ro~c;.,
M: J
~~ile !
~l'B:Odffil M'f1 v:rnma 861

200 BURMA LAW REPORTS [!965
o~(i~
m (' (' 0 (' (' (' (' 0 J:":' '1
&;.fOJ~yG-fOJ?~ OJQCO)'jffil 'QX}ffiffi 91)(1)"JGOYJ GI.':JO:;QO)OOI
Q Q coOo:lJ"JQdfc ~
- ) o c c Q c-r;::;: cr;::: c o c ~ r;::;: c

Q~o~?8GOJ~"l <:lOO ar_ ~O)GOG'f'C:~w;p :;Q~"J4)Ct:jOJL:JC:~1) Gy")ffiffidGyGt:j:>C:I
c- o "~ c ~ r,:c \ co c c ~ c ~ c o
c- i~ c- 4)"J:~:Ojl0J :>:""'tjiffi9J t:1f(l)()) (I)())Q9yro:>Oy~9J G'PC:QJ GO:Gy'!Ge:J :>c:~
r,:~<;OO'XII> G co c o oc- c- c- c IR c- c cr,;:c- cr;::;:
~~ ~c- . ~ ffi4)9CQCD:>:OJ~ II ~mqc: :;om~09f ~-fO:>GyGf>OJ:>ffi *O)r::JC:t?if'e1"J:
t:lf(ol?'tCC I J;;: c Q 0 C C C r C J;;: C" ') C c- C Q C" 0
OJr::JCil :;o0J"::>:O? :;Q())(I)())G~C:QJSC: fj4)()10J~Gt GG"JCGOJ:>c:9m ~m<>q
C C~ 00 r: C" C" 0 C C" G 0 (' ~
OJ~ II ffiffiill9J ~~mi.':Jrom~:95J'Jf8d~()) G9G*:G'f'W9J :;o~J :>:ar_
c (' 0 (' 0\ 0 c- c 0 ~ cc
G'f'C:QJOJ~~C\j]CI ~If?~ 0yG<j>OJ:>Sd:>: SdGe:J:>c:1:3:>:9f 01JGQJ II.
o GG '1 o c <:
CD:;oo()lffi
c c- oc- <: c c '1
cc:~JIGQO)C0<.9CI :;QC~IISd :>:Sd0CDG:(JI")g()) <.9COIOJ:Yl II c.9CGOJ'J
c- c
L L-1 !lie. 6o L JL U Ao C.:, Ao
')(" c- Q c c- 0 c ~ c- 0 '1 ('
SdQI~~g OO~"JSd<f.GG())"JC:I SdG'f'CGG())'JC:Geec: G<?1)901:::0~11
0 r;::;: c- Q (' c r,;: c '1 c- r:::
c c 0
q(Gt:j:>q $d4)9CQL:JC:(94)010J~<J.(ro~: ~m<>qOJ~ II qc:mGOI OJ())GOJ-
c- c ,..,., c
c C C C C o OC" C \ J;;: C"

Oiffi.J~:>:Go:>:> OO~Oo:>G:>:Gp:o:>~ <jC:mG<j>G<j>OJ :>00 <J?Crof:~:::ofjq
c '1 c c- c-oc- c o ~ c c- 'T' c
GfGyOJ:>ffi ~~:O IOJ~II G0"JC~'f.4)f0:>~1 ~G~"J~ qc:mGOI SdGJm
'1 c- c- cr;::;:c- c- c- c- c c- c- c
00-:>:oro:>~ll GG"JCGOO"JCt:j~OJ~ 3d9ffiGOJ'J())OJ2tSd~()) qc:~~4)())')g_
r,; '1 c cr c c c o '1 c-
Gt:1:>9~:010J~ 4)0J~j9~CO~: Oiffi~OIOJ211 .,
0 C' 0 c c . 0
CX)())OJ
\ 0
GG())'JC:GOJ'J:;QGI-:>:
C' Q C' ~
.SQ
c
mro:o:>roQuOOJCOJ:Ylm~G-::>1
(L 0 C!.. - C!) J l. 0 OL u 14 OJ:D
(.!;
~ C' C' (' 0 0 r:::
0 <: C' r,;: r.<?
BJQ.]yGCO:>m~ SdL:J:>:GOJ:> 0-<.J-()) OOGt::JQ~'J:~:~CGJ -:>:mco2: G~i:Jil!M I
r:::
c- o C' o or;:;: G '1 C' c c Q c- r,; c- \ \
GopG.yop~ qc:~9~uGo:>-:> oo1Gp:qc cnetro:>:OJ~ :;o0p::::o2 t:14)~ ~
(' o C' ~ (' Q C'O C' Q Q C' 0 (" ( ) ( )
~~ mr.GG())'JC:Gt:j'JC: Sd4)9CQCD'J:OJ~~0? OJ())GOJQ~O) .J ~ \)
0 C' C 0 C" 00 C" C' C'OO C' 00
mcnqcco~; G<?~9:::0211 <Xf:;o0p::::o23 GG'JCGOJ:>.c:9~ffil <jC:~95)GOJ?
Q ')
OOIGQ
\~ C Q
(X)O)GOGOJ"J 0001 'J:GmO)J O):;QC4)0J o:>: ::>:CDO)GO:QGOJ'J 0)001
C' OC"Q 0 Q C' \ Q ')
J .) L U -1. L oL l o
C'G '1 c o G r,;:cc:;: c
~4)001 4)0J2~~ OOGJ?:i:J4)U0J211
(' c Q 0 .<: 0 C' (' C' Q 0 ')

CDO)GOGroc:QIGOJ'J ID.S0.S'J01')g()) GIO)Gt)$
G0'JCGOJ'JC:QO)~QOC0
-1 LLL J T U T IL T U L L
o o c . C o ' c- c- c- c o c c
~:OJ OOGQO;Q,s 0G4):XOI 4)4)G:;o:QI())O)C .O)OCOC:~'J CIJ4)'Jg0JgQ.s SdOJC
U ol lT oL -r U A L ~ ll &. -IT o
C" C' C" C" C' C C' Q OC' C' C' .
ffiO)~ OJ~GCOJ '?GOJ:G::n'JCO~:I ffiJyroctCOC:~'J :;o jO <;p~C~f;1~ G') 00
OC" C' C' 0 C' Q C' o C C'~ C'
. ~tc~y8G'f>Gpoo'J:::n2o:;> GC],?')OJ~ 8J4)')C~OJ2:; II 8Jffiill9J o:>mGo:>
c
GG'JCGSd'JC :YJ.l;\C
'
c c . c c- oc o
GG?CCD.S:4).SO)
o ' o o c o
C.:, J o AT T oL G 'JOOo:>m::n
l o - ol.
GQG~:rom:~'J ~4)rD:4)?
-1 ~ l J -1.
C'O C" C'Q 0 C" Q ' ) \ 0 C' c- C' C"
4)0J~o:;> GG"JCGOJ'Jc:9m Oo:lJ'J 000 OC. 00100~?" 002t~C:G'f'o:JOOJ2_
0 C" ~ OC' C' C" OC" C' r,;:c- C' \ C" C'
~cr ro JO 'P~c~.y:'~ G9 oo q>~c~.y:r::JQ)9r Qme::::o211
C"'l r;::;:c c o c c <:- cG 'T'

s:J(X)())OI 8dGe:i'JC:OO~JCOOJ:>:q GCD'Jffif.JC\j]C I G0'JCGOJ'JC:')SdGO I
~c c o r;::c . c ~cr;:::c c <:- C'A; t:
t:1~roc~p:Gmro?:L:lc::::o2 mG~x:t::lc:'f'GJ?:'q OOCOJ2.:9! ~:>:~c:.
1 <1
II:~~~ I~ CC00~11
G "' 11 rr 11
ucocoescc:ccococlcoego13ooeo
.) .) .) .) .)
g
u:c\;oco6-
.)
@ro:oi:Jcolbc.cee>wcble~cococ.co
.> .J~.> .> .:> ~
c.cce>M::>ceoP oc.e.ce>cocooe>be:oe>O>p,..,
e.> .>~ .) .>
co&,es
.>~_. ::>
:oi:J:chl&bJ@oo~
.>:::J ~..l .:> .><:> ibes:cPC'lcoooesc.<.lees
~ ;:,
ro~esl!n
li ~
u@roobbO>:ceeoo
.> .>o.> e .>
cco::xo
.)
.
coPe~
.> \
r!G:Xo roe l:o@ro.&>:11Pco
~.,) u.; ..) .)
lu~c.oo~cb
0 .,)
~reescroecoc.blecococco
t.; .) ~
cocb6-

cd:o "@ccb&roecoro
00 .) ..)
:cl;ecocoes
.)
:@oow:c.rl'l;~&:llrco
.) 0 .,)
cocblecococc.uc<ee<-
.) ~.
l::;t:lcol;occeeoceohl
.r:J, .) oc.enecocbe>tc:w:~O<:ee.c:oi:J~&,:liPco
.) "~ .> .) 0 -t.,; f).) .):::1.>
IOPescode>C'l
.)~
ccce>:fucoO>
..) 0
4b~ro:llrco
.).)
w~c.ooO>cb e:lP~&o~cb
0.) .)~.)
c.roe:ccoococoPe~cou
.) .) \
uoorec.olJ:k
.) .> :I
u@ccooeoob
.) .) 0
ecoc.coe
o.)
co:~i:bcbcoo\;coO>
e':j ,J.)
h>~bc.uP{)coo
O.>.).)
cb:ccococ.l6e
.)
"l:cco:~&:cbcool;c.uO>.
oee.::J .>.>
~booP{)coowcoPe~ u@cceocowre~ bQ~cO(;~"I:Ch:> ooc.coe:P, c.cce:ceeoo~es ,!i;ce&,.
..) .) .:> 0 .) '\ .> \.) ,J \ . ) ::l ..) ~0 0 .,) .> ~
to~ccco~~
.., .J
4b:clJ~lo@oo~oo:c.do&coo
~ .> ~.J ..> .>o o .>
1cboco:~
.>
!Gb<oew:da:cccfles
~ o '
o~:c.cc
.>
wo
0
Jch~ec.l;wb
.)
tol'le.Gw:ob JISO>Q&tocbe
\. 0 .)0 :)- .) 'S'.>:J .) :oc.Pee&wo
.) .) ,~d!c:crowclb:>e>
)..... .)
r
:)lg
.)
ii965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 203
' c c r.::c o c c c 'l c c. c c c c c
~QJ())O)COO?!~C!<"q OUX9Jro:D~Oto:>~~ GOO?());;lO)C~C:o:>~ll 'J<j>OOC oeG:'l
('
roc:~~ Oro~GQJ?C!
(' (' C' r.:
G9?C!Oji~OJ~
(' -~ C' ._<;, 0 (' 0
CJC!~ OOG'q '\~'tO)())G'Pro~'JG<!
' ' (' ('
q~co~~:
. 'l ('
GO)?OOQt~
('
oroo:>?!~C
(' '
OOG:D?!<:lt?:ro
0
GO)Q
06
QO):'nll
C' 0 0
OO:DGO)ClO) Co
0 (' . ('
;q
tJ J o lJ L 06 J1 -l C.:, L ot,. o,a Jl
c c c
9.yoocroc:o:>fE oro~GQJ?C!<:lJ?! cqoGo:>?OOQtg
c c c c 'ic c
omo:>?!<"qo:>'JG~:t ooCJ
o ' ~Ga>'-'a~
f.:C' QC
:D'J:Ot
'l ~
Gill OOO:D:'n II
c (' OOG
0 'JCc QU):DO)OO'J!
c 0 0
C\)(JO):'L>C\):'n
c C' C'
'):o:>:"n II
c c:Jflol':>~C'CH
-[ I. C:. ol o tl oL C, JU.. C..:.
0 C' OC'C C' C C C r.:: C' C 0 r,::;::: C'
Oil9?~COO<:l5 Oro~GQJ?C:GJ?! <:qU<:l~ OdG~OOGf50C 'iJG:D!Go:>'JGt::J~
C' o
OU)U):)JO)OJO)COO):::>:OO'J: C\)CJC\):'L>C\):'n 'J: C! <JG
Q OC' . (' C' C' ')())GO)! II OO:D0~ C' 0 C' C'
C\)OQ~
n. 1\. L -r C. C.:. Jt:!o tot L L--I T
~ c c. cc o c c cr,;: oc
c~- cr.:;:c-
t::l~U)o:>~Sd~5o:l? 11:~ <ft~ro? roCJro2C9~~?=9rt:j~m~c:
c' c c r.:;:c r,;:c oc c
ooqro~QJ())o:>COO?:~c: tjtDGOa:>~CJ~ II
o c c ~ c r,;:c _o c ' c c c r.::

o~~o.>m~crocp:~t::l:m o:>'JCJf>OO?:~~oqro~cl ~QJmo:>co:>~G~
('(' (' (' (' (' (' ' (' 0 (' (' ~
OOGfGOO'J())i] o:>'P:":QJlO()) OCG9?m ~())(.!)())())? ~QJrorqom<.9JmG~<:l'.illl
0 (' ~ 'l (' r,::;: (' (' 0 (' C'~C' ,<jl r,;:C'
-Oil9?~C GOt GOKDG:D? OdGt:;j'JC: OOQJ())~OO') <:l~o:>~[jOJ~(JJt!11Jt:JV
'l"C::C' OOC' C' o C' C~ C' C' ' C' 0
GOt ~c: G'j!~COO~CI <X>'P!QOO?: ~roa:>roSJ OJOJG~:GyG~OOOJ?: ~QJmo:
c (' (' (' (' 0(' (' ~ ,..J<, C' ' C' 0 (' (' ('
om<SJm9ro:>~Gro"J_ Goro't~~~Ofl~SJ' ~oo1tqc ~QJrorq OU)(.!)Jm9;;
GOO?mQ~c:ljo.>o:>~ II
(' r.:: (' r.: (' ('
0 C' CO Co C''l C C .C:. 0 ~
00 GOO')())QQI())()) C\)())QO)COIO):'L>O)GO)t'J())OO?:o:>~ O:'n'JQGQG.S :
L 0 l o C.t JJ ,L CJIOJIT
Q GO C' \ C' C' C' '
G~o:>? t)l 00~: roGa:>pma:>o:>~ llo:>mGo:> OOGOO?())OJOO'J!<:lJ?:Od') OO<:l.o:>?!
1Sc c o ~ c c cr,~ r,~ ~ c

oroo:>?:rq G9?G~'J9J oro~GQpc:<Jp: cqut1:t1 ~ro~: <:lG<(,?')II
OC' 0
OOCO)O)Co
C'~ :'n:DroGt?::n
C' 0
GillC!QtO):'n
(' C' !;' 0 ('
OO~C:Dro:'n! GGill())GO)!II
C'
l L .:1 l:.:tll U ot -r U (.!, oo(. C:, L
OOG
0 ?C C' ("
GOOt')())OO?: o:>OO?! (J:UO)::'l.1
. (' C' C'
O)(J~C(Jt
(' '
O)QI())O)CQ.S GQOtO)
C' C' C' 0 'l
oL :U n. C:. G JLJ o JJ o U -IT Jl t.
r,::;!! (' ' C'
G;)Gyt:;j!())GC\] ')())003.)~ II
0 0 ~QC'' C' C'
OiE'J'iJ 00~:9 G~Gye1: 2:~o.>ro OOCJo:>?!G9?00?!G:D? oro~GQJ?C:
o oc c c~
gp:q ~c~croc~ G9?C:QJ~0c: '=l'iJII ooCJgoo'=l:n"J:ro~?:l oro::o?:ro 0 ?:
c 'r.::c o occ ' r.:: c r.::
GO)QCJt:\\C
o C' 0
OO:DGCOG~?ro?
0 C'
OroOOGQt?C!Qt')!())
C' 0 ~
(\)
091 OC' 0
OOCO)O)CC\)(J(J::'l.')
C" OC' C'
0 A IJ JJJ L oL J -r ll U U 1. L l l ol o C
o:.> U)~9.sg
C' C'OC'
OJ~C
C"
G::O:Go:>?G
C 'l _ C' ' ?CI U)QO)Qt())O)C
C' ' C' C'C'.
C!O):'n G?!OX:Oo:>:'n II
-Ol
ro
ot.
l lL T
-[" J
'l
L
U L
C"
C:. J
-r . U
C'
A
GroG~? OO?:Go:>? 000?!000? G~:ot:<:lt?:ro Gmc:Qt c:<:l? ro?rom

J
G
0
C"
o
' l.ta U
0
c . c c '1" 'l c r,;:c c o c
'0)2t 20GS00900iE: U)~ro1tqc GOt GOtmGo:>? OO!j0000Jroq:(:D~ S'd())Jl:
<:'l oc c c~ c r.::c o r,;:cr,;:c'l c c~
GOCOtll ~~C<X>CSJ Gt:pc:QJ~C!<,l~Go:>:o:>~~ ljo.>Oto:>~ll 00())(..).)~ o.>-:>:
~ c o~ c o <: ~ c Sl r,;:c c
~!Oji tliEO[q:(l:ll mJ.y:<:l?G9:CJ? S'd~'f'U) Dlg~ 000?:000-:>CJ~l:ljox:qjCI
c J:. c cc o o or.:: c r,;: c c
Gro~ ?moo-:>:~~~ romomg <X(000?:ooo.>'JCJJ ?:rq G~0c:tl~~iE: OOG'j:
mil 0Qtroroc~coJo:>::n
'
u
c co c 'l
L
c o c o o
c. n ::ororoc
L. L 6
c c c
ooo:>oo&ro(..).) o.>G0<:l:'n
L L o:>L c.!.
oo0'J:oo0~t?:
u
u~cc~~<.Oe() ~:;m~~ea 1bea f'c ~'~fb s~c2 ~:be:cde :e.G:~
l 11 I(L 17 1
IICOC!li'ICCOO 1
OeOCO(l(l)a.JCOCOOO n
COIOI'I ~ea:
v
Occecc.ooees L ll
amecnec I~CJGfoe
,;) 0 ~ ~0 .) .) ,) ,) .) .) . ... .) 0
ll:c\;ocofl
.)
:@roc.h@ccl~
.) .) 0
@ccaR:ca:cc
:J .>::1 &
cccebe:o@:c.cored!,
.)..J
1:d~ocoft
.)
:@co
.)
lr.l!,o
~
&~eoh>(')ro
.>o .>
cobcoro
.> ..>
l;ccro tbec:obcc
o> .>
od:cc~
:; :J
1.>@cc&oocbeoo
.> .:>
e&ec

11 @ab:c.co~ooroccce oRec:ca:cc 'oo:cl\,

.) .) .) .:J:i 0 f)
fu~eokoro
.)O .>
ooowro
.) .>
,!;coco
O.)
tbea: obccooohco~
.) ..> .>
tba:: (e) cc .)O
aha:: u@ftb:c.Q:lre
.J
:c.G:cc
e
,I(;JQe!Jeec
S':_j. :::1 'w: obc.cocohco~
o .> .> .>
1bec (co) cc c~o2:@~.>
:b:e>:ccoPe :ca:cco
u@l'lbaR:ca:cc ccce6e:ol:l:oePero~ t2cc
.,
.,. ;:, ,:J e ..> ::::1 "
ccooecoec
.)
~b(;obhc:ro .>COCOCOOO
.J O.) .)O.) ..)
coroi'IQ~e:
.) ~
tka.JG~ booe~
.>
lttCDI'ICa.l~
0 0 0.)
ceo~~:;~ ,!i;o4rooet'l
~.> 4
1Wt~ec
o.:>o
t~COI'Ic.coe
~fee.> 5 c~:rweu
cco!Je llwre
.>
..J:J:"Ce
..~:,1
9 ' 1 , " 11
uoeoooworo
.) . ) 0 . ) 0 . )
wrowoe
.) .)
:orowc.roew
.)
ecow-:c.c:cc
0
cccebe:ol:l:c.core
.>:::i ro~-Cc .)0
sbw seo2:@4
.)
ltc eso
.)
seo2ccw
.)
:be:c.core:c.c:cc
0
r
:)~
.:>
soz S.DIOdffil M V1 VJAJ~DH

208 i BURMA LAW REPORTS
tl
u.)0
ohxntoe:Cbc.oet'oes
.) 0
u0oo>cc:2u
.) e
( :c Pe>e:cbcoe&w)
o o
~c(')~:~h>:c
.) .) e
l'))~:~h>:2
.:> e
* r
~~
(~:cbco~~nes)
60Z S.DIOdffil M.V1 VW'MUI

S.DIOdffil M V1 VW'ilil9: orz
HZ
11 (c) S "~hoeod~eo :b:;,
ob&@Q_:>~'lae ,&:ep&,;~~c.oo...ch :c.PI'IwG~Qe.o
coloC.i.o:@&cr
:J ~ ~0 ,) ~ ~0\. S'.) ~ .) ,):>Frobe@co
,) .) .,::,
tbe.o r "eAco::>b rn fl~}, c:;,oC c.co:;,GCCII
\. ,) ,) ;I ~ .)
U l:>t:l~~OC.CO
.) ~0.)
COCoW .)~OCO-~oe
,) .)
c.ccebkol~e
0 .)
~b:>~:>k--c9oCcoe.o
,) .)0 ,)
c.coeecc-lc.~oceoc
.)
c.ccoo~'..O,:.t:l!b
.) :.:1 r:J
oWIC.rMb;co:lJow
.) 0
4oc.coechoe
.) . :f ,)COCoW~COODch~cc~&>sJircoJoco-
,) ,) .) ,) .)~oCO ,)o~d.re
ucobcl~
~
rogl?JJ>OOe
c3t~c .J.
S.UI0d3(1 M V1 vmna ZIZ

lbeskcceJ:ccocoMe i'Jd:J(c) b:~es ~~ lfhcc:2 ~~Rcc:&es :::>w~4-occo'
~ ~ o ~ B' e ~:J ~ ~
t:C2o.:C2cdoes:2 ~chJe& 11 cccce::oeJbeJ ~c.o~:cr~:bc<lli!!:l:~h w
~ ~ ~o e .~ ~ o ~ ' ~ -;> ~
4-oes:2
~o e
eco~:ccro
.) o ~
:C2wlo1Pees:c~:C2ro
~ o IS ~
ccc~cromc.uto
..> o
HCCe>bccw
~ o o
:::>ch-le~crom&
..) ~ \
:cP~:~occ
.. .)
re:::>hc.ocS.eJ
.) .)0.)
I~CCo<llei::>~teeocc~
.)00 0
~liilcc~e>~
.):J 0
wCbe~~'!&1&;4-b
~
II (;~C.U<llOCC CCCC:::>b 1co2ocrorocoto ltmcr~:Cc<llCC
_, ol~ .) . o .).) _, _, .) .) . .) o o .)
11cccc(])hl
~ ~:J
:C2ro::>~::>hceaocc
.) ..> .)0..> .)
:cc.u~64-oes:2
o .>o
11 a:!cceco~::>l;:Cbc.o
e .) \.) .)
~~hlcc
.:>:1
c.ohl:?:ec.u:EJ&:cbc.olfc@o
~:~. e:J 0
~~~
0
wcccccromc.uro
0.) ..)0
:cP~:~C!Icc
.)
r:cc.u;
c~:4ccb16 uC2cce::>b<ll:cl;oco ~hl~Rccc~a, od:J 10e>es:ob ~c(:;Je>
~o :Jo .:> '\.:> e .:> .:>:J .:>:_j o ' ..> ~ .> .:> ~
OJ
0
u .)ccccee~o
'\
tnCCCCiO<llhl:o!JeC!Ie&,
0.) .)l. .) :J ..)~h
IC.Uooes4b"llJ:~es
.) ..) :_j 0
1od:Jcba.:ccee>
..) .)
~es~~~ IQ
.)0 ~ 00 0
1:cP~:~C!IccCo
..) 0
rw4C!IesW
.)0 0
ua:!cce~~:Cbco
.) \0 \
rbes(c)$;),J ~ .) so
:be~cnwcc.u:cc~o:XJ&@R
_, _, ->o .) :.:~ r~:i1:Q&:Cbc.ocooQCb
.) e:J .) . wccCb
_, b 11!:l:d~~2Po
oj .)
IWtctcte~(])eBlo
o o- o .:>o o
cnc~o 5~~ccb1:2 cPo4e~4Ac.u<ll<llCCi!!:l:ob
.:> .:> ~ .:>O :..1 e .:> .:> .) Y .:>
r~oes:2
.:>o
1~hlcc
e .:>:::1
b!;coe>~a.:C!IC!ICC llmcPA:tuC!ICC ccce~:cco<llQ:CC.O ~b roc.oe c.u:cPei'c
0 ..) .) .) 0 .) ' .:>:..1 .) \ .)
:c@w 1lG0~bhb:heB t'cwto 11 CCccC!Ihl0cc ccce>c.o~cccc C!lhla:?ohb:hes
...J ~ .:>..J.:>O 0 0 \ 0 .:> .):J.:> .:> .:> ..>:J .:>0 0
1:d:.oes ~cc:cco:4c3hl!;,o::>oo (c). ~a.:rec.cdeJ ce>n2:cc~ cc.c~
.:>O ..> .J :.:lot.. .> ' .:> .> .:>
(])CC
~
e:"l:v:e.bcooo~c~~Q
.) .) .)0 .):..3 rcccc:cPA:b::acc
~ 0 .)
:ttc.u:2Po
0 .)
II .)C2cceooro
\..) (.,
:a:!o)
.)
:tu

r :tuC!Icc:lcco:2Po
0 .)0 .)
IC.U~es:crt':C!ICCCC.Oe>Co
.) .) 0
IICCcch-le~CDeJ
.) ~--0
c.uecb
0 '\
M~occ.ooocco&e
.) .) .) .)0
::>&ecC.Oe><llCC
.)0 .)
:::>cc:a:!ftb
..) .)
w:dA:tuocc
0 0 .)
ccce~cc~eoPco
.) .) .)
oGf' beJ!OIOe>b~
.) l.,
ccceefuc.oekc.oe~
\ .)
ec.uoaCC:fl:)!Ob
.).) .) -;) .)
II .)C2ccC!Ihl
.):J
(d~:cco~b
\ 0
'J<ll:Jh be.:ceo2c.cesccoe>C!ICC l~b'JbWotu W:4::>otucoC!ICPCC 1fGohl:cc.o
.> .)0 ..> ..> ..> ..>o.:>o .:> o .) ..> .) .> ~ ..>:::1 e
o'lxt: 0occ r2cdoes:2 &:ccococFroe~11 u::>cfl~oc<'l~:a :h.ll!c:chco
.:> O.> ..> .:> .>o e .J .:> .:> e e:::l
IZ SL~:Oclffil M V1 VW~DH
..;
SJ.CIOdffii M V1 VJAJ.lliHl
1965] BURNU\ LAVV REPORTS 215
C" C" C" 0 C" OC" OC" C" C" C" C" 0'\ o
.y~:euG~Qp:~<;: qc:qooqc cqc.vccxro)(~ .vem1 ~Jto~~9G::D"J SJ')Q~ :)eli:~
c- . c- c c- c- c- c- oc-o c-oc-@ c-
0'J~I'IOJ'dQI
u.
CC:~ll ::D00ffiQ)CI
~
mro:oc
-c Q);;o()Q,~O :G::l.)') ::D0CD:@')gg
t. u .. 0 C'
r:::
1 !
c- o c- r.;::c-
l
or:::c-
J
\O c-r.;::c-
J
c- o o e=ooo;;
SJO n;J~-:>: ::D0~:Qp:~ ~OO'JCCI)'Jl:jC:I C:XD:S)tjC:I ~{IQ)l3C:I 0:x>e:?qr~ C'
~c:
~ ~ f,'7 ')
~Goo:)8~
C" 'l o C" 0 C" C" <' C" OC" C"
Q~~OU10f::9J ~Of())Q) rr,_OO'J:OI::Df:;ll f2:20G8 ?_O n;J'Ji ::D00:'D~C0C
~C' OC'
(" (" (" (" 0 '\ 0 (" '10 'l (" 0 (" (" (" 0
1:1~~:)/fCCII
00
I
j :) 0:'l"l:m8:~rm
C lJ
?_ ~CI OO())::DOCOl~C.H::D:D
u l.Ot"L. . C.:.
II 000:n:~:~1mm
tC.:, J l
'l (" (" . (" (" r:::c- r,;c- (" -c- ("
GG!ro:SJm:"D ::D0GQ)'J SJ())20G80091 roG9:'fcl3C~I t:J08Cil'"JGo:!c:;;:982
r;;_c- r::;:: C" o <'
I:J0GC:J')C:CJ:t G(l)')C~~XDOI X2il 0?t~:JCf2~20GO @IS G'X)I !.(_0 jO I:JC::
0"' C" OJ,7C" C" r: o o r;;_c-
c- c- o e oc- o ' c- r;;_c- o c- c- c: c-
~Of0')~J[OO':( e:8"J0f()) G'J:oq:~'J::De:? . e0'1JI 90'J~J[00091 qc:(gJJ$;)90
0 (" (" (" (" (" '\ 0 (" ("
::l.)(J"Jg!.)JJ;I <J:(000"J:CI?:JYcJp::x>e:;xe:;:J qc:O?::::i cooo,r ~m~81
(" (" r.:c- C' 0 0 c (" C' C' C'
te:?:eo;;oop:m <J2o:>m'J:~0 co"J:::n~~~ '=~CI'fJ9r;c:: Q)e?:ro'=l:
~rmo:>m
. U
c- o o o
c.ums'X
T 1
c-
.s1
.T
c c- . "' c-
Q:).S couro'J:vl:x>.::D 11
T l -.
c[Y. o
ro.:s~QiO)'))G
u
co
L
6 "J:;Jc- m] SJQ
C:J
Q)CI
<'
.ll
oc- o c oc-
e
;):~o.smc.DO?CI
L
o
\
c~c o\ o
L..
())'Jill."T.>G J:'J) ffili!::.o~6c:Q''IO>:.JY'.:OG0:'D'JIJI

c-
Sdffi
-:- L o Jt.
6 C TL l U.A I ;o :..t ol,

c c c- c e oc- c- c- c "'
20G8l f~:2o~sgp:~9 OOfQJ[U'=lJJW~'JI 2~000fCJtC Q)'JOf'=l())C:OI<J?
C \
Gcqpm:-o::De:;ll e:oo~JI ~~ 90~:9
(" G ~ C" 0 ('::>)Q("o("
0'Jcoq:~l ar_
0
~:.T.l'J
("
::D0~o:>~'t 9f
C"'\C"
OC' C" 0 ' " C", <:: . C G OCO COC" C" C' \ '\
9c0C 'J~CO'J:q(ml qc:~IIO')()~ me:;J.;"J:i . Cf~<L'0~())~09f Q)'JOf~CO'J:~
o c- oc- c- c- c- c o o c~ ' c o c-
qJI 90')0~()) 9CQ)C0e:;:m<,~:~JffiD.aOi ffiJI[:~f9f1 Cl:j ~<?'=l~G::D'J::D0QJ?:
0
0)1
t. t.
("
QO)(I)J
C'
c:G ' 6 .JCI(" .OJO:'l"ll:::C::O
(" <;X;C::O()I"'
o ~- -L- -L-
C'
C::OC'OQ)~C'r.:
-r
(" ::DC~G
C' \
o
'6 'JC:ml
(" 0
"
0
m:
t
m"J:::n~u .
c r,;:c o c c-r;;_c- e c- c- c-
::D?Q<j>SJ?:I:l~:;qcqjcl . roo~l:l.v~m2:m1 mJil=9t::D~ 'f>C'O~SJ
c
0)())1 ooro ("0::DOJC(" Q)')QS'=JQG()
(" 0 II C::OC'OOJQ
(" ("IDG 'JffiQ.SOOo:>rorc OJOJe>:
9 (" ("
c, T IL 6 T Jl T JL . - lT 6 IL C
c- o c o c- c o ~ c- c- c- r,; c-o o c-
::D2 qtnO)(I)())G'f>o:> ffi'Jill('J)Gr::1')0) ())JI[:~f'f?CJtCI OOtJ0'iJG.::D'J00J
r,;:c r,; c- c- c-r.;::c- r,;:c- c- o o c "lc o
I:J<;i '=lG<j>'J())Gr::1')~2:?: ffiJI[:~ftjc:I:J0'J'=l2:?11 CX(~ j 'JOGOIC:<j 9q(
c c-. c c- c- o c- oc- o ' oc- ' c- c-
::l.):D
c.:- C::OC'OOJ'=l())Uil:ro.smGmro::D:DII
-r c ())c.DOJC'=l::D::Y.ll
.L '=JOC:G0o:>~CI o::>O:'l,._
a
(" ("\ ("
JL 6TT T l . L
.v::Dm
0
rooo.:::o:nm.vooo:>ml
("
:;om
("0o;:>mcc meoro:Jm .c (" ("
Q::DCQGO
J o
11 rom
("
lL L 0 u, q) A - - T' il ~ 1.- 0 I
o c- c- o c- c c oo oc- c- o
tt[:QGm:>G: romttl:l OO~'=lGffi?C: (I)())QOOWOO<DC:I ~OO?'=l'=lJ?UD
Q (" C' .. C" . C' C" C" Lc-" '("l C" Jl (" ~.
. 09C'ffl mutt QG())':>C:cqjC 0)0~1 OO'f>0GroJC:cqJC OO'f>::D'J09?.:::0211
0
. ::DC::OO?CI C'
SJO> ~G::D?e><>GS'=lU?:ml mco: c?.s::>~um Q)QOSJG.S~CI mo:::o1
c (" (" (" ("
oL-LO G ' IL. CJT l . TJ o c.!,
0
:::o'=J(.J)Q)
C' 0 (" .
mc.n.v"J:roc.nmr
(" ~ ("
roo::D:n
c 0 c
m~'=lL?:SJO)rol :;om .v:::omcro:::o:r
C' . (" ("
oL L ~ J L L l:.!. q) tJ 6 -- ""1- ll A C
IDS('B') ::DCGCI)9'-J:'l)(.J) 00
C'
("
C"
(" ("
C"
o
c 0 ("
~
C"
l
_, _c
OC'
l
("
c:::D:"l"liCOQ~C
C'
C
C" 0
LILJ"
C" C"
_.. .. \J
0 (" . .
C"
OO~ffiiCG:D'JCIJ:'l"l:l
C"
C
C"
= -- T
C'
Cli<D:::OQ)C
ti. G
c-
Q)?O.S())IGCO())G0::D:DII
Tlll- C:.
Q)O:DI ::D'=l(.J)<Y.) ())U)ID'J:(I)ux;JI
C!.oLt. L J
QJC'OOJQID<Y.)())
T Jl ll
(" c C" (" (" c.~ (" C'
oo'Proe:;: ~om8m~9::Df:;ll :::00Gm-:>eoG8t oooo&:eoGsl rom;;ro
Sl~Odffii M.V1 VW'llilg 9l'Z
BURMA LAW REPORTS Z:f7
-x.J./89/9 I/( 1)t/81 /'d"';)
II .:>.CCccrobJwr~coo
.:>. 0 .:>. .:>.
WOO:::>t:l
0 0 .:>.:::1
:c.coob01oos01hl
.:>. e.:>.
M:::>t:l:cco~coe>:c.~oco~Oihl
.:>.~l .:>. .:>.:::1 o .:>. _,:_j
c.wtb:b~es JR::>rw~retooo
~.:>. .:>. o o
rore:~k5hl
.:>. ;)
to(r)
:J l,
r i;~
::J
f)(;OG~OCa..>e.G
~ .:>.
C.COe>OICC
.:>.
Ja..>:&coo.Qlcb
.:>.
-:>Co
.:>.
IO~e.G
..L
<1-oemC
.:>. o
riGeroco o~e::>re:)hll(l)
e ~ .:>. .:>.
~C~~:crmoc~~esOO IICCccrerotohleOIR
.:> :J'S .:>. ~ .:>. ~ o .:>. e'J.... .:>. "j
:cccoobco
.:>. .:>.
~:o~c.cco c.cce>coc.coOO:>
.:>.
Jtcm:c.Pftec~cc~:Xooro
0 .:>. ~.:>. .:>.
oeo:dft
.:>.
:boro
.:>. .:>.
WOIOICC
.:>. .:>...
c.cc~:ct:les
::r. .:>.ofwtoes
~
::>tocoto:::>S
.:>. 0 .:>. 0 .:>.
IICCCCOihl:hleerw
.:>. .:>. ;j e'h.
eoobobes
o .:>. ~
~s01hl
..> ..>:J
c.cc;o~wtowtoes~esiCB
.:>. ..> o .:>. '5 ~l.He>es~oes:2
..> .:>.o e
r::>fco
..>
:c.01:201
.:>.
o01:::>1oe>
.:>. ..>l-
tu:to:c.eswPeesb:>
o .:>. o
"C2cc:cce>~wrco,b@co
.:>. o..> .:>.
~~f):::>t:l
o ..>:::1
:ftcccor~
.:>. 0 ..)
r:cccocccc:c.rftoos:ll~
.:>. ..) .:> .:>. :J .
c.cc~lPees
I)
rbes~cco~Oicc
..)
::>hl&
.:>. ~0
"cccc01R
.:>. .:>. ;j
:C2co:hlbee:2rwes
.:>. e'J \. ..) tiG01~S.e>wb
':5' ..) oc coc.cc::>cow01
..) 101~e bi;lt}c ~cccoMe
.:>. ..) ::J .:>. ..)
ca:>sOihlc.w~co~:c.~oco ~01hlw:&co~ t:cccoohloo uccccbeeolreesFf)c.Pc.oe>
..> ..> ~ o ..> .:>. ~ .:>. .:>. :Jo . :1 """ J
CO 6 .:>.CCCC~oes:d
..>o e
oeocb:ree>oo'!lies
.:>. .:>.
ICftectcb~COe>
..> o
[:,..LIO~to~e.G
'
II ..>CCCC
Olhi:CCCIJCCftbdroro
..);j..) .:>. ..>0
c.~rc.oco
0
torowre:~c5hl
00..>..)
,osoo2roes
:_j , l, ..)
C.COeiOICC..)
wtae.sS.b:oe>Oihles
..> ..> ..>:_j
:cro~oes:2
..>o
tiGOIRcccc::xec.occ
e 'S'..>:b ..> ..>
l=lc~o2coesc.co~c:Kc
.:>. ..>
ICCCC~OC.CO
..> .:>.
ll:l~Oes:2
Y ..>o e
II cccd~
..>
IGOIRcro~
~.:>.:1
OOO~Ge>OCC.Oes
e ..> .:>. .:>.
C.CO~OICC
..>
I:Ca..>CCcc~:ot:lero:b~es
..) ..>:::I\
a..>coc.ore
..) .:>.
ohl:oc.~~COO.Qlcb
..>:I..) ~ .:>.
ICC'JlJf):::>t:lc.or~coo
\ :_j ..>:::1.:>. . .:>.
ro:to:c.es
0 0
ca:>GOihl
..)~
..)
ccc~:ccocoMeorofiw w~ccoe>OICC
0
..) ' .:>.
..)
r::>rocb~
..) 0
11 CCft
..)
~COO~OIR
.:>. 0 ..) ;j
:::>CC.O~OIR
,)
:oQelO:be>es
.:>. :1 ..) ::::1 '\
ohl:oc~e>COO.Qlcb
.:>. ;j ..) :::3 .:>.
ICCCCOeJCof):be>es
'\
S~1IOdH'H M.V1 VW'HOH 81Z

BURMA LAW REPORTS
APPELLATE CIVll.,
ABDUL JALIL KHAN (APPELLANT) c.c.

z96s
V. Feb. 8th.
MUNTAZ KHAN AND ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Pleadings:.....determi11ation of suit on pleadings, or consistent with pleadings.
Amendment of Plaint at lu:aring of Appeal- to be allowed only in special
cases.
The Plaintiff had filed a suit for refund of purchase price of certain machineries
:and accessories alleged to have been sold to him by the Defendant, and on the
evidence, the true facts of the case were found to be that the properties were
:merely meant to be hypothecated as security for a J~an.
The learned trial judge having dismissed the suit ; On Appeal :-
Held: The determination of a suit sl)ould be founded upon a case, either
"to be found in the pleadings or involved or consistent with the case thereby
made ; the wh~le of the circumstances must be taken into account and carefully
:scrutinized, and in the ultimate analysis, the question is one of circumstances
and not. of law.
A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar and one v. A . Chokkqlingam Chettiar:
(I949)B.L.R. 46 (S.C.) ;A.C.Ahhonandonev A.Habib,(1952)B.L.R.z36 (S.C.);
U Than Tin v. }lf. Ba Ba, (1953), B.L.R. 9 (S.C.) and F.schenchunder Si11gh v
Shamachuru Bhutto, _Koilasunder Singh and others, II. M.I.A. 7, referred to.
-In the present suit, thePlaintiff had insisted that.the ')>.thole of the transaction
was a sale of sP.ecific movabl'e properties. His remedy is therefore for delivery
of the same, and possibly damages for non-delivery. l;ie s~ould not be allowed
to Obtain a decree .on the ba~is that th~ alleged purche price was in fact a
.. ,loan. . . .::--'.
:>f'f.:tHeld furik:r:~-~R~g~rdirig ihe question whetlf r~IPlaintiff should be
~ :ij~~~ed to am~nd the pla'int at this stage, it is not one"o :11fe ' special ca;es where
such amendment ;should be allowed. - .,: .
.;'G....N. Banerji for

. the .appellant.
.
305 of
A. Jalil
First Appeal No. 121 of 1964,
'Chief Judge, City Civil Court of Rangoon in
ax, dated nth A~t 196-4.
16
c.c. Khan who is the appellant in the present app.eal sued the
1965
- defendant-respondent Muntaz Khan for the recovery of
JA~nK;,AN K 6,ooo with costs thereon and interest at the Court rate

MUNTAZ
from the date of the suit. His case was that at Rangoon
KHAN on or about the 2oth of January 1959, the defendant sold
AND ONE. him certain machineries and accessories for. a sum of
K 6,ooo and acknowledged receipt of the purchase price
in a docu,ment dated the 2oth of January 1959 executed
by him. :This document contained full particulars a,s to
the properties sold to the plaintiff. subsequent to the
sale the defendant failed to give delivery of the goods sold
in spite of repeated demands so that he had to file the
present suit for the refund of the purchase price. The
document which was referred to in the plaint has been
fll:ed in the proceedings, though the plaintiff later dedinf:cl
to put it in as ev:idence in support of his case. By this
document the defendant purported to sell to the plaintiff :
one paper cutting machine, one wire stiching machine,
one paper ruling machine aswell as the right of occupancy
of the room in House No. I 17, 32ild Street for a sum of
K 6,ooo th.e receipt of which was acknowledged therein.
This document was impounded by the Collector and a
heavy penaltY. of K 1,440 had been paid but, the plaintiff
for reasons best known to himself refused to tender it as
evidence being of the view that since the -right of
~~~f~~pancy,, .of. t]}~ {9,~~ ,.:YY:fS . invq!t~~L th~. document
:.a equired registration.'. .Be th~t as it iJ:ia::y,. the plaintiff .by
a second-amended .pla.i.I1t dated th~ r8th February r964,.
;:-set ou~ the particulars of .~h~ .rnoveaQl~.. properties sold to ~
>,.~im by the defenqant, .ria~ely, paper.'. cutting . machine,.
~~;wire stitching ~chine ariq .paper niling -~flili).e. . This.
ifj mended ~laint:.:,.~;w~\~ 110.t:;;however, ' accepte<i .. by the
!t1~fh.ed . trial\.jll:aE~:.: 6n: .tlig~ifound ,,':c;~'f , ~~f~iaintiff --h~d.
56{lghtifi~~Q<luce the .p~cular. . .. , ~:~.':co~d never
have . given mthout tendering in eVil; . ce :the documen~
refer.ied to jn ~ firstamended pia~~ ga~ea .the :X2:th of
' ..
April 1962. There must have been some confusion in c.c.

rg6s
the mind of the learned trial Judge between pleading and
proof. Since the amended plaint dated the 18th , of JALIL ABDKuL
liAN
February 1964, did not introduce a new cause of action v.
different from that set out in the first amended plaint ~:A~z
there seems no reason why the plaintiff should not have AND oN~r.
been allowed to make the necessary amendment ; whether
in view of the 'fact that he refused to tender as evidence
the sale deed dated the 2oth January 1959, he would be
allowed to adduce secondary evidence relating to the
contents of that document, is a totally different matter.
The defence of Muntaz Khan was that the document
referred to by the plaintiff was signed by him because of
a misrepresentation on the part of the plaintiff that it was
a deed of hypothecation of his_property, namely, the
paper cutting machine, wire stitching machine and paper
ruling machine. Regarding the transaction between him
and the plaintiff the defendant said that he had borrowed
the sum of K 5,ooo from the plaintiff an'd that there had
bt::en 15 repayments towards that loan to a total of
K' 3,650 so that only K 1,350 remained unpaid.
Accordingly, the plaintiff's suit which was to the effect
that the machineries and accessories mentioned by him
had been sold but not yet delivered to him, should b.e
diSmissed.
.: On<itfie plea41!f~ the learned tri~l Judge fifuned several
issues of which ;the'most important were those relating to
the allegation by the pl~ntiff that the machineries and
accessor;ies had .been sold to..him forK 6,ooo but not yet
delivered to him by tbe defendant ; and the allegation by
the 'dff~ndant that he liad received a loan of K 5,0oo of
:vvhi~~ ~~~Lr;~P-~~ .;K 3:6_5q. ..--~~:~~ - <:~i! ~- .
On the ~eV.i.(}6i.C.e; adduced it is clear that.;tb.~ plaintiff
had lent a s~~Fk-~5,ooo to the deferid~Ef.'executing
a promisso!f~:-note in .favour of the defendthit's decree-
holder and that the plaintiff also lent K 1,000 to the
c.c. defendant to enable him to run his business. 'Also tlie

1965
loan of K 5,000 was to bear interest at the rate of two
!AL!~ per cent per mensem. Regarding the alleged repayments
~u~.u; the defendant had onJy his statement on oath .to rely on,
Klu.N
AND ONB.
as he could not cite as witness the plaintiff's own employee
and brother-in-law K. S. Ker Ali who had since returnea
to Pakistan. It was the defendant's case that the entries
in the book produced by h~ acknowledging payments of
several sums entered therein, were in the handwriting of
the plaintiff's brother-in-law.
The learned trial Judge while holding that the
defendant had not been able tO' prove that he had made
payments to a total of K 3,650 as set out in his written
statement, considered that the plaintiff's suit should be
dismissed because he had failed to p:rove the sale of
machineries and accessories as alleged in his plaint.
Being dissatisfied with the judgment anQ. decree of the
trial Court dismissing his suit, the plaintiff has preferred
the .present appeal.
Now, even assuming that the plaintiff can be allowed
to produ~e. as evidence the sale d~d .dated t~e 2oth of
January, 1959, by which the machineries and accessories
and the night of occupancy of the room in No. II7, 32nd
Street, Rangoon, his plaint was defective. Since the
machineries ana ac;c;essories were stil~ in existence, what
the .pla.filtitf shou11i:~_:hav~ sued -~pr:~::was the-i-~4livery - of
specific moveable properties, not_. for the refund of the
purchase price. Therefore, when -the true facts are that
these:: prdperties ~~re n:terely. me.:~nt'''to be _hypothecated
~ secu,n_ry for a loan of K 6,opo \he plamtiff be_giv.en,.
.a, deq~~~;:mthout._ ~endm~~t _
()f ?
:. -Ii1~~i~~~?.$~.~.i~~l!'.atuppclli . :;r}!~~~}~~:;>-::~~~S.~"'..,.,..,"'.~
A: Ghokkaliit~- :?ttiar (r)
aft~r
. .~
observip:g-.
. . .
: at a party should
.
"
be
.
::: : .. ~ v .. - . (x) (t949) B.L.R. 46. (S.C:).

lose a case set out in his pleading and that it is not the . ~~6~
function of a trial or an appellate Court to make out a
case different from the one set out in pleadings, held that }A~DK~AN
f).
as an exceptional case where the aefendant knew what MCNTAZ
the case was that he had to meet, and raised a defence AND KHAN
ONE.
but failed to prove it, the appellate Court was justified in
giving a decree on the basis of .the case set up by the
defendant in his defence. Were this dictum to be applied
literally to the facts of the present case the plaintiff should
succeed in getting from the defenaant the sum which he
had lent to the defendant in .respect of which the defendant
had failed to prove repayment. However, the authority
in A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar's (I) case has been
shaken by the observations of the late Supreme Court in a
subsequent case,_ viz., A. C. Ahkhoon and one v.
A. Habib (2). There it was observed that there is no .
decision which goes to the length of permitting the Court
to reject the plaintiff's case, and to grant the plaintiff a
decree on an inconsistent set of facts set up by the
defenaant in answer to the plaintiff's case. A compromise
was, however, apparently made in a third case before the
late Supreme Court, namely, U Than Tin v. M. Ba Ba (3).
There it was held that in applying the principle
enunciated Eshenchunder Singh v. Shamachuru Bhutto,
Koilasunder Singh and others (4) of the absolute necessity
..th~~~the_..~~~ermi~~tW.P.-'il?. a .case should. be fou,p.~~d upon
a .case eitlier to bi(iourid.in the pleadings or mvolved or
consistent with the case thereby maae, the whol~ of the
circumstances must ,,b e taken into account and carefully
scrutinized and that:m the ultimate analysis the -question
is .one of. circumstances and not of law. .
., :: Now~~what ar~ ~e cirrumstances .of the present qtSe? .
The pihlfl$. b.1'd;~lSc~~ri~ the last, tbit1sto~~y;~ the
. date of . ~ seco-efiaea plaint which _h~.ii~~n: the
(2) (1952) B.L.R. ~i36:'(S.C.). (3) (:9S3) B.L:'R. 9 (S.C.)
. , '.: . (4) n.l\ll.P.A: 7 . '
c.c. r8th February 1964, that the whole of the transaction

1965
was sale of specific moveable properties. If so, the
ABIJUL h - d
}ALTL KHAN property m t e goo s pass
ed to h.1m and }1lS. on}y remedy
Mu~rAz was to obta~ delivery of the same and pqssibly, damages
KHAN
AND ONE.
as well for non-delivery . within a reasonable time. In a
suit th~ ,framed, I do not consider that the plaintiff should
be allow~ to obtain a decree on the basis that the alleged
purchase. price was in fact a loan. . The question remains
whether I $hould, at this stage of the proceedings; allow
the plaintiff to amend his plaint so as to enable him to
establish the existence of the relationship of creditor and
debtor as between himself and the aefendant. However,
it is a well established principle of law that except in very
special cases, ieave to amend ~hould be refused w.pen the
e:ffec.t of the propose4 amendment is to take away from
the defendant a legal right which has accrued to him by
lapse of time. No doubt in this country it. is usual to
allow a plaintiff to amena his plaint so as to base his
action on the original consideration, when a promissory
note is defectiye because the stamps thereon had not been
properly cancelled bythe defendant who had executed it.
However, I do not consider that this is one of the very
special cases where amendment of the plaint should be
allowed. The plaintiff had deliberately sought to make
out that the transaction, relating to the machineries and
<t~~e~R!ies~-~as a s~!~~ .: whereas )?:1. fact ,it w~~ e:J;"e .
h)ipotlleciti6ii as adniitt~:by his own witnesses; . ....... nad
not sought to amend th~ plain~ even after the dc;fendant
.. had .by ,};tis written St(\te~eiit pointed OUt the. realJ.p,.ature
, of the :transaction. He
didnot evenask for an a.hietfafuent
~~~- th*~~~tii~ :he filed .th~ ptese~t appeai on of,. tlie.-i6th
.-:~PJi~biiil~i964, Io~g -~fter ;t~e a~bt
WIihlliaiiofi''*tli~
-: ~
~ . _., . .
ea.
alleg.;-.. .-~.::ilO.~id)~ing
':.::;.~.;&),.. . ,,
.
,
tJ~u~y, !959 :. q~~Jl~P-:!lY:; t do not
~ r~uest of the learp'
1
a.l1\dvocate for the
that he should .be given time to file an
1eave to amend the plaint in the appellate stage, should c.c.

196s
be acceded to.
ABDUL
For these reasons I consider that the learned trial Judge JALtL KHAN
was quite justified in having dismissed the plaintiff's suit. Mtl~;TAZ
In the result, the appeal fails and it is dismissed with ~a~::.S.
costs, Advocate'~ fees being assessed at 5 (five) gol~ mohurs.
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before U San Maung and U Saw Ba Thein, JJ.
c.c. DAw .CHJT NGWE (APPELLANT)

I96s
Mar. 30. v.
MR. w. F. WOOD AND ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Resjudicata- order in proceeding under Guardians and Words Act--whetl'
opt'fates as res judicata itr a subsequent suit. Questi~ of atkption-tQ.
be raised in previous proceeding. Guardians arrd Warth Acts. 48--a bart&
subsequent suits.
The Respondents had in a previous proceeding filed an Application under
s. 25 of ~he Guardians and Wards Act. against the Appellant for the custody of
their minor child. The Distr~ct Judge, after hearing the contentions of both' .
parties, ordered that the child be delivered to the Respondents who were his:
natural parents. The said order was also confirmed on Appeal.
Subsequently the Appellant filed a suit for declaration that the said child was
her adoptive son. The Respondents contended that the suit was barred by-
res judicata in view of th~ decision in the previous proceeding. On Appeal : -
Held : In the previous proceeding, the Appellant could have _contended
a~arnst the Respondents, that the child was her adoptive son. She should have
specifically raised a plea to that effect. She also did not take the alternative
course of'filing ail application. under s. 10 of the Guardians and Wards Act
read with s . 7 thereof, to be appointed guardian of the child, on the grow1ci:
that her rights were superior to that of his natural parents. Accordingly the
Appellants' sui\ is _bai:red by res .fudicata.
Maung Hmat v. Maung Htay,, 1 Ran. p. zs8 ; Doddi Dorayya v. Bathula.
Adinarayana, A.I.R. (1953) Mt.d. p. 183 ; Srimati Raj L,tltshmi Dasi a11d other..
v. Banamali Sen a11d others, A.I.R. (1953) Supreme Court p. 33 ; Shadeo v. -
Mahrajj anfl another, l i Ran. p. 569 ; Sathi and two others v. Ram.andi Pandara~
. 42 Mad. p. 647, ref~rr~ to. . .
:,;;' 'Held further: . Tli'e~~}esent snit'i~ also covered by~- 4lt .~f the Gua;i'cllahr'!:;~;
:: and Wards Act, a$~th~- pt~ent suit is an at1;empt to nulli~ 'the order pass;ti.riri .
the previous .proeej:ding. Under the said section, such' an order shall be fina i
and shall no.t be confuted by suits or otherwise.
.Hla Nyun f~!.:riR"Maung .f~:r th~ appellant. '='
District Court of Mandalay, is against the judgment and c.c.

1965
decree of the trial Court, dismissing her suit on the ground
DAW CHIT'
that it was barred by res judicata, because of the decision NGW
v.
in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 38 of 1960 of the same MR. W.F.
Court. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are WooD AND-
Ol'-1<:.
briefly these :
In Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 38 of 1960 a fore-

said, W . F. Wood and his wife Mrs. Wood filed an appli-
cation under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act
for im order directing Daw Chit Ngwe to deliver their
minor son William Wood to their custody. The appli-
cants' case was that .William Wood was born to them on
the sth of December 1953 and lived with them in 75th
Street, Mandalay, where Daw Chit Ngwe also lived in a
house opposite to them. Daw Chit Ngwe was on friendly
terms with them, so they allowed their son William
Wood to go and live with her from time to time. In
. June 1959, W. F. Wood was transferred from Mandalay
to Prome ' leaving his wife and children at Mandalay.. On
the 28th of March 1960 Mrs. Wood went to visit her
friends at Shwebo leaving William in charge of Daw Chit
Ngwe . . When she returned to Mandalay on the 31st of
March r 960, she found both Daw Chit Ngwe and her son
William missing. So, she and her husband had to file an
apP,~t!p~y,\ln4t::! see~9n 25 of_:!Y.l~ Gudi~. '.14. ~ards .
. Act~::\fff1rd~f~nce of Daw Chi{NgWe.to the' application
under section 25 of the Guardians ~d Wards Act was:
tha_t~S.he had brought up William .since.he w~ .about three
days old :and that .the applicants Mr. and Mrs. Wood
having. ~hgle~ed, abandoned and deserted their minor
S9Pr;t*~~~.;f.~?~,\~b.tit~~<hfP. h~ c~~~'" :,:~e~,~f.g~~~ tpat
- ~Y~)q1q~t<?ked ~af~er Wi~li~ ..~!t~~ 'o/~.ner ~~, ~hild,
.~{~~l5rought ~m up. m a,~!l~iP.er..~tting he~ poSJ.tion::. .''
as ~e of the late U Sem Aung, a Deputy Supenntendent
of Police:
2.28 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. The learned District Judge, after a thorough enquiry

1965
into the contentions raised by the applicants Mr. and Mrs.
DAWCHIT
NowE Wood and by the respondent Daw Chit Ngwe, passed an
v. F.
MR.W. order . directing that William Wood be delivered to the
Woon AND
ONJE.
custody of his natural parents. Daw. Chit Ngvie being
dissatisfied with the order of the learned District Judge
appealed as proVided for, in section 47 of the Guardians
and Wards Act, and a Bench of this Court dismissed her
appeal holding that although Daw Chit Ngwe might have
brought up the boy since he was a few years old, she had
no real defence to the application under section 25 of the .
Guardians and Wards Act. The order of the appellate
Court was passed on the I 8th of March I 963.
On the 28th of March . I963, the plaintiff Daw Chit: ~
Ngwe.filed the present suit for declaration that the mino~
William Wood was her adoptive son. According to her
she had brought him up as her own child since he was
about three days old, with the intention that he should
inherit and that if there is any legal impediment to his
being declared a kittima adoptive son, a declaration to .the
effect that he was her apatittha adoptive son should be
given. Mr. and Mrs. Wood by their writte11: statem~nt
contended inter alia that the plaintiff Daw Chit Ngwes
suit was barred by res judicata . in view of the decision in
Civil Miscellaneous Case N9: 38 of 1;96o:. This defence-'
~~as ~cc;~pt~d .PY th~ lear~m~R~trict Ju~ge . ~?~', ac~B.iJt1-{~~
mgly : dismissed the plamtiff ' Daw Ch1t Ngwe's smt~~?
Hence the present appeal. . .-:i':::
. Now, the application ~"QY. , the defendant-respond~n,~~. ,~
Mr. :and Mrs. W~od in the previous case was b~ed on tli~.;:;,,
giou~d tJ:ra.:~ being the:'riatural~ par~nts of the mu16r-,
:wniiam. w ; .: .
.'!' {::~~.~~~.!;~.;"?{.J'.;?:"".'
.,
_;:_.j{j;m .fact
~iiif>}ffi[iilf-appellant
. ;ha~e. Specifically 1.n.;:;au~:;,u J:ler right to the ......,....v ... y
. the minor... was that of Mr. and Mrs . . ...
that account. Under the Burmese Buddhist Law, the two c.c.
t965
principal incidents of adoption are that the adopted child
DAWCHIT
-changes its parents and it loses all rights of inheritance in NcWJ> .
YJ.
the property of its natural parents. In fact, the adopted MR.W.F.
child leaves the family of its natural parents and enters .'OODAND ONE.
that of the adoptive parents almost as effectively as if it
had been born in the adoptive family, so long as the
adoptive parents remain Buddhist. (See Lahiri's Burmese
Buddhist Law, page 163 of the 6th Edition.)
The plaintiff-appellant Daw Chit Ngwe had failed to
take this attitude in her defence to the application under
-section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act. She did not
.also take the alternative course opened to her of filing an
.application under section 10 o~ the Guardians and Wards
Act read with section /thereof, to be appointed guardian
of the minor William Wood on the ground that her rights
were superior to that of his natural parents.
Accordingly, in our opinion, the plaintiff's present
suit is barred by the principles of res judicata.
In Mauna Hmat v. Mauna Htay (r), it was held that
where in a Civil Miscellaneous Proceedings for letters of
administration the parties to the appeal were rival
:claimants, evidence was recorded at length as in a regular
suit and the respondent was held by the Court not to be
a 'legitimate daughter of one Ma~ng ,P~w. t.hls finding
. :~~~hStitui~(f~a bar ..to a declara#ir}r:-~rtfii ~e' respondent .. l)y
that she was a legitimate daugP,ter of Maung Paw on the
general principles of res judicata. . I~ Doddi Dorayya v.
. 'Bathula Adinarayarid (2), it was held _that proceedmgs
tinder. ;Rule 2 of the Madras Agri~~.tu$ts' R~lief Act of
1938 were'.iiot of a ~ummary naiur_e ~d th_~(therefore,
.. ~ f!"'! -'":... . -:; ct.-
~-li''i' ~ 1":-... ~.. 0
.;. ,,,.,.,~'-';
~~ ~.order:
.-
tliereiD:::~at,
-
a pers<:5_n<:
~~
1 ..
'Y(as not an-i~gricul~~ r
:
-,.. ... . _. .
~l~~or~o:~~~!~~~~~f(g~~::n!nS:~~~~;~:_
(1) I Ran. p. 258. (z) A.I.R. (1953) Mad. p. 183.
c .c. In this connection the following observations of the

1965
learned Judge may be us~fully reproduced. He said:
- DAWCHlT
NGWE "The learned Judges held that the doctrine of res judicatcr
'lJ.
MR.W.F. is not confined . to decisions in suits but applies even to-
WooDANE decisions rendered in proceedings, which are not suits. To
ONl!.
ascertain whether a procee<ling is summary or not, they have
!_aid down various tests and hel<;l that if the proceeding is not'
a summary one, a decision therein would be res judicata if
the conditions laid down in Section I I C.P.C. are complied-
with. They .negatived the contentio~'l that a proceeding
under S. 84(1) of the Madras Hindu Religious Endowme..11ts.
Act is summary in nature. The fact that t:he District Court
is bound to take evidence, shoufd act ~:m the materials placed'
before it by parties, should decide substantial questions.
affecting rights , of parties and similar characteristics were
considered ~. indicating that the proceedjngs were not sum.
mary in their nature."
In Srimati Raj Laksbmi Dasi and others v. Ranamali Sen-

and others (3), it was held that the decision of the Special
Judge appointed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
was binding on the parties in a subsequent suit, on :the .
principle of res judicata, that the condition regarding the
competency of the former Court to try the subsequent .
suit was one of the limitations and engrafted on t~e
general rule of res judicata .by section r I of the Code and
. that this limitation has application to suits alone. .

In the Ci!~,c;P;<?JY;,l,!nder
.-.-.1:1-~\-Y/. .
'i:;:_;:.:....-_
c0n~i5f~ration, .ih~ o:q.ly;,.;o
~: ~1 '
reij!e~Y,~
...;:f;/.!t.'t-
, .:. ' ,
.:;:;
..... '~ I t: -~ ' ~ ~1.1,-f''
which was op-en-":tO 'Mr. and ..Mrs. Wood ~for the rest~ta:~~;::
tion of the . c~stody of their minor son 'was by way' "()f .
application tm.der.. the Gua:t:_dians and Wards Act, v.,_if!::,.,~
Shadeo v. Mfil:i.z:~j{-9n,d another. (4), where ."the .late .ffighit;_
Co\lrt of Judlt~fu.r~;.~t Rango,oz:i cited With approv~(tith~:~~~
decision of., .. i ri1i~":Sench ,of.1fue Madr-as Higli~-oUf.t~drl*'
Sathi arid :f-: ' \mj~ ~:.i.cJn~~i ; P~rldiJt:iiJA',:~g)~~- ~~~'-
fore, if n s~~- ~i~e had.ielied .up6~~ffi~'1t~ct'iliat- tlie.
" ~-.'!:. . -~94:''~.!:3''!.".. . . .. . . . :
(3) A.i.R'.''(x953) Si:li>reme Court, p. 33 . - (4) ' 9 Rqti. p. 569.
-::.,. . :: : : (s) 42. Mad. p. 647.
minor William Wood being her adoptive son should not c.c.
r96s
be restored to the custody of his natural parents, she
DAWCHIT
should have specifically raised a plea to that affect. This NcwE
she did not do. Accordingly, her present suit is barred fJ.
MR. W.F.
under the principle of res judicata. 'NoOP!\ND
ONE.
Although this point has not been raised in the trial
Court, we are inclined to think that the present suit is
.also barred by section 48 of the Guardians and Wards
Act. On the plaintiff's own showing the present suit was
designed to nullify the order passed by the District Court
in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 38 of 1960. Accordingly,
section 48 mentioned above will stand in her way. If
enacts " Save as provided by the last foregoing section
and by section 622 of the Code of Civil Procedure
(corresponding to section IIS of the Civil Procedure Code
o f 1908) an order maae under this Ad shall be final, and
'Shall not be liable to be contested by suits or otherwise."
'Therefore, the regular suit practically to contest tlie
iinding_ of the District Court is barred by the provisions
of this section.
In the result, the appeal fails and it is dismissed with
costS. Advocate's fees being assessed at K 51.
CRIMINAL REVISION
Before U Scm Maur.g. J.
c.c, DAw CHOE (APPLICANT)

z96s
Mar. 8. v.
THE UNION OF BURMA {KO KYEE) (REsl'g~~!'(r). *
Defamatio?J- use of the word "mcoo~>::5" (uvva,.t)-whether defamatory-Penal

Cede s. soo.
\vlvm: the compl.linant w:1s an employee of t!:le Mufiio_.ip~aji;}.:and the

accu;ed ~t!.d referred to him ~s c( :J:~e;()e) n (sc~vant) of a ,.~:~~~ . pe1sonJ
when he: wn,; his tenant. . :
Held: The accused ..had m!d defamatory- wcrds'it:l so call.ing the. comphd-
nant. i: is not an act causing slight hu1m, but a s-!rious imputation.
S!u.lrif Almwd v. Q.:zbul Sir;gh, I.L.R. 43 All. 497, referred to anti.
d istinguif'hcd.
\-Van Hock for the applicant.
Sein Bu forthe respondent.
U SAN M;\UNG, ].-. In Criminal RegUlar Trial No. 6or

of 1963 of the I rth Additional Magistrate, Rangoon, Daw
Choe, who is the applicant in the present application 'for
revision WaS convicted under section 500 of .t he }'enal
C::.9de for.:::~'%~ing .,!}~f~ed the . complaW.~t;\J{~~;~ye~ ;_~by.,
calling him .(C roG6:.i" and ~' ()~t, of u Tu~ Maung (P\'5) ..
She was sentenc~ .to a fip.e of . K wo for .this 9ff~11~e ..
Being dissatisfied with t}le conviction ~.a:rt..d - sentence, }the
.applicant .tried tp ._moV:e the Sessions Judge; H.~Pi~W.~~(iy
.,....:.and Rangoon,
~..... . ' . .
td'. i~:~9Pifuend to this Court.tli1{f~(h~$.P.n~c:-
-f ~~~ :.~.t*
; .. : ...
'_f'
.
'-!
. ~ _..~.;':..'~t:.~- ~.;.
:_ :.t/P.Jm .and::~7~~~~~~~~~t.~4e.;on t~e ~~ . , ~~~1~ 11~~;~
mel;'ely.4....... ...~:: ~e~complainant as.cg:_ . . ~88rro:>:o:>'' ..
.~ ..a.f-1;}~:-~ . :~~ ...4::~1~~ .. l ~-.. .. lt.
---
. . . :. ... ;:'~ ~-: ,. . . . . .. ,. .- ....,,.r, ' .. ..
Crirrui:ia:1>Revision No. x6o (B) of ~964; 'Review.: of the order. of the.
sessions judge of Rangoon dated the 27th day of August, 1964, passed. in
CriJninal Revisio~ No: .7o qf 1964.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 23J
and that she had never described him either as cc s:JG:D~" c1965
.c.
".
or "~t The learned Sessions Judge considered that the DAw CHoE.
complainant had exaggerated his case by saying that the v.
THBUNION
accused had called him "~f ~'. He however held that OF Bt.'RMA
the complainant had been called "m-;~Q " and that in the (Ko KYEE)~
circumstances of the case it was defamation to have called
~he complainant as such. In the circumstances he refused
to recommend that the conviction and sentence be set
aside.- Hence the present application for revision to this
Court by the accused Daw Choe.
Now,. it would appear that there was a piece of land
in Pathein-nyunt Kwetthitwhich stood in the joint names
of U Tun Maung (PW 5) and the accused Daw Choe.
There was also a house situated on this iand and the
complainant K~ Kyet occupied one room . in it while
Ko Thaung, husband of Ma Khin Nwe (PVv 4) occupied
another. This house was burnt down by fire and both
Ko Kyee and Ko Thaung were accommodated at the
Refugee Camp at Kaba Aye. Later, the authorities
concerned allowed Daw Choe to construct a new building
on this land on condition that she would lease it to the
original tenantS. After the house was rebuilt Daw Choe
refused to put the ~omplainant Ko Kyee into possession
se. that Ko Kyee reported the matter to the Local Security
and Administrative. Committee. This matter was enquired
<-into by;_U Myip,t:;.JPY.V. . 6)., .,Su~-Irispector of., Felice and dt .
was aileged th.lt{/when ' examined' by the' police _offi~er
Daw. Choe .had stated in the -presence of Ko Kyee~ U Tun
Maung .and Ma;: Khin Nwe .that .she did not reinstat~
. Ko Kyee because .he was nee a>.'t~nant of U Tun Maung .
.but mere]y his "~G~~--~~-'
.. ..
~ ~ .
Or\ '.!_ ;,;~~~>That SUCh a Statemeiit
. :, <; .. o ... ..:.. . ;:.... .
~ ,.~ '
_;_ was:ffi<l~e i~ suppp:rt~s!J}y t}i~e.Y-ld~~e of tb,e.$ulr.I~or

. o~ '1'6lke-.hi~~rt%~:/A&:ordl.ilg!y;'r.ffie' Ieame(l'~M:agtitr.ate
. , ....,;. ~~.~.lo~ie.~~... -.~ ; 4 - :-~ f',?{ol). ~ .! ._. ~ . 1" ' ' '\
holding that'~*.h~i~~~~riient wasdefamatQ~.i(<iOilVicted the

ac'cused Da.W/:'CJire as mentioned above~ The learned
Sessions Judge, .howev~r, :thought that inasniuch :a.S the
c.c. expression '' m.Jt" was not mentioned by Ko Kyee in his

- 1965
complaint the statements of some witnesses to the effect
.DAW CHOB
v. that such an expression was used to describe Ko Kyee
.'THBUNION
OF B URMA
were ex;:~.ggerations. He, however, believed that the word
I(Ko KYBB). " s;>GDQ " was "used and that the comp~airiant Ko Kyee
being a relation, and not a servant of U Tun Maung, had_
been defamed.
Sitting as a Court of revision I am not prepared to

say that the finding of fact of the learned trial Magistrate
that the accused Daw Choe had described Ko Kyee as
~' ::r.lGn~ " and "~~ " to the Sub-Inspector of Police who
was making an iJ:lquiry into the matter is perverse inasmuch
.as the Sub~Irispector of Police himself~ -said that such .an
expression was used by Daw Choe~ However, even
ass-uming that Daw Choe had only called Ko Kyee an
cc 8dG4>Q ~ of U Tun Maung and not his tenant I consider
that the word used in describing KoKyee-was defamatory.
The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant

Daw Cho~ has relied upo_n the commentary to sectiqn 95
-of the Penal Code in Ratanlal's Law of Crimes for his
-contention that the matter was covered by this secti~n.
1n the commentary the following sentence occurs under
the caption ~ Acts causing slight harm where a barrister II
.an~:~q)ieaaei>w~re
. ,;.._,, . :-. . ....
.~ ..:..:.,--: ~and .th~ Ja,tter
.engaged in a,CMe, ....... .
~made
. , ; .:.:;
a rema!k conveying an imputapon-o n ""the form.er . upon

Which the former CC1lled the latter a . " liar " the WOr"Qs
used ~-were . more akin to an abuse 'or ..insult=than toan
';~ ;,'''' ' charaCter. With ''this ' commen~ i am
. :'7' ....... :;-::-~~ .~. .,.. ' . ."; .- .., ..
be9~~ in the J_lea_t -~Q~J:~ll,e.. #~eni

. make~' a seri~~~j_ippij~~ti~i{ rin~~*ther, _,;
. retorte<l by sa~-tftli~
~ .... ......._;_...;:'f:'..;~,....
p.erson :: ~~king

::i::
\i:~
"".,,, ....... .., ... tation was a- .-~ liar "., the expression was '':
-. . .. .....
~- ~!'- . . . .
l_ll~_( ~o;re to. convey _an insult than ~? defame J:iis
.character.
Another case. relied upon by the learned Advocate for ~9~

the .applicant is Sharif Ahmad v. Qabul Singh (I). There DAw CHoE .
during
.
the hearing
.
.of a civil suit in the
.
case of one, Ramji

v.
THEUNION
Lal against the Municipal Board of Kairana, a question oF BuRMA
. arose as to the authority of the acting Secretary of the (Ko KYEE).
Municipal Board to sign and verify. the written statement .
on behalf of the Board. The complainant Qabul Singh,
a Vakil was present in his professional capacity represent-
ing Ramji Lal while the accused Sharif Ahmad who. was
also Chairman of the Municipal Board was also present jn
Court. Qabul Singh took objection to the authority of
the clerk to sign and verify the plaint. He said that the .
pay of the clerk concerned was only Rs. 10 to .Rs. 15 a .
month. Thereupon, Sharif Ahmad broke in and said: :
"Ram Chandra Sahai's status is higher than yours." .
Thereafter Qabul Singh prosecuted Sharif Ahmad under
section 500 of the Penal Code and he was convicted by
the trial Magistrate. On application by Sharif Ahmad to
the High Court of Allahabad the conviction and sentence
. were set aside, the learned Judges of the High Court
holding t~at section 95 of the .Penal Code was applicable.
.. . . . . .
However, in that case Qabul Singh, the complainant
was a It:!ading Vakil having an income of Rs. I6,ooo a
.year ; so, the learned Judges of the Allahabad High .Court
',;considereq::,tllat; to, $~Y.,~that the -:$t?.tus g(.,Qabul Singh was
lower than~'t:hat of' :~ derk . fuirwwg Rs~ 'ro . or R!L .i5. a
month could not be defamatory as no one present in Court
:.Could have:; taken this very seriously and that, therefore;
no persori))f ordinaiy. balance; -sense and temper would
~' hav~. m~~e :the .incident a :Subject of criminal proceedings. .
:' '.,_:.000+: ;~_~.d;:~:: , ;, . ~ ... ~-i ~,:, ': O:~_ f~. :.;.::~:~:~~O .:::,;:,~-~::.; 0 0 0 ~
0
I , ' , :
. , :In :inyr~~-o.*-~:a#,&J.!~~hri.ia~W ca5e'(:t) ~ dist:ln~~p?ble

~: fromthe pres~t~,,~: : e:'::cQinplainailt .. Ko Kx,~~:~fs::'~an
: employee of th~t;:;, and his work\\ti;rJ~;I~~k
uniapality
. (x) I.L.R. 43 A_ll.499,
17
c.c. after the Municipal gardens. He was .a tenant of U Tun
I96S
Maung. Therefore, in an enquiry which resulted from
DAW CHO
(1, Daw Choe's refusal ~o reinstate him on the grourid that
THE UNioN
OF BURMA he was not a tenant of U Tun Maung, it was a serious.
(Ko KYBE). imputation to call him a " servant " of U Tun Maung
instead of being U Tun Maung's tenant.
for these reaso~ I do not consider that the conviction
and senteri:ce meted out to the .applicant Daw Choe should
be disturbed. The application for revision fails and it js
.dismissed.
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before U San Mau11g, J.
DAW MYA MAY (APPELLANT) c.c.

1<i6s
v. 10 Apr.
DAW HLA YIN AND SI~ OTHERS '(RESPONDENTS).*
Adopticn-by ailing atmt before death-whether obtaitzed by undue influmce.

Courts not to make out a case differmt from the pleadings. Contract Act,
s. 16 (3)-presumption as to undue influence-when arisu. Concurrmt
findings by lhwer courts as to "undue influence "--not question of fact but
that of lav;-pO'Wer of High Co11rt to disturb such finding. "Lack of
publicity" in adoption-t<~hethn rekvant. Contractual nature of adoption
under the Registration of Kittima Adoption Act.
Held: Where the plaintiff had alleged that the Deed of Adoption ia
favour of the defendant by an ailing, deceased aunt shortly befor"e her death
was void as it was obtained by " undue influence;,, it is not open to the Court
to suggest that the deceased was more or less senseless at the time of execution
and did not know what she was doing. Such a finding would mean that
it was null and void on that accountalone, andno question of" undue influence
would arise for consideration. It is not for the Court to make out a cas~
different from the one set out in the pleadings.
A.S.P.S.K.R. Kamppan Chettyar and one v. A. Clzokkalingam Chettiar~
(1949) .B.L.R., p. 46 (S.C.) ; U Than Tiu v. M. Ba Ba, (19~3) B.L.R., p.<)
(S.C) ; -referred to and followed.
Held further : Assuming that the Defendant, as the niece of the deceased
and living in the same house and looking after her, was in a position to dominate .
.:. there iS: no evidence to show tliil~sh~.;.\tsed her position ~o obtain the execution.
' ' 'bf the Deed of Adoption. The pr~umption in s.x6 (3) of the Contl'$ct :Act
as to undue influence by a person in a position to dominate the will of"
another, will arise only if the transaction appears on the face of it or on evidence
adduced to be wi.conscionabl~. In this case, there is nothing unConscionable
in the Deed of Adop~ion. ~ _ . .
Held also : The concurrent fuid.ings of the two lower courts that the
Deed ~f Adoption was invalid-because it w;s obtained by "undue influence'"
is not.-based' on p~0 4uestions of .fact. It depends upon. the legal inference
~;;,~~-~roved fa.ct5~ i~{b.i~'ii f~~ittl? ~flaw. Accordingly,' the High Cr~~~=
*"'}can disturb this finding on Sec:Ond~eal. , ~:-..;:... -:.
.
:tr. ...
J :~~;.: ~~';{. ....:;...:.t.~\~..;....
Civil Second Appeal N~:.::~z :-;;{ x2, against the decree of the DistriCt:
Court ~Toungoo in Civ'iiAppeal No. xo of.1962. dated 21st. }une.~962.
c.c. Dharma Mal and others v. Moti Sagar, I.L.R.8 Lah. 573 (PC) ; U San Pe
1965
v. Mq Thin Kyi and one, (1955) B.L.R. p. 137 ; Wali Mohamed and others
DAW MYA v. lliohamed Baksh and others, 57 I. A. 87 af p. 91 referred to.
MAY The question of "lack of publ icitSr" has arisen in cases of adoption made
v.
DAW HLA before the R~istration of Kittima Adoption Act, 1939. When a Deed of
YIN AND Adoption is duly executed and registered in complience with the R~gistration
SIX OTHERS. of Kittim~ A<loption Act, the Deed itSelf is a clear and sufficient proof of the
adoption.
Ma Kyaingv. Ma OhnK.yiandfourothers,(t963) B.L.R., p. x84; Ma PU. v .
.D;;w Aye Mya and others, (1948) B.L.R. 19 at p.26 ; Lim Chill So v. Lim.Geokseo,
(1956) B.L.R. 248 at p. z6o ; referred to and followed.
Held further ; Adoption 'UIJ.der the Burmese 'Buddhist Law 'is a contract.
It is all the
m:>re so a contract under the R egistration of Keittima Adoption
Act. Accordingly, unless such a contract can be. avoi~ed on proof of U.O:due
influence, fraud, etc., it remains, valid in ~aw.
Dr. Ba Maw for the appellant.

Maung Maung Khin for the respondents.
U SAN MA~G, J.-This appeal un:der

clause (a), (b) or
(cf of sub-section (I) of section roo, Civil Procedure Code,
is against the judgment and decree of the DiStrict .Court
of Toungoo in qvil Appeal No. 10 of 1962, wherein the
learned Dis~rict Judge confirmed the judgment and deer~
of the Subdivisional Court, Toungoo, in Civil Regular Suit
No. 9 of 1960 for the administration of the estate of the
deceased Daw Aye .
. .;.,.:: ':(he ,J~Ci.l?..giving rise toJh~-.-Present .app~al . "!!e brief!ytl:.<
as~foilows : . In'.Civil Regular'::Siiit :No. 9 of 1966 fuention~l~~:
above Daw Hla Yin, the first -respml.dent in the pre~en.i
appeal by her original plaint;.~med the defendant-appellant ,
Daw Mya. .May. and the defeiid~nt-respondents oaw HIK~:
. Tin anf.U .Sein for the administration of the estate of her .
..~~f.~~~~l h*:s!s,t~f.~paw... ~~~;-~~!?,;d~~~d. a~ To~Ji~?o .gn
il';:~!J:<5f septeriil?er~:f957;_{:P 'iffo~ding to Daw:<'Ia~ "'"'. .; .~"""''
i:sz~h'<i .the defendants
...: _. _.. ,_.
t(.-:ol~tiio<.~ ~ .;.;:;..-- ~ ~
~""' ~ .
... ...... "'-:
l -Tjn and... . u sein.'
.,. ':::!:1 '
-ha1f-&sters -and half-brother .Of.the deceased.Daw.
the bnly persons entitl~ .;to inherit her . es~te.
the defendant Daw Mya May who was only a niece of c.c.
1965
Daw Aye she was impleaded for t}:le purpose of C?btaining
DAwMYA
a declaration to the effect that registered deed of adoption MAY
v ...
dated the 2nd of August 1957, by which Daw Aye DAw HLA
purported to adopt her as a Kittima daughter was null YIN AND
SIX OTHERS.
and void because it was obtained by " undue influence "
as defined in section 16 of the Contract Act.
The plaintiff Daw Hla Yin was allowed to amend her
plaint for no less than three times. By $e 3rd amended
plaint dated the 4th of March 1961, Daw Hla Yin claimed
that she was_one of the eight heirs of the deceased Daw
Aye, the other heirs being Daw Mya May, Daw Hla Tin
and U Sein who were impleade4 in her.original plaint, and
U Sein Pe, U San Pe, U Tun Hla and Daw Saw whose names
appear in her subsequent plaint. These new defendants
\\rere the brothers and sister of Daw Mya May aii'd t~ey
were related to the deceased I)aw Aye as nephews and
niece being the children of her full-blooded brother, U Pan
Tha . . t.By the 3rd amended plaint plaintiff Daw Hla Yin .
asked for the administration of the estate of Daw Aye on
the footing that she was entitled to Ya th share thereof,
because the dee'd of adoption dated the 2nd of August '!.957
was null and void:
Of the defendants the only person who seriously
.. conte.Sted: D.aw .HJ.~ .Yin's suit' was the .<lefendant-appellan~ ''
:n aw .-Mya Mai -,~~sit~ denied' th~t .the 'r~gistered deed of ~
adoption dated the 2nd of August 1957, was obtained by
: undue influence " as allegf:?d by the plaintiff. She . also
said that the house.mentioned as Item_one in t:Pe schedule '
.of properties rumexed .to the plain~-.c:}id d!Ot wholly belong
:: :,~0. ..~~~:':~~~~~/?.~~~e::~~~~s~~,i P.~~j!Aie as :.~h~e wa~ .~\"
:_.:~q?P:tx<ict of:sal:'b'y::Paw:'i}.Y~J>f~this house to "herself an<J.itt
t;Jli~;;hti-sband u
f!o'".:ii/:'.':
B.~
sem ~~ai~-tlie
:-~-~........ -<:' . .
~~f'~{ft'J
purchase price....... ,...,~
K 6,ooo of which K 5;o6o had alteady been paid to..
Daw Aye. :./,
Of the other defendants in the suit U Tun Hla and

-
DAW MYA
MAY
Daw Saw supported the stand taken by the defendanf-
appellant Daw Mya May as may be seen from the written
fl.
DAW HLA
statement filed by them on the 14th of October 1960 to
YIN A>"'D the 2nd amended plaint. The other defendants including
SIX OTHI!RS.
U Sein . Pe and U San Pe, brothers of Daw Mya May,
suppor~ed. the plaintiff's case.
Accordingly the most important issue involved was

whether the deed of adoption dated the 2nd August 1957
was void because it was obtained by "- undue influence "
as defined il). section r6 of the Contract Act. After
.examining witnesses cited .b y both the parties the learne<I
trial Judge answered th~ issue in the affirmative for. the
reasons given in the following passage of his judgment.
The learned Judge said: .
" Now, it has been revealed from the evidence on record
that Daw Aye, deceased, whi1e suffering from her lingering
illness, was on the Ist lazan of Wagaung, 1319 B.E.
(27-7-1957) fallen down to the ground from her bath-room
on the upper storey of her double-storied building, and since
then, she could not move and was senseless for 15 days and
she died on the 9th Lasok Tawthathin 1319 B.E. (17-9-1957).
The registered adoption deed (Exhibit 2) was executed and
registered on the 7th lazan Wagaung; 1319 B.E. (2-8-1957)
as it appe~~ed on . the face of the said document. So it is
~~:'f~parerit that.it,.was,:0ecuted.~.n~ regist~t:ed only af~e.r 6 days~:;~
of the fall of the deceaseq. fmni the house. The exact date ..,
of the fall could not .be ascertained by the 1st defendp.nt .
and her wi~esses. . .Therefore, it can hardly be pr~sumeci ~~~
that Daw Ay.e)was in no~al. mental condition: on th,e date . .:::
of the-. exeqijtiop
.l .
.()fi the exhibit
;'>-
adoption
- .{!- .
deed.
-~
: .
In the testi- :?
J~. ' .........
many of ~o M}'illt_Way (f!W 4), the ,,Registra~on ,Clerk to .

\. ~b~R~gis~ -u.J~l}._tm ,I95:J.,A ~adJi~n.'tcfuhdJt~~# that:~~ ,;~~
~i):hec.time of execution an~~~~a#Q.lJ. of tlie adoptiqn d. '
~~{Eili~it:2) at tl).e hous~ of.~~ec~e'd Daw A:Ye, the dec~
' ed . was laid up 1n bed )iiider illness and that he thought '::i::
.the patient was senseless': at . that time, only recovering h~ . ,. ,.
. .
senses at intervals. The actual words the said witness de- c.c.
1965
posed are:
DAwMYA
MAY
t:'.
DAW HLA
YIN AND
SIX OTHERS.
name."
In the result, the plaintiff's suit was decreed with costs.
Being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree of the
trial Court the defendant Daw Mya May appealed and
the learned District Judge of Toungoo dismissed the appeal
for the reasons given in the following passage of his
judgment: The learned Judge said:
~The fact that Daw Aye was in a very bad condition
~t the time. of the e?Cecution and registration of .the deed
Z~i:i ev.id~ce :by the . deposition~;9~Ko . Myint .way ~W 4) in .
''\vhich .he stated that when he:~'a the Sub-Registrar U Lone .
"(now deceased) wehi: to register the deed, the deceased Daw
Aye was lying on a bed in the ground-floor of her house
~d that in his opinion Daw . Aye: was unconscious at that
. time and that she . only .recover~ her senses at intervals.
This Witn~ ~~ates: ,_
~~ ;; -,~ :./ " ~L~~<ft
.. ~ ..... -. dT ,. t-~~r~~=~ ;.cn~ro?:c::oo:> c::~?E8o1::n~ u
-.... .
11
-a \ . ~~ #' ~-}}.r~ ., ' Cj L C.:.
:;~~: _-~:nGo:n9ooe>;CJSjg9~~'i',c-:f.-i'
~~ - U _
-~oo5ro8o1::n~ia:>~:a:>.s:>:oot
..... ... t::. T T

6 ::L:'
rff :,~~o~~8o1 ~~mo3:UGo;;~b c::fu":>~~G>ro:>:~~<)E8o1n" ".""-

....
... T T . Jl tl . ,, - : .._ tl L
.A Pf.rusal of the doctu~ent ."{Exhibit 2) also reveals that:
there is no signature of the deceaSed Daw Aye on it. There
c.c. is only the thumb impression of the deceased. Throughout

I96S
the evidence it is known that the deceased Daw Aye was
DAW MYA literate and was .able to sign her name. The absence of the
. :t\'fAY
t/. signature of Daw Aye shows that she was in a bad state and
DAw HLA entirely unable even to siWl her short na'!lle. The . evidence
YIN ANJ)
SIX OTHBRS. of the registration clerk Maung Myint Way ,(PW 4) shows
clearly that the deceased Daw Aye was unable to understand
as to what she was doing. In May Oung's Buddl:iist Law at
page r21 it is stated thus:
' The essential con9~tion is that the act of adoption is
performed in full consciousness of w hat is being done. '
The manner in which the deceased Daw .Aye signed the
adoption deed would show that the deed was obtained by
undue influence. Acco:r:ding to section 16. of the Contract
Act a contract is said to be induced by undue influence where
the rel(\tions subsisting between the parties are such that one
o( the 'parties is in a position to dominate the will of the
other. and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage
over the other. The condition in which Daw Aye was at
the time of executing the adoption deed she was clearly not
in a fit mental capacity to know what she was doing and her
m1nd was probably disturbed by her illness. Persons
contracting with persons whose mental capacity 1s effected
arepresumed to be in a position to nomina~ th~ will of the
other party. A person . who enters into a contract with
another wh~se mental capacity is effected by physical or
mental distress or old age or by illness is also deemed to be
in ~ position to dominate the will of that ()ther person.
Therefore while the deceased Daw Aye was in the condition
th~t:'.~Jle .w~..;~at,:.the ~m~):>f .. th.~ .t~'f~$1ftion. of 0e .ad~RU<?n .
deed- she .was suffermg from bo.tliJfphysldtl and niehtal
. distt:ess by ill~ess, and when th,e appell.a nt-rst defendant Daw
Mya May and her husband U Sein Bwint .made the deceased
exeeute ~d register , the dotumeiit'ib.ev were clearly iii.. a
p~sition to dominate t4e will of the~dec~ed Daw Aye. For
. all tl).ese .reaso~s it m:ust be . held :~'that 'the . ad(mi:ion' 'deed
. (J;.X~it .. ~):; ;was . . ' ' and th~~tthe
aJcillifeiit would cbe in ""~.,.f!'rt; ( ,:'
. '~~~~~,.;: .. : . ':' .. :, ,\
l~~bW~;~lt would. seem that ....w.~~&'-'

Judge ~d not-.say so
in so .--:--J.,
. ..
c.c.
come to the conclusion that at the time the 'deceased 1965
Daw Aye.executed the registered deed of. adoption dated DAWMYA
the 2nd of August 1957, by affixing her thumb impression MAY
v.
thereto, she did not'in fact know that she was executing DAw HLA
such a deed. The learned Subdivisional Judge 'did not srxYIN AND
OTHERS.
say that in his opinion baw .Aye was unable to understand
what she was 'doing at the time she affixed her thumb
impr~ssion to the deed of adoption. He merely reproduced
a portion of the evid,ence of the Registration Clerk
K<;> Myfut Way (PW 4) for the view that Daw Aye was
more or less senseless at that time, only recovering her
senses at intervals.
Now, if the learned District Judge considered that at
the time Daw Aye executed the deed of adoption dated
the ind of August 1951~ she did not know what she was
doing, his finding was tantamount to that the deed of
adoption was not in fact that of the deceased Daw Aye.
If so, it is null and void on that account alone~ and no
question .of the deed having been obtained by " undue
influence" as defined in section 16 of the Contract Act
re~lly arose for his consideration. The fact that he did
come to a finding that .this 'deed was obtained by " undue
influence", necess.arily predicates that Daw Aye knew
what she was doing when .she affixed her thumb impression
to the deed, Accordingly, the judgment of the learned
b~~.ct Judg;,;,H~'% ..~l!dg_. appeal is no~..:5.~~ui~oc~..~n
this account. ';;Smillarly . JS the .case of ili~Judgment of
the learned tria~ Judge whi<:h had been confirmed by the
learned Dist;rict Judge.
It is ~ettled. l~w that a_party shocld be.~llowed to win
or loss on a case se~':-9Jl~)l} his pleadings and tha,t .it is .not
t~t: . . function . qf A:f tti~L or .. a~ appellate : court to _.
..make. out a~i~~~~etffiffcient
... . :.-:-; :.."'-
- ,:oo~.s,-t
-from tlie'\ohe::.,set
':. :;. ...""; . .
' out m, ~!:i
pleadings. / rs.~~iS.P.S.K.R~ Karrippan!;Cif.~
~A'.Jr:oo~~~-t"'l~. .. . q~~~,l_..~.b_r and -one .
~.A. Ch6'J(KaJhfgO.m . C~ettiar (1) an<f'1-'t f !'fhan Tin v~
(x) (1949) B.L.R. p. 46. ($.C.).
~;~ .M. B~ Ba (2)] The ca.se of the plaintiff Daw Hla Yin
DAw MvA being that the registered deed of adoption dated the
MAY 2nd August 1957 was obtained from the deceased Daw Aye
DAwvHLA
~~~
by "undue influence" it is not .
open to the trial Court
. .
:SIX OTHERs. or to the lower appellate Court_to suggest that Daw Aye
being more or .less senseless at the time she did not know
what she was doing when s~e affixed her thumb impression
on the 'deed of adoption.
"Undue influence" has been _defined in section r6 of
the Contract Act as follows :
" A contract is said to be induced by ' undue influence ' - .
where the relations subsisting between the parties are such
. that one of :the parties is in a 'positiot?- to dominate the will
of another arid US!?S that position to obtain an unfair ,
advantage over the other. ,,
" Undue influence " is presumed when a person who

is _in a position-to _dominate the will of another, enters
into a contract with him, and the 1:!ansaction appears on
the .face of it . . .or . on . . the evidence addu- . ced to be
unconscionable: . - . .
. Where a person makec; a contractWith another whose
mental capacity is temporarily affected by reason of age
. or illness or bodily distress that persoq. i,s deemed to be in :
. a position' to dominate the will of the other.
~f~tviae 'sub-secticil)s (2) and'i(,k) :~f-settidflf~!-6:]. ~:. - . ,~::,;~_: ;-:~
~':'!;'~: - . :Bearing this definition' Iii mind, ; iet_:; ~s .examme :tb:e .
' circumstances of the present case. The qeceased D<iw Aye .
was the daughter -of ()ne.u bhn .,,li~ 'first wife tiaw .
She ha.d an eid:h '"' ' Tha whos~ ;_;
''--U.UUJL"-.ll'were-fii~ defendants defendants 'f;
"
.,:v.....,,...,. .; f(j 7t~1Klf.tei.~ '. u)~g~'>.;;,~
Daw.-sefu ,
. . .:. . ~~<i~ :''
were the: Hla Yin an:a:.
..,:'!-'-,....
_ ......., ...
<4. ....., baw Hhi Tin .~~d. u -.Sein. _:,A.~out thi-ee y~s-
'before the death of Daw Aye the defendant Daw Mya May c.c.
1965
and her family came to live with her at Toungoo at a DAW MYA
bouse adjacent to that where defenaant Daw Hla Tin MAY
v.
resided with her husband. Thereafter, there were a series DA\V HLA
of litigations between Daw Mya May and her husband SIXYIN AND
OTH'ERS.
U Sein Bwint on the one hand and Daw Hla Tin and her
husband on the other. A dispute arose between them
'Over the house where Daw Hla Tin and her husband were
residing an'd in this d.i,spute the deceased Daw Aye sided
with her niece Daw Mya_May with whom she was living. ~
Daw Aye was about 70 years of age when she had an
accident. On or about ~he 27th of July 1957, she fell
through a hole in the floor from the upper storey to the
-groundfloor of her house. According to some of the
witnesses for the plaintiff-especially, Ma Ngwe Sein
\PW 5) and Daw Yi (PW 6)-Daw Aye was more or less
unconcious for about 15 days after her fall. The deed of
adoptio~ now sought to be impugned was executed at
her house by Daw Aye on the 2nd of August 1957, and it
was registered the same 'day by the Sub-Registrar U Lone
(now deceas~) and then Registration Clerk Ko Myint
Way (PW 4). As. to what actually took place at the
time of the .execution of this deed there is the evidence of
Ko Myint Way (PW 4) cited by the plaintiff, the defendant
Daw Mya May herself and Daw Aye Kyin (DW 5) who
was one ..Qf ~me. attesting witnesses. What Kb Myint Way
said wa;; that .n~w Aye w~ able to '8peak at 'that time
but that it:was his impression that she lost consciousness.
:now .and~ again during the time they were present at her
bed-~de ~be.cause she spoke only .a few words. 'This
witness howe~tr!' had to q1,1alify his statement when cross-
.examind. ,He. h..ad to admjt: that the Sub-Reiistrar U Lone
was a}:#,!~ j>erson and:~.that he ~as US\ially dilige~Fln
the ~~~r;~f his d~ties. He ~~-~pad to admit that
whenfU1Ene asked Daw Aye whether she as~nted to the
exe<:ution of the deed of a'doption. Daw Aye nodded
c.c.
1965
her head signifying assent. He also had to admit that
___:.. U Lone was actually conversing with Daw Aye about th~
DA~r:YA Ahlu which she intended to give the next day and that
DA:;_IiLA Daw Aye spoke a fe~ words in reply. Accordingly if.
YIN AND Ko Myint Way's evidence is taken as a whole the deceased
SIX OTHERS.
. Daw Aye fully knew what she was dmng at the time she-
. affixed her thumb impression on the deed of adoptiou
dated the 2nd of August 1957.
Of the two defen.ce witnesses, namely, Daw Aye Kyin:
(DW 5) and a Burmese physici;m by the name of Saya Mya,
Daw Aye Kyin alone could attend Court to give evidence
as Saya Mya was dead. This witness was emphatic in
that Daw Aye was quite . consciQ~ at the time she executed
. the deed of adoption -and herthumb impression was..taken
only because her hands were not steady enough to sign
the deed. According to .this :witness also Saya .Mya was
attending to Daw Aye as she was sufferil)g from diarrhoecr
and that Daw Aye died only 45 day.s later because of this:
disease..
In .view of this evidence it would be only perverse if
the Court were to come to a 'finding that Daw Aye's.
cognitive faculties were so impaired that she did not know
what she was doing at the time she affixed her thumb
. impression .
to the
.
deed of adoption . . .
. :"': l,:hat Daw Aye ful~y9iJ!t~~qe<l'
,..$::;; _.h........ .. ..,..,4,;
Fo . adopt
- the defendant
..... .. ..
paw Mya May and .thus preferred her to succeed:\to her '
~ . ..?-.... ?.- ~ -
estate to the exclusion of ht:r half-brothers and sisters and

her other neph~ws and niece, there is ample evidence -on
-~the record. U Ba Saw .' r), a. retired DiStrict
:~:~upefiutendent
. .,.q.. of
! ,.... .

P olice.

:..intimate friend of the
. ...
:~1~~~ed :Qa:W !hjs,-':witness _ap~~Lq..'.;.

~fi.lonth after 'n aw "til~ upped~ ;'~ :!.:i];i~:bt" .
f:-'ltf~- - -:~;.., ~
........:...:. .:v .
!~the hou~e he her house. H ... , ~~old
,;).!'!J ;1~,-~. '\' .
by Daw Aye that -to adopt her niece 'DawMya ..

. May a~ a Kittiina 'd~tighte~.: He wa~ also requested by
.her to make the necessary artangements with the Sub- c.c.

1965
Registrar U Lone. He accordingly told U Lone what Daw
D AW MYA
Aye had requested him to do and about four or five days MAY
'0.
later he again met U Lone who informed him that the DAW HLA
.registered deed of adoption had been executed. U Lone Y IN AND
SIX OTHERs
.also told him that his presence was required at an Ahlu
to be given by Daw Aye the next day. He went to Daw
Aye's house as invited and he was present when Daw Aye
:performed the Y e-set-cj2a ceremony for th~ Ahlu which
she had given. This Ahlu had taken the form of a
.Soon-gyi-launa to about 70 monks. Therefore, if U Ba
.Saw's evidence be believed it was at the instance of Daw
Aye that the registered deed of adoption came to be
executed, and I see no reason why U Ba Saw should be
-disbelieved.
There is also another piece of evidence which goes to
show that the deceased Daw Aye had looked upon her
niece Daw Mya May mor~ or less as an adoptive daughter
for some time before a formal deed was executed. In the
year 1957 Daw Mya May filed an application for
-exemption of certain pieces of _paddy land measuring 21
..acres an~ Daw Aye filed an affidavit in support of Daw
Mya May's application. In that affidavit which had been
filed in Reven_u e Proceedings No.
96 of ~956-57 of the
District Land Nationalisation Committee, Toungoo, Daw
Aye ~~~~ ~h,~t;D~y; Mya -May was,fl:~P.~J.li.~~ and that
:She hatl ~adoptetl the latter in the Kittima. form since the
:year 1930. The reference to the year I93Q may well be
-an ~xaggeration but the affidavit goes to establish that
:Daw Aye had been looki!lg upon her . niece Daw Mya _May
more as a ~u_ih~er. -~. . .
Nq do~bS4I!:):'b:e agreement (fu.dribit ~)~ d~ted t)l~ :.7nd.
~
. -.z..,- ... ""' -...:-- #~- .....
- ,.. . .
iaz~ ?tl~d,~~;,.'I3i7'.~.R. by whi~q~pa.w f\:ye ~ntiacted
'to J~~~~r-Jiouse and its site ;~~}jqi{oo ~ schedul~ Jf.
.anneXed to:th~ plaint for a sum of K.6,ooo to U Sein Bwint
.an~_Daw Mya May~ Daw Aye said that she had .rio one to
c. c. succeed her as heir . This fact ;is relied upon by the

. x96s
plaintiff Daw Hla Yin as showing that Daw Mya May
D AW M YA
MAY . could not have been a i\.itti!lla adoptive daughter since
v. the y ear I930 as alsq claimed by her. Howev~r. although
DAW H LA
YIN AN D it is true that the recital in the agreement, (Exhibit I),.
SIX OTHERS.
would negative the suggestion that Daw ~ya May was a:
Kittima adoptive .daughter prior to the date of the execu-
tion of the registered deed .o f adoption dated the ind of
August I 957, this will not negative the fact that she had
intended to adopt Daw Mya May formally, as had since
been done.
Now, let us apply the law relating to " un9,ue
influence" as defined jn section 16 of the C~ntract Act
to the facts of the pres~nt case: The deceased Daw Aye
who was an elderly -lady of about 67 sent for her niece
Daw Mya May and family to come and live with her at
Toungoo for the purpose of looking aft~r her in her old
age. According to USein Pe (PW 2) and other witnesses:
for the plaintiff Daw Aye 'defrayed the expenses necessary
for the maintenance of her household. She was looked:
upon by Daw Mya May and her family as the Head of tlie.
household. Before she had her fall from th~ upper storeyr
Daw Aye was served not only by Daw Mya May but also
by her children. According to U Sein Pe also when, after
. she niet with the accident, Daw Aye was bed-ridden and
. was also . sutfering.Jr9w :diarrh~ea.:
..-:r~~. - . . . . .. ~ . Daw:.MYC:l
- . r . . t: Ma:y.Aooke~.
~"J-.~w-...,.
:~~
....- "~" ~
after her althoughthe' rest of the household neglected her: . ~
This sta,~ement is in contt:adiction to that of- Ma Hla Kyi
. (Pvv_ 3) U Sein Pe's _o\Vn :wife, who said that DawAy~ was: .
neglected by everybody so that s he was more or less.. -~
.coV.ered ~with filth . .. Be ~hat.. a.~ _'i t:.;ruty, it is .c lear that ,~~
~]'be{
.
ore .Q~w
. .:1
Aye .n:i~(~w.ith;heig~cei,deh~:there
.. ,..- '<t~r~~~\-:Jp~~!'-h ~.:- .,,-: -_~; '1.'; '~[?- ..:.~ '-/i ,;,
was .no-:Jnei~t-~
-,.~-:-;,;.~.-::.";,-~..~i:~~~t:.;~ '!">::.;~*
.:. m a pOSltldn to._,g .'J~:,,_.er.. 'Yi.ll, Sn~:;,b~ni_(~~j..,~~;j)~~-,~::
v
the household. .. ..,.,,.,.:,. . g that after she s~e~~;:hed- ..

ridden, Daw Myf May wli6 looked after .h~r :Was in a
position_. to, d0miDaie; there is not a. ipta ' of. 'evjdence: to
BURMA LAW REPORTS 249> .
show that Daw Mya May used her position to obtain the c. c.
rgS,;
execution of the deed of adoption by Daw Aye. No doubt, DAW MYA.
sub-section (3) of section 16 of the Contract Act lays down MAY
that when a person who is in a position to dominate the o ...wviD..""

will of another enters into a contract with him it must SIXYIN Ju-...o
OTHERS.
be presumed until the countrary is proved that the coli.tract
was induced by "undue influence" if the transaction
appears on the face of it or on evidence adduced to be
unconscionable. However, in my opinion, there is nothing
unconscionable in the deed of adoption.
The circumstances show that Daw Mya May was in
the position of the most favoured niece. She was looking
after Daw Aye in sickness and in health. According to
the admission .of the plaintiff's own witnesses, even when
the o~her persons were loathe to attend on her because
she was not only bed-ridden but was suffering from
diarrhoea as well, Daw Mya May continued to tend to
her needs . . Accordingly, it is not surprising that Daw Aye
should wish to adopt Daw Mya May and fuus selected
her among her half-brothers and sisters and her other
nephews and niece as the person to succeed her in the
event of her death.
Therefore, sub-section (3) of section 16 of the Contract
Act cannot come .into play, and in the absence of any
evidence on the record to show that Daw Mya May had
used~her poSitidii to influence DaW'; Aye to adopt her, the
findings of the two courts below that the registered deed
of adoption. was invalid because .of section 16 of the
Contract
. Act, cannot
.
be allowed to stand. .
'It has.b~err strongiy contended by the learne<l Advocate
for the pla1.~~-~espondent Daw Hla Yin that-t4e;;I~ed
-Judg#!9tf~~~
.- -~t . . ' two coUrts below l.:J.~4
-.;. , .....come to' a-coiiclirrent
fiQ.djlm~C!J::foact tbat the deed %:f~l>tio~ was obtained by.
. . "~~~e inflqence " .and that, therefore, this findingcannot
. :be disturbed ni a second appeal under section xoo of the
DAW MYA
MAY
v.
D.\W HLA
YIN AND
:SIX OTHERS.
(3) (1953) iL.R. .'i>'-:'4-ii. (H.C.) (6) I.L:R.{ . i..~., sn(P.c.y . .

(4) (1949) B.L.R., p:95, (7) (1955) L.R. p. 1 j7. .
p.
(5) .(195 1) B.L.R., 341. (8) S?.J.A.87.atp.91.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 251,..
c.c.
1941. To the arguments raised by the lea~ned Judges 1965
below in this connection the case of Ma Kyaing v. Ma Ohn D... WMYA
MAY
Kyi and four others (9) affords a complete answer. There, v;
U Maung Maung, J., after citing with approval certain DAW HLA
YIN A.~D
observations. of U E Maung, J., in Ma Pu v. Daw Aye Mya SlX OTHERS.
and others (ro) and of myself _ i n Lim Chin So v. Lim

Geoksoo (II) came to the conclusion that when a 'deed of
adoption is duly executed and registered in compliance
with the Registration of Kittima Adoption Act, the deed
itself is a clear and sufficient proof of the adoption.
In the case now under consideration there is credible
evidence to show that it was the 'deceased Daw Aye herself
who had made arrangements with the Sub-Registrar U Lone
for the purpose of having the deed of adoption drafted.
Bemg bed-ridden the registration had to be made in the
house in the presence of the Sub-Registrar, the Registration
Clerk Ko Myint Way and the two attesting witnesses one
of whom was the _physician attending on her. Accord-
ingly, applying the principle enunciated in Ma Kyaing's
case (9) the registered deed of adoption dated the 2nd of
August 1957 is by itself sufficient proof of the adoption
of Daw Mya May by the deceased Daw Aye.
As pointed out in Maung Mya Din v. Maung Ye Gyi
and one (r2) adoption under the Burmese Buddhist Law is
a c(mtract under which one person takes another with
-ce~~-~ -- ohjects . and confers ce:r~i.n righ~:, It iS .all the
~ore ~so ~ contract under the :Reiistration of Kittima
0
Adoptions Act. Accordingly, unless such a contract can

be av~ided on. proof of " undue influence ,. or fraud, etc.,
it. remains. valid in law.
For these reasons I consider that both the Courts below
. 'Y~:r~ :<)V:~._q~g hi haviAg igj.yep ,a,~cdeq:e,~._-
:~ -._ .... . I' " " " . , .... . .
for ~adrn.inistration
......... _ .. - -
-c..t-' <f.~-,.t
t~.J~StPl~~ntiff-respon<J.~~f
'""-;4-IL~.,... , ,
Q.~Vit\~m a tin.
' ' .J~~?ftiA'!~:r$""':
on the ground
, .
~~fT(('963) B.L.R:, p. i84. . .,i$(%$6) B.L.R. :z48 at p. :z6o. .:.
o(Io}(t948) B.L.R., 19 at p. :z6. _-,; ii)o'4 B.L.J., 136 (See Dunkley's .
Digest, Vol. 1~/Column 9~) .
0

18 .
c.c.
. 1965
that she arid th~ defendants in the suit were co-heirs to the~
estate of ti?.e deceased Daw Aye, _and it must be set aside.
DA\V ~1YA .
M AY In the result _the appeal succee~s. The judgment and:
DAwvi-lu decree of the District Court of Toungoo appealed against
Ym AND are reversed and the plaintiff-respondent Daw Hla Yin's.
six oTHRs. s~it for ~d.ministration dismissed with costs throughout.. .
A~voc~r.e's fees in this Court being assessed, at K 185.
ORIGINAL CIVIL
B~fore U Kyaw Zan U, J.
ESOOF HASHIM MEHTAR AND THREE OTHERS c.c ....

1965
(PLAINTIFFS)
Feb. 4 .:
v.
MAHMOOD HASHIM MEHTAR AND TWO OTHERS
(DEFENDANTS).*
Recei.ver--o. 40, CitJil Procedure Code-just and convenient- when appointment

to be made.
Held : In d~iding whether it would be just and equitable to appoint_a
R~iver, due weigat must be g iven to all relevant considerations and the
question o_ appointment is to be detennined on the facts of each particular
case.
Thus, where the application for such appointment is made by the Plaintiffs
who are co-owners of the suit property with the Defendants, and the Defendants
have also furnished securities to the Court, the appointment should not be
made. For such appointment there should be urgent need for protection o
the properties.
Basu for :the plaintiffs.

Tun Sein for the aefendants . .
. U KY~w :~ U, ] .- These two -applications under

'.'Order 46;-;~~liie
.. :;.
't "=bf.' the Code of GI~~Trocedure
. . . ,v..: .
dated
nth October 1963, and 4th November, 1962 "for
appointment of Receiver of the plaintiffs' share of oil
pumpe4 up fro~p oil wells at Yenangyating " are almost.
identicai 'hi subStance and they ariseo~t of these two
4,..C - _.,;,)
~~ Suits against tht 'defendant, who is managing t):le oil wells

~lS ~ co-owne',--t--,~-
aiia:as ~agen{of .the p~~,.!bUt
.. ~. ~Nt,':t,
the power-
of-att~~~ ~~~~t -as the le:tter. ?~Ety have now
been revo
.
. . :' It .has been alleg~~'bil
~- . ... .. . is subject to
. ~-~. ..
Civil Reguhr Suit No. 23 or't963:

Civil Regular Sui: No. 33 of 1963.
c.c. evaporation and there are dangers from fires, thefts or
1965
leakages apart from fluctuations in prices and consequent-
EsooF
HAsHIM ly it is just .and convenient to appoint a Receiver in each
~a;:E . case in order to sell their shares of oil to save wastage
oTmns and loss of profit.
MA~oon The defendant denied that there has been a valid
~~;~~ revocation of the power-of-attorney and letter of authori-
AND Two
OTHERS.
ty. He stat.ed that according to the terms of agency he
is responsible for any dangers from fire, theft, leakages .
or evaporati<m, and that he has to sell at the prevailing
market price, which is not less than the price fixed by
the Government. He said that for any mishandling a
suit for damages was open against him and therefore these
applications were not called for. He is afraid that if they
are allowed they would entail in dosing do'Wn of the
business as pumping machineries belonging to the third
parties would be taken away and labour problems would .
ensure to the detriments of his and the plaintiffs' interests
as co-owners. According to him only certain wells are
workable and pumping is allowed by the Government
jointly and not separately. .
. . These :two suits are mainly for accounts 'only. The
parties are brothers and sisters and nephew and niece.
Tlfe defence is that the power-of-attorney and the letter
of authority are irrevocable and that proper accounts
~
.have been..
_.::,-~A.O
rendered. The defendant claims that he is the
'.:>), ' ,,,
o : :. ' '
00 1_/.':'~~J: ..o' ' :., o
. .. :::only member of the family who has'~;;spedal technical

knowledge and experience in the o~l business since he has
..:.:2,_-?<Y?r~ed the oil wells since .before the;)ast .World War.
. .<.~ The oil business and Jhe wells are -~~~tral prope_rties
,, '";.~{
. o!J~~-.
::..
~nd the defendarit sta:~~
1
tf' ..
' ' '
.th.a t.he has worked.~~d p1anagelf:
'.'J -~....... ...~... . .
. )~ltthem. for ..e . P~.st~~45-'Yeai~_i:;With U1e .kn<;>wlegge ~and con-.
' ~'~<~hf ~LA~~;~J~~~ff~ -w~6t~~"~~~r~J!~;;~~V.$:J.1~!f c?:t>:vn~~;"~'. :,
.. : H;e sta~~~~W:l:SOm~ wells are no~;: ,.QW-g less due to
. natur~ ~exhaustion though the e~nses : are getting heavier
and they need re-conditioning~ ana ~ori.sequently the
plaintiffs are now dissatisfied with lesser income. Accord- c.c.
x96s
ing to the plaintiffs the defendant failed to render
EsooF
accounts except for the period 1st August 1961, to 30th HASHIM
MJ!RTAR
April 1963. The suits were filed in July and August AND THREE
1963. According to the agreement between the parties C.THERS
v.
the accounts are to be rendered only annually. The MAHMOOD
HAsHIM
}reamed advocate for the plaintiffs contended. in his argu- MEHTAR
AND TWO
ments that the accounts rendered are not correct. This OTHERS.
matt~r has yet to be gone into when evidence is led in the
suits which have not yet been heard.
The plaintiffs had previously applied under Order 39

of the Code of Civil Procedure for temporary injunction
to restrain the defeJ?.dant from selling the plaintiffs' shares
of oil bailed out from the wells and to direct him to
deliver to them. The grounds raised were :the same as
those raised in these applications. The Appellate Court
found that all the co-owners have not joined in the suits
against the defendant, and that since the defendant has
contracted to sell the oil to the :third parties and has to
pay the incom~-tax and other charges there would be
difficulty in leaving aside the shares of the plaintiffs as in
such a business the shares are not quite separable. Only
afte:t: the sale . the taxes can be paid and the various
charg~s met before the _remainder can be distributed
: amqnt:~-the : <;:.~q:wners; ;ind ; ac'cordingly:;-~t; ordered to
vacate - the t~rriporary injunctions on "the defendant
furnic:"hing suffiCient securities. The defendant had
furnishe-d sufficient securitieS. In the circumstances .
nari~ted above the point .for' consideration' :now is wh~
th~;f:Jt :would be jus~ and:.~con~~nient to a~low tQ.ese two
-~P~~~g~~t~..:_5~;-9M~ ::f#~b ,~g#.~.~ Re_c;ei~~~- ~~:e )earned
autliors P1ll~.-J.W~- N~u-. m therr L~w q_': e1~.~s (1960)
have this t6'ff.~fpage 188: . ..F~:
.,.::.: : . . .
" No:=receiver where injWtction sufficient-Both injunction
and. receivers are branches of the extraordinary preventive
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. jurisdiction of equity, they are not yet distinct and separate
IC}6S branche;; u:,ed for the attainment of different results; arid a
ESOOF Court of Equity may properly refuse a receiver, although an
HASHIM
M.EHT~R
appropriate case is presented for an in junction. So the
AND THREE appointment of a receiver is properly denied where an
OTH.I!RS
v. injunction will afford ample protection for the 1ights of the
M.\HMOOD plaintjff."
HASHIM
MBHTAR
. ~~ .
AND TWO
OTHERS.
The: learned advocate for the plaintiffs dwelt mainly
in his arguments upon the alleged termination of the
agency and non-rendering of accounts. The Court has
yet to come to findings on these points after hearing the
evidence in the main suhs since the defendant has joined
iss~es on the'fi?.. For the present. the least said about
them the better. In deciding whether it will be just and
~onvenieiit to appoint a Receiver due weight must be
given to al.~ relevant consid~rations and_the question of
appointment is to be determined on. the facts of each
particul~ ~~e. If the defendant is found to be wasting
ami' damaging. by his. acts of. commissions or omissions
and ther~' a:re h6 means to. compensate for the loss thus
caused the appoi~~~ent may be justified. So far there
are no materials on: -record to come. to such a finding. It
musi be remembered that the defendant has his interest
in -"the wells and he -has furnished sufficient securities. .In
the circ:umstances _i t does not appear to be just and
_convenient
......
tO ri:!JnQVe
..'.:!_,,_.,..
rum from
.
possession
...
. '
an4 hanQ.. QVer
\f,
the pr<?perties which require teChniCal kriq~.d~dg~ '.and

experience to -a stranger and complicate matters. I' do
. not' t;hin.\: the p!.ai~tiffs have made out -a strong .case.
Unless fiaud or:qishonesty or. f~lsification of:a~count~ i~
, shown.:t~o have'-been committed by:tlie .defendant as co"
<::P~~i~Thd.th~ie ,i~ im~nent - . to the . "~ ._, .
:be' f61lt1W.&i'::by\ ~t~i?a;fable
.hiS _pos~~si6'~-;; :fij:~not to
must be urgent rteeafor protection of . The
learn~ ::adv.ocate .f or the plaintiffs referf~ me to Ramji
. .
Ram and o.thers v. Saligram '(~) wherein the appointment: c.c.
-or a Receiver was approved .When a co-Owner was keeping 1965
the other co-oWI1er out of possession of the joint-family ESOOF

HASHIM
p roperty. In the instant case the defendant c'a nnot be M EHTAR
AND THREE
said to be keeping the plaintiffs out of possession of the OTHERS
:wells or oil. As a matter of fact it was by agreement of
MAHMOOD
all the co-owners that the defenda'n t was asked t-o work HASHIM
MEHTAR
.and manage the business. {; : AND TWO
OTHERS.
Another authority relied upon by him is Rayhiinath
Prasad Tandon v. Budaun.Electric Supply Co., Ltd. .(2). It
was a very much stronger case than the one now under
-consideration. In that case definite allegations of waste,
falsification and destruction of accounts, removal of
machinery and embezzlement of money were made and
they were not rebutted by any counter-affidavit on the
part of the defendant. In Chandrika Misra and another
v. Ram Misra and another (3) relied upon by the learned
. advocate for the plairntiffs the parties concerned were
admittedly members of a joint Hindu family and entitled
to joint possession of the property, but the plaintiff was
<lenied access to the books of accounts and he was com-
pelled to pay the arrears of house rents to have a decree
for ejectment rescinded and the arrears of income-tax.
The present suits are entirely different. .T he principle
was well laid down in Daw Sein Yin v. U Obn Khin (4)
where .the head-note says there must be a well~fourided
y 1~ar 'that the p{q~tftY in qhestion bft~diSipated or. will
that irrepara~le mischief may be done unless,. 't he Court
gives its protection. It further says that the power
co~ferred by the':d>-cte of Civil Procedure . on .Court for
~.a.p~i:q.tment of R~ceiv~:t: should be exercised With greates~
.~:~i~tre,~~~~4
O :.. ,1\1.\
'
caurlop., . ap.d tp~t _violent ~.nd whq~esale ch~ges
(\ ' O - ~ ' 0 Oo O 0 HO l
0
0 " . ... OP
' ~ by -pramtiff of :~~~st~ ,i~d malversation7 by,';lthe ~P,efen<tanf

in, p6sse5s~oD::~~,;~~~~=t~~u.ffident, unle5s . fa "". : :'~ri."~ and
~.......... ' -: . :;;.:;i'!""
~;_
" - --
(1) (I909-I<}i~n4 c :w .'N. 24~t f3) (1959) ~~);f:ii:'z4o (H.C.) ..
(2) A.I.R . (z9~9} Al!. 112. {4) (194.8 )Jl.L.R. 487 (H. C.).
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. established show that there has been an abuse or danger

1'965
of abuse by the defendant in possession. It is a dis-
EsooF
HASHIM cretionary matter. Considering the facts and circum-
MBHTAR
AND rHRilE stances obtaining in the suits and in the affidavits and
' OTHER'>
fl.
counter-affidavits I do not consider that the applications
MAHMOOD should be allowed. They are therefore dismissed with
HASHIM
MBHTAR costs. Advocate's fees three Gold Mohurs in each suit.
AND T\'1' 0
OTHERS.
APPELLATE CIVIL
Befort U San Maung and U Saw Ba TMin, JJ.

c.c.
HAJT B. P. MUSA (a) I-IAJI MUSA KAKA (APPELLANT) I96S
v.
HAJI ABDUL SAMAD (RESPONDENT).*
Rent-Standard Rent Certificate under 1946 Act-whether 'Valid during the

lifetime of subsequent Acts. Rate at which rent to be awarded for different
periods. .
Where the plaintiff respondent had filed a suit for reco'l(ery of rent of the
suit premises at the standard rent fixed by the Controller of Rents on 16th
June I947. for the period ~st December 1947 to JISt July 196o and the only
question left on App~al was at what rate the .rent should be decreed.
Held: (1) For the period ISt December I947 to I']th January 1948 (the
dat~ of repeal of the 1948 Act), the plaintiff should be given rent at the nate
fixed by the Controller on z6th June I947 .
(z) As regards rent for the period when the I9+8 Act was in force, it is
clear that the standard rent fixed on I6th June 1947 ceased to be in force
when the I946 Act was rtpealed.. There being no rent fixed by the Controller
under the 1948 Act, the alternative is to find out the standard rent fixed under
s. z(f) (ii) of the I948 Act, i.e. the rent on 1st September I939 On the
evidence it must be held that the rent on this date was Rs. ISO per mensem.
(3) Regarding the period subsequen~ to the expiry of the I948 Act, and
the coming into force of the 196o Act, the rent is to be the contractual rate
of K 300 per mensem. .
(4) For the period 4th May 1960 to date of suit, the plaintiff cannot recover
any rent for want of a certificate by the . Rent Controller appointed under
,. the Act of 196o. .
~!.J!~_.._'_'f" ~ ~ -=-:::-. .v- :.,'. ~:
,.. :: Ko Ba Yin v. Ko Thein and one, (x9s8) B.L.R.6x6 (H.C.), referred to and"
followed.
--5.. L. verma for

. .. . .
the appellant.
1 ., ........ ~ ~ . ,,-. -;~ -
:;~t,i-!.':~-Tl$.AN,i\1AQ~d~"J.-This. ap~l~by Haji M~ Kaka, .the.~.

:~l~~ft~-~an~ in Civil Re~t~f:lli.~~~o: r3 o~ r9 o~J;~~~r
~Istrict. the .JUdgmenf~:~n.~
6o
.. .' . Court, Mandalay,:)s' agamst
.
. ~ Civil xst Appeal No. IS of 1963 agairist the decree of the District Court
of ~n~lay, passed in regular Suit No. 13 of 1960.
.26.0 BURMA LAW REPORTS (r965
decree of that Court awarding a sum of K 51,680 to the

plaintiff-respondent Haji Abdul Samad as rent of the
~{;~_~(~- premises in suit for the period 1st of December 1947 till
HAJl.A.~uSA the 31st of July 1960. The facts giving rise to the pyesent
u- v~
:nAJI .:>.l3DUL ,
appeal are briefly .
these :
-SA:\-BD. The defendant-appellant Haji Musa Kaka \Vas the
tenant of the plaintiff-respondent Haji Abdul Samad of the
three east' rooms of premises known. as Bolding No. rjr,
~lock _No. 602, Chan-e Thazan Ward, Mandalay. The
'tenancy was terminated On the 3~St Of July 194.6 by a
notice served_on the defendant under section 1.o 6 of the
Transfer of -P roperty Act. The plaintiff then fi,led a suit
being Civil Regular Suit No. 13 of 1Q51 of the Additional
District Court of Mar:tda:Jay for arrears of rent fron'l Ist of
March 1946 Lill Lhe 31st of July 1946 at RS. 3"-10 J month
-and damages for use and occupation from the 1st of August
1946 till the 31st of November 1947 at Rs. 340 a month.
The le~uned Additional DiStrict Judge gpve a decree as
-prayed for. He also gave a decree for further clamages
'from the date of suit till the date of eviction of: ihe
.defendant. The defendant appe~led, and -a Bench of. the
.then High Court .confirmed the decree except ,that for
further damages. The judgment of the then 'High Court
confirming :th_e judgment and decree of the trial Court was
passed on the 18th of December 1956 after .the Urban Renf
. -_Cop.trol . 1-~S~t~-W4~>~;1.1ad .been -~~pealect:'}~-~~~t,h.e :\J.5PtJ.l~--~~l~h:
Control Act/':'1948, which came into. force on the qth Of :
_ January 1948'.
_:;: ; ..
' . ~
On th~;;~.9tl} ,pf August 1960, after .tF-e ~v4vu,.......

Musa
' .
Kakfl ::h~Q.,:~made
:
~.""("-~ ":':
unsuccessful
. .
.attempts."'' ..
~
further appe_~ls.,':;tg~st- th~.. jgdgment and ...

;'R'egular:~'Stil
o.::
~~ . .ft;~f.i-~r of i~~1
' ~ ~ -:-
/ 'of:-rnc;..:~iJJi.tl~ltlQ'nat:~Distti6f%.~
. ..
Cou;rt;;; .,,ljft' Haji' Abdul .
hOW . - . :;_'. ppeal,. -~ He asked fbi - .. -fqr use . ~d
~-~w.p~tio~ o f :1:~~ three rooms by- th~ defeu.dant for ---t he
. .
~VRMA LAW REPORTS 261
period rst of December 1947 till the 31st of July 1960. In c.c.
1965
pis .plaint, Haji AbduJ Samad stated that in spite of the
.decree for ejectment and for damages for use and occupa- fuJI B. P .
MusA (a)
tion passed against the defendant Haji Musa Kaka, the HA11 MusA
KAKA
defendant had remained in occupation of the three rooms v .
HAJl ABDUL
in suit and that he was therefore liable to pay damages at S.\MAD.
the .rate of K 340 per mensem. The defendant Haji Musa
Kaka by his written statement to the original plaint con-
tended, inter alia, that the plaintiff's suit for damages for
use and occupation was not maintainable in law, as he
being a tenant remaining in possession of the premises let to
him after the termination of the tenancy, was a " tenant "
as defined in clause (g) of section 2 of the Urban Rent
. Control Act, 1948. This contention was accepted by the
learned District Judge who relied. upon the decision of the
late High Court in Bhogee-Ram v. U Ba So and one (r)
which was based upon the definition of the "tenant" in
clause (g) of section 2 of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948.
. Accordingly, on the 31st of March 1961, which was
the last date of the closing of civil Courts .f or the purposes
of section -:!: of the Limitation Act, vide section 2 of the
Special Limita~ion of Accrual of Interests Act, 1950, the
plaintiff filed an amended plaint for recover of rent
amounting to K sr,68o from the defendant for the period
1n question. The demand was made aq:ording to .the
~'~standard rery.t fixed by :t:b.~ Contr9llet: of Rents, Mandalay,
:on the r6th .of J1.:1ne"':::ri947 in Revenue Proceedings
No. -67/XIII of 1946-47. The defendant filed an amended
written statement.after the.amended plaint was allowed by
.' ,the learned District JUdge by his. order dated the 30th of
-j~ne )961. He contended ::that he was. the tenant of
~~.~M~s:_rs. Ab.d~~am~d - ~r.Jtf~fr: an~ not.?t~~-pla_intifiHaji
~~~]?dul Samad. . He '!!~?"j:q~mtended "that ihe so-called, relit
~:t~fbced by the Control_i1#i~l{eilti iJ:1 his. ~evenue Pr~i~g~ngs
(i) (1949) RLR. s65 .( H.C:).
c.c. No. 67/XIII of 1946-47 was not the standard -rent withm
1965
the meaning of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948 or
~~s~(~ I96o, and that the standard .rent was therefore that fixed
HAji Mos... by Statute, vide clause (f) of section 2 of the Urban Rent
. ~~ Control Act, 1948, and cJause (f) of section 2. of the Urban
HA.Jx AnnuL
sAMAo. Rent Control Act,. 19 6o. He a1so contended t h at th e
claim for rent for the period of more than three years.
prior to the date of the suit was barred by -limitation,
Furthermore, he was entit1ed to be reimbursed for the
expenses incurred by him in replacing the roof of the
building which was removed by the plaintiff with a view ..
to annoy him.
. On t4es~ pleadings the learned pi~trict Ju~g~ framed~
many issues as enumerated in the j:udgment now under
appeal. After examining the witnesses cited by both the
parties, the learned Judge held that he need not go into the
question whether or not the premises were let prior to the
1st of September 1939 or between the rst of September
1939 and the 1st of January 1941 and of the rent for
which these premises were let at these periods. He held.
that the fixation of the standard r~nt by the 'Rent Con-
tr9ller in Revenue Proceedings No. 67/XIII of .1946-47 was.
valid for the period during which the Urban Rent Control
Act, 1948, and the Urban Rent Control Act1 J96o, were
:
in force /p ; .. AcGordingly.
~~ ~ :
he gave
-:
a decree
..
to:t:he plaintiff as
~t-'?~lo.. t~- --:;<',~(!;.' ~_...... ... ...
prayed for. The defendant's Advocate"':h-aVirig wirlved the

plea, .the defendant was not entitled to .deduct from the
rent the cost of replacing the roof .on.~he. suit preqrlses.
'
Being diss~~. fie~ with .the judgm~iii~~4.
. \-lor . . .;- . . ''
~~~re~. the
"....;';....~ ~ fr!.)f~
-6
trial Court, the.;: defendant Haji Musa. Kakac;;has;ane<Lthe
!it:pr~s~~~:~1g~}~tfJt.>. :5Y): .- :~'~.;ri:Jii,;(. :.. :~~~;,~~?,f?:
N~W'
0
~if~jS~'glear.that although for~
~~~~J~~It <fl~'f
~ w. nodsubseq
>- . . ~
uent
ta t1le..:i~rm1iia1:ion of the.. lease_of, ~:"" .~"t'~e- rooms : in . suit
the plaintiff was rightly given a decree .f<?fdamages for }lse .
and occupation of t he building in Civil .Regular S~it No. 1~
:ef 1951 of the Additional District Court, the suit for c.c.
1965
<damages for the period subsequent to the 17th of January
.<Q t Hr.Jt B. P.
1948, when t h e Urb an Rent C.ontro1 A~t, I9<tV came m o MusA ca)
force and the 1946 Act was repealed thereby, was not HA~~~..us~
maintainable in law as rightly held by the learned District H AJl "A.

BDUL
judge in his order dated the 24th of March 1961. The SAMAD.
learned District Judge has also rightly, in our opinion,
,given the plaintiff leave to amend the plaint. This
.amended plaint having been filed on the 31st of March
1961, the plaintiff was saved from lim~tation in respect of
the rent for the period of more than three years prior to
the date of the present suit.
It is an admitted fact that in spite of the judgment and
<decree having been passed against him in Civil Regular
Suit No. 13 of 1951, the defendant remained in occupation
<>f the three rooms in suit. It is also, an admitted fact
that he never paid the plaintiff any rerit for the period
subsequent to the 1st of December 1947. The only
question which therefore remains is at what rate should
the rent be decreed-
(a) for the period while the Urban Rent Control Act,
1946, remained in for.ce;
(b) for the period during which the Urban Rent
Control Act, 1948, remained in force ; and
(c) for the period subsequent to the 8th _of October
1959 .w hen the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948,
expired by efflux of ~e.
Regarding (a), it is clear that for the period rst of
December 1947 dll the 17th pf january 1948,-the plaintiff
should be given rent at ~he rate ~ed by the Controller ip.
Revenue Proceedings No._67/XIII\ Qf, 1946-47.
Regarding (b);.~ ~~-~is Clear tliat"tli~ Standard ~nt fixed by
the Controller;_$'t.~~ on the_i(?th ofJun~}g~~~d to
be in force. wb.eii~fhe Urban Rent Control ~~ct~ i946,-W<l5
repealed. As pointed out by the J_ate ~igh Court in Ko Ba
c.c. '
Yin (a) Ali Mohamed Musa and one y. Ko Thein and one (2),
1965
under the Urban Rent Control Act, 1948, the -standard rent
~~~AB(~> is either the rent fixed by statute under paragraph (II) of
Iui~A~ust. clause (f) of section 2 or by the Controller of Rents
v. appointed under the 1948 Act as provided in section 19.
HAJI ABDUL .
St.MAo. It is common ground that the Controller of Rents
appointed under the I 948 Act had never fi~ed any standard
rent in respect of the three rooms now in suit. Therefore
it is a matter ~or consideration whether there is any
standard rent fixed by definition in paragraph (II) of clause
(f) of section 2. For this purpose the evi~ence adduced in
the -case should be looked into, and ~he learned Advocates
for.,b oth the appellant and the respondent have asked us to
dispose of this issue as provided for in Order XLI, Rule 24.
of .the Civil Procedure Code. In our opinion, there is
sufficient evidence adduced in the case to come to a finding.
on this issue.
Now, the plaintiff .Haji Abdul Samad said that about
t\VO years before the second wor~d war, he had rented. the
three rooms now in suit to one Kala Singh at a rental of
Rs .. roo per room; Kala Singh set up a bakery in these
rooms. Regarding the three rooms on the west, he had
let them..out to one M. L. Badia at a r.ental of Rs. 300.
\i\'h~n:~t:he .~d~f~ndant ~arne inJ9.A~cctipap()n of the suit
ro~fu~~~'fier'' the second world;~~~;"':ih~.:a~eed .r~i{t: was ..~:;
Rs. 300 per mensem. The defend;mt Musa, orithe other
han4,j;aid that he at first occupied fue three rooms in suit
.....-:~~.' '~:. . -~ ;I
during<".~e Japanese occupation period for .which .he paid

rent:; at ... . per mensem to the J?l;rintitts : s~n; ~whose .
' ~ Ba _~~~ Aft~r- .J~e i~.6:~~#p~ti8{tipf the.
BiitiSii?he'.agi:8eaY'''~':;'P~Y:~ erlil~h~~a~ferit of -~';:
mensem:. 't~ter'
. . . ' . .
.

'fr(jilei ~f R~riis ais .<-...~
.':' ~1"'
;ms .: ~ppucc:mcm fixed the) tan af~ rent at .Rs. 300 per. .'
~ien5em}
. .:..
; ; . ......
-------.---'------,..~--_.;,:...-- - .
(2) (t9s8) B.L.R. 6x6 (.H. C ..). .
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS
He also said that his predecessor, who was in occupa- ?9;;

tion of the suit rooms for about five or six years before the HAJI B. P.
second world war, was paying rent at the rate of Rs. 150 MusA. (a)
HAJI Mt.:SA
per mensem. KAu
f).
Maharaj (DW 4) said that the three rooms now HAJI AnnuL
occupied by the defendant were occupied by him prior to SAM:\o.
the year 1942 and that he had to pay daily rent of Rs. 6
for five or six years. Later the rent was reduced to Rs. 5
a day by the plaintiff. As regards the rooms on the west
side, this witness said that they were occupied by M. L.
Badia, one of the defence witnesses.
M. L. Badia (DW 5) himself said that he was in
occupation of the three rooms on the west of the suit
premises before the second world war at a rental of Rs. 6
a day, \'t'hich was later reduced by the plaintiff toRs. 5 a
day. He ceased to occupy these rooms when Mandalay
was bombed during the month of March 1942. He had
been paying rent at Rs. 5 a day for a period of about three
or four years before he ceased to occupy these rooms.
The evidence of Badia is corroborated by Hansraj
(DW 6).
From th~ above evidence it is clear that for a period of
about three or four years before March 1942, the three
rooms in suit now occupied by the defendant Haji Musa
Kaka and for~ei'ly -o;ccupied by Maharaj:;ww 4) and the
tbree rooms on the west formerly occupied-by M. L. Ba~a
(DW 5) were let out at the rate of Rs. 5 a day, which
was approximately Rs. 150 per month, and that prior to
that period the rental was Rs. 6 a day, which was approxi-
mately Rs. 180 ~r m6p.th. Accordingly, we must hold
that the rent~! ~il!~- S~t rooms On the ISj _pf September
193~ was Rs~~i5o~i>er me~em. ThisJs ~w,e_. standard rent
. ~~-:.:::;~:.----:-; . -. ~--
under . paragniJ)}f(II) (B) of 'clause (f)~"f!'~ction 2 of the
Urban, Rent Colltrol Act, 1948. Accordingly, for the
period the _ I~ of january 1948 till the 8th of October
266 BURMA LAVv REPORTS
c.c. 1959, the plaintiff should be awarded rent at the ra~e of

1965
K r 50 per mensem.
HArt B. P.
J.f1~sM~~A Regarding (c), for the period subsequent to the expiry
KAr<A
v.
of and the coming into force of the Urban Rent Control
HArt ABDuL Act, 1960, the Urban Rent Contro~ Act, 1948, the plaintiff
SAMAD.
sh ould be g1ven
. rent at t h e contractua1 rate 01r K 300 .per
mensem. This was the rate agreed upon between the
plaintiff and the. defendant as admitted by the latter. For
the period the 4th of May 1960 till the date of the suit, the
plaintiff cannot recover -any rent for w~mt of a certificate
by the Rent Controller appointed under the Urban Rent .
Control Act, 1960, because section 19 of the 1960 Act is
standing in. his way. He has not fi~ed with this suit a .
standard rent certificate granted to him by the Contreller
appointed under the 1960 Act. Of course, such a certifi-
cate is not now necessary for the period prior to the
coming into force of the Urban Rent Control Act, 1960,
because section 19 only enacts that the Court should not
accept plaint in suits for the recovery of rents due after
the enactment of the 1960 Act unless a certificate by the
Controller certifying the standard rent has been. attached
to the plaint.
For the reasons given above the judgment and deqe~
of the District Court, Mandalay, noyv appealed against
;.ldust be varied.; ....Instead_of.~a decr~e !fqr Rs,. 5 r ,68o, there . ,
,.~.WiJi be a decree f~r K. :23,6:73..22 . c~mprised or'ilie . '.
::. ~allowing :
. .. ~..
....:'": ',.... . .K.
(a) ... i.-.-s:y(~i.>.:,~-51 548
:(b) .
.(c). ~
.:(.';f:!,~:f~i~::~:::
BURMA LAW P~PORTS 267
The plaintiff must receive proportionate costs in the trial c.c.

1965
Court. As regards costs in this appeal, since the appellant HAJI B.P
.and the respondent are partially successful, we would MuSA (a)
HAJI MusA
direct that each party should be~r its own costs KAKA
"
HAJI ABDUL
SAMAD.
268 BURMA LAW :REPORTS
APPELLATE CIVIL
Bdore U San l'v!aung and U Saw Ba Thein, JJ.
c. c. KHATIZA BIB! (APPELLANT)
--
I96S
March. z6.
v.
.MA SINT AND SIX (RESPONDENTS).*
Compromise :'decree-whether bnding on Defendants not a party to the Compro-

mise petitio11. Maintainability of a Stlit for Declaratian that the decree-
is not binditzg - Proviso to S. 42 Specific Relief Act-whether applicable.
Held : Where a compromise petition in a suit was signed l:iy one of the-
Defendants and her Advocate who took care to describe himself as Advocate
for that Defendant, the decree passed thereon cannot be binding on the other
defendants, in the way that it would have been binding on them, had the-
been parties to the compromise.
Held further: A subsequent suit filed by the other defend'a:ilts, for a
Declaration that the said compromise decree is not binding on them, is-
maintainable in law.
Such a suit for Declaration is maintainable in spite of the proviso to s. 42
of the Specific Relief Act, as strictly speaking it.is not within the scope of that
section.
R.obert Fischer v. The Secretary of State for India in Council, LL.R. 22 Mad..
p .z7o, P.C.; and Shwparsatl Singh v. R.amnadan Prasaa Singh, .I.L.R. 43 Cal-
p. 694, P.C., referred to and distingui.'<hed.
Chaudhuri Mahamnwd Manjural Haque v. Bisweswar Banerji; (1944};
1 CaL 644, referred to and followed.
Although execution proceedings had been opened against the plaintiffs in,.
the subsequent suit by virtue of the said compromise decree, a Declaration-
obtaineo by them in the subsequent suit is bound to be respected by tl1e e~ecuting
Court. I n such a situation; nothing more than a Declaration needs to be.
aSited~~1~~or, ;: ,~,~:* ...
~.:~:~~.:~~~ .. . .~ . ;:_ . ..: . . ..
Held .Further : The object of the proviso to s. 42 of the Specilic-<R ef Act:
is to pr~ve~t a multiplicity of suits. Accordingly, a Declaration $ho.u ld be .
granted unless it would be futile without such further consequential relief as.
an ioj~ion, -etc, Therefore; ~veri if the present swt for Declaration i'ifgovemed
by s.:-4~ of _ ,Specific R<:lief ~ct, _it is maintainable without a 'p :niyer for.
such as an injunction. . _.
v. Hari /:larain; p -1.R. (1946} NJ... p. 8s6,
.< : . . -" ~:..... ~ ~~~;.:;:t::. .: ~. .'
BURMA LAW REPORTS 269>
c.c.
Maung Latt for the appellant. 1965'
K. C. Singh for the respondents.
U SAN MAUNG, ].-This appeal by Khatiza Bibi, the
first defendant in Civil Regular Suit N~. 22 of 1961 of the
.
KHATIZA
BIBl
MASLN'J:'
AND SIX.
District Court of Mandalay, is against the judgment and

decree of the trial Court declaring that the compromise
decree passed in Civil Regular Suit No. 13 of 1955 nf the
Court of the Additional District Judge, Mandalay, was not .
binding upon the plaintiff-respondents Ma Sint, U Tin,
Daw Gyi, Ko Ba Aye, Daw Ah Mar and U Htoo. The
facts giving rise to the present appeal are briefly these :
In Civil Regular Suit No. 13 of 1955 mentioned
above, the present appellant Khatiza Bibi sued Daw Tin U
and 28 others for possession. of a piece of land known as
Holding No. :r8-B in Block No. 162, Pyigyi-kyetthayai
Quarter, Mand~lay, and for the ejectment of the defendants
from this land. In that suit, U Kyi, now deceased father
of Ma Sint was defendant No. 15, U Tin was defendant
No. 8, Daw Gyi was defendant No. 9, Ko Ba Aye was
defendant No. 10, Daw Ah Mar was defend~t No. I I and
U Htoo was defendant No. 12. Ma Khatiza Bibi's case
was that by a registered deed of sale No. 99 of 1941 she
had purchased from U Tin husband of Daw Tin U the suit
land as well as a building situated thereon for a sum of
Rs. 6,ooo. Jhereaf~er, U Tin continued to occupy the
:. .:building solq..::to her;i:at a rental of .K ' 30 per 11\ensem .
u Tin.dioo.'Tri.. the yeal 195i, during ~he pendency.'of her
application to . the UI:ban Rent Controller, Mandalay, for
fixation pf~:standard I'eiJ.t. Pending the enquiry before
the Urban Rent Controller, U Tin died and his widow
-: . DawT in.U was brought on the record. Daw Tin U :by
.,, .,:her obJ~~ie.t . up. .~ .#t~~Jo ~4e ~ui.(l@d, advel:'s.e ~o;~~~,: .
~.~.:by. ~g~i~:V1n~&g:otth.(fact ihat'tlie registe!~~:a.~:ea.
. : o f sale. No. 99. o~i!9~was~ i~St dunng the Ses9.# ditW'orld.
War. Accon:li!l~ly, :~,she . had to file the present suit
'C.C. impleading the second defendant Ah Pe Gyi, as he was

1965
in possession of the building on the suit land as tenant of
KsJ.TlZA
:Bmi Daw Tin U. The other defendants were impleaded as
Q.
MASINT
they had built houses on the suit land with the permission
.AND sxx. of Daw Tin U. These defendants also refused to pay her
any rent because of Daw Tin U's objection. Therefore,
she asked for a decree for possession of the suit land and
the building thereon, and for ejectment of the defendants
from the suit land.
Daw Tin U who was the first defendant in that suit,
by her written statement denied that the suit land and
the building thereon were sold by her deceased husbana
U Tin to Khatiza Bibi as alleged by her. _ She said that
she was the owner in succession to her mother-in-law
Daw Tan and her deceased husband U Tjn., and that the
second defendant in that suit viz. Ah Pe Gyi was her own
tenant. . As regards the other aefendants, she .said that
they had built houses on the suit land with the permission
given by her deceased husband U Tin and by herself after
U Tin's death, and that they were accordingly her tenants.
The second defendant in that suit viz. Ah Pe Gy!
contended that .Daw Tin U was the owner of the house
occupied by him and that he was her tenant. The other
defendants. including U Kyi, U Tin, Daw Gyi, Ko Ba Aye,
Daw Ah Mar and U Htoo by their loirit written statement
, , contended th~t t,4,ey w~r,e ..residing qn the . suit land With.
:.the permission bf U Tiii.~.':and Daw Tin U; - a nd thatYtli'ef~' .
were therefore tenants of Daw Tin U. They asked t~at
Ma Khatiza's su!t against ._Plem 'to be accordingly dis~sse_d.
.rn
i;... .
th~t . ~{ the niafu
. ... ~ .
defendant
.
Daw
'
Tin u:~ :w~
, . ~ .1 :.;
re1J~esented by.:}fr. S. 'L. Verma; ~me of th~ '~ding Advocat:e~r

~ .qr.. ~,
:Mari&Ia-~~~['h d .. K: a
. . Ym~;,.,, . e..~'-"~ c;,p:;.o.,.,ap,~:: u . Y! <;~dt).P;~,,
u n.a,~-';t~{b~

:~)<.~:Ba Aye, Da#'':A.h.~;\~4-P .Htoo were -~_so i.epli~4fji~)
~~by the same advocat~~~W~~g~m respect of them !~':r.2
iiled a separate .po~~(of a:ttomey. ., , ..... ~:
On the pleadings, one of the issues framed was whether c.c.
1965
Ma Khatiza Bibi's suit was maintainable in the form 'KH.ATIZA
presented to the Court. On this issue, the then Additional BIBI
t).
District Judge (U Seiri Thin) held that on th~ plaintiff Ma MA SntT
ANil SIX,
Khatiza Bibi's own showing the main defendant Daw Tin U
was her tenant as "defined in clause (g) of section 2 of the
Urban Rent Control Act, I948 while th~ other defendants
who were the tenants of Daw Tin U was the plaintiff Ma
Khatiza Bibi's sub-tenants. Accordingly, a suit for
ejectment of the defendants would only lie in the
circumstances enumerated in the various clauses of
section I I of the Urban Rent Control Act. In the result,
the plaintiff Ma Khatiza Bibi's suit was dismissed vvith
costS.
Ma Khatiza Bibi appealed, and a Bench of the late High
Court by its judgment in Civil First Appeal No. 36 of 1956
set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court
dismissing the plaintiff Ma Khatiza Bibi's suit and under
Order 4I, Rule 23 of the Civil Procedure Code, remanded
the suit for trial. After this remand the plaintiff Ma
Khatiza Bibi and the then defen'dant Daw Tin U filed a
joint application for compromise of the suit. By this
jqint petition .the suit l.a nd was divided ;i.nto two with a
.. common passage ;in betWeen the plaintiff :Ma Khatiza Bibi
~~:;~=w~': tO ''Obtain . posses$i'On;-_,-, o f . the ~Whole'-;of the eastern
'.... l . . - .._~..., ; .. ~: .-.. ., "'
portion of the suit land''together with the house stailding

thereon, while the then defendant Daw Tin U was to obtain
._ . possession of the 'whol~ (?f the western portion. As'reg~ds
: the other defen'dants, there was to be a decree for possession
.iff favour of tP.e plijritiff Ma'.''Khatiza Bil>i as against the
~~ii1(.d~f~ndants:~N6".: 2 . _ . No. 8~;iq;. 23 who . wer~
~(till 'occupation of allotted . to "U~ Kha~~;;iibi. .
r-- The suit as.against. No. 3 to 7 and d~fif!"1iifs
No. 24 t~ 29 who wre in occupation of the portion all~~ted
to Daw Tj.n U, was to be dismissed without costs.
This petition for compromise was signed by U Ba Than

as agent for Khatiza Bibi and the defendant Ma Tin U. It
KHATlZA
Bmr was also signed .by U Maung Latt, Advocate for the plaintiff
MAesrl'(T and by Mr. Verma who d~scribed himself therein as
AND sxx. Advocate for the defendant No. r. A decree in term of
the compromise was passed on the 15th of December 1960,
and th:e ::suit was closed.
on the . 13th of May 196!, Ma Khatiza Bibi filed an
application for the execution of the compromise decree
which she had obtained in Civil Regular Suit No. 13 of
1955, and her application was dealt with in Civil Execution
Case No. 3 of 1961. There, she asked for ejectment of
the defendan~ No. 8 to 23 .. in, the aforesaid Civil suit,
which inciuded U Kyi fath~r of the respondent Ma Sint,.
U Tin, Daw Gyi, Ko Ba Aye, Daw.Ah Mar and U Htoo.
These persons accordingly filed Civil Regular Suit No. 22
-of 1961 of the District Court, Mandalay, now under appeal
on the ground that since they were not parties to the
petition for compromise filed in Civil Regular Suit No .. 13
of 1955 of the Additional District Court, they were not
bound .by that decree. In that suit Ma Khatiza Bibi was
made the first defendant while Daw Tin U was impieaded as
a co-defendant. The defence of Ma Khatiza Bibi was .that
the compromise petition was signed not only byDaw Tin U
P.vt also ..by,-Mr. S. .L. Verma,;;WlW was the advocate appe~;~.~
irig for D~rw.Tin U as well aS:of ol'ail the other 28 .defendanl? f.;
in. the suit and 'that the!ef~re, the other defendants were .
also. bound by the co.mpron;Use decree. The defence of... _
Daw Tin.U.w~ that she had :c<;)nsei;J.ted to the compromise:~
deere~: being. pa~sed against' her ...:? . As regards the other :.
:~~f~!i~~~~~::Da~ilf.In .t!..s~f~ -s~a~;.~.J:ley
.~- ;J~~:~:;g::;
7bcam~.iii Jaw -,t:fieJ:eriant:S'"Cf.:' - ~-:khatiza
...:-:;.~;,4-:.:. ... . .. :: . . ..... -::_,~'i,:~~
!.:.. . ) :. ~:,., ~.
~?7.~~;~PIDP!OIDI~e decree. ..~ ~~-said that .the suit
her ,.was misconceived.... ~"'- ::,:' . , .
. On the pleadings; the . most jmportant issue to . be
<lecid~ was whether the compromise decree was bi~ding
tQn the defendants other than Daw Tin U because c.c.
Mr. S. L. V-erma who represented them in the suit, had
96s
KHATIZA
signed the petition for compromise. After examining Bmx
.,,
witnesses cited by both the parties, the learned trial Judge MASINT
came to the conclusion that Mr. S. L. Verma had signed AND 81X.
the compromise petition only in his capacity as advocate
for Daw Tin U, and not in his cap'acity as advb~ate for
'the other defendants in the suit. Accordingly, the
compromise decree was not binding on these defendants
-some of whom were the plaintiffs in Civil Regular Suit
No. 22 of 1961 now un'der appeal.
The learned trial Judge also held that the suit was
maintainable without a prayer for consequential relief.
Hence the pres~t appeal by Khatiza Bibi.
Now, on the facts, there is no room for any possible
-doubt that Mr. S. L. Verma signed the petition of
<Compromise dated the 15th of December 1960, in Civil
Regular Suit No. 13 of 1955 of the Additionad District
Court, merely a~ advocate for the first defendant Daw Tin U
who also affixed her signature thereto. Mr. Verma who
was cited by the defendant Khatiza Bibi as her own witness
-said that he never signed the compromise petition in his .
.capacity as an advocate appearing for the other defendants
in. the suit. The defendant Khatiza Bibj is bound by the .
:.!~yidence qf.-he~ ow_n witnes~: Furthe~~ore, Mr. Verma:s ,,
evidence is strongly corroborated by the fact that he had ':
taken care to describe himself as advocate for the <lefandant .
No: I (viz. Daw Tin U), at the time he affixed his signature
. to the compromise petition; Some of the plaintiffs in the
present case had .also given evidence to the effect ~hat
. tl].ey did not kn9~ . ()f the ~QlllPtQplise petition and th~t
'~ ... ~ _ . . ., >....,; - ~-l; ..... -,. ;.
~$y_pply ~e !o lglow.,<i!.tb..e~~~nce of the col?pro~e,r

~:tdecr~ when they recei~petices issued in the ~iYP~:J~;
Execution Case No. 3 of r96r arising out of the .Civil
Regular S':rit No. 13 of 1955 of the Additional District
Court.
The compromise decree passed in Civil Regular Suit

No. 13 of 1955 of the Additional District Coprt is accord-
KHAnzA
Bm1 ingly not binding on the present plaintiff-respondents
MAvSINT Ma Sint, U Tin, Daw Gyi, Ko Ba Aye, Daw Ah Mar and
AND s1x. U Htoo, in the way that the 'decree would have been
binding on them had they been parties to the compromise.
The question now for consideration is whether the present
suit for declaration that the CO.fi!.promise decree is not
binding on the plaintiff-respondents, is maintainable in law.
Now, the compromise decree has been drawn up in
usual form viz. No. 2-A in Appendix '"D ", the name of
:the plaintiff and the names o'f the first defendant Daw Tin U
.and, th~ 28 other defendants have been inserted therein.
The~ the decree goes on to say-" This suit coming on this
.day for final disposal before U Maung Maung Kyi, B.L.,
Additional District Judge, Mandalay in the presence of
U Ba Than, Agent for the plaintiff and ;rvfr. S. L. Verma~
Advocate for the defendants, it is ordered that the
agreement, dated the rsth of December 1960 set out in
the Schedule hereto, be recorded and it is decreed that all
further proceedings in. this suit be, and the same are hereby
stayed upon the terms of the sai~ agreement, except for
the purpose of carrying the same into effect, for which
purpose the parties are to be at liberty to apply."
. :Ob.e of the: terms... of the agreement:. sh out in the ,:~
Sch~dule is as follows:: .. . ,. . . '
.,. "(h) That as .- :the d~fendants ):';o. 2 . and 8 to' 23 are in
occupation of. th~ jlortion of the land and house allotted by
this ~ecr.ee to :the ,p~a4J.titr, there shall.. cp,e ~- 9-etree against
them fo:r , pos~e9ji': "t;h costs of the sui,!:." :.... ..: :.~:
.-;;;;~ ... tc :i.#-.1:~ .'
:-'>.. ~:~ . ,.,'.'/=~;"'. . 5::;~\~::Ji;~~~~{ < . . \:~~~t . ':~:~
.:
;,t: ~~{the decree on the
~"~~j "',\'". . '
face
9. ' . {' Qqlewhat
_.. ,...
:rhis-leading.,,''-
. ..
.
It:f~~ld see~ that all the de~ :_ .. . \ vere represented by,
. M:r. Verma and t'J:lat they haa: agreed ~o the terms of the ..~.
compromise including that nien9oned above.
In fact, the learned Additional District Judge who .c.c.
xg6s
succeeded the learned Judge who passed the decree, himself
Ka.\TIZA
thought that the compromise decree was binding, as such, BIBl
on the defendants other than Daw Tin U who had signed v.
MA SncT
petition for compromise: This fact appears in his order AND siX.
dated the 27th November 1962, in rejecting the applica-
tions under section 15 (r) of the Urban Rent Control Act,
1960, by some persons claiming to be successors in title
to some of the defendants in the suit, fo! recission of the
decree on payment of arrears of rent. The learned
Additional District Judge stated inter alia:
" The rest of the defef!.dants had been living on the land
as tenants of Ma Tin U, but Khatiza Bibi obtained a decree
for possession against ill those persons who were occupying
that part of the land allotted to her by the decree. Hence.
though the applicants might formerly have been tenants qf
Ma Tin U, since they occupy Khatiza Bibi's portion of the
land, they will have to abide by the decree."
Hence the present plaintiff-respondents Ma Sint, and

five others had every reason to fear that the decree dated
the rsth of December 1960 in Civil Regular Suit No. 13 .
of 1955 of the Additional District Court could be .executed
against them .as if they were parties to the compromise
petition giving rise to that decree. Accordingly, they had
the right r;t.zy:jjle a:smt for a declaration 'that .this decree
was not hitiding upon th~ in the manner in which .they
would be bound. had they been parties to the compromise
petition dated the rsth December 1960 filed in that suit.
. . .
The next . ql;l.@6~ . for q:mside:ration is whetlu~r th~
. p1aintiff-r~spqn'd~~~. -s~it ~S.;:tWt maintainable...!>ec<luse .qC,
/:'t:lie provis.ort<>i:~ftion.:
42 -~~tihe s~ific,,Relier
-.~..-. ~:.\.~~;.. :n:>
. : . .. ::.
Act.: :< ifi't;.;
'i': ,..;- - .
oth~ 'wP-\~Jl~tP.er they could ~<! ~*~W..d have asked

fo:r an i!fu[cti~h by way of .conseqtientihl .relief. .
In our opinion the sujt now under appeal ~ not strictly
within the scope of section 42 of the Specific Relief Act~
In Robert Fischer v. The Secretary of State for India in

Council, (I) the Privy Council held that a suit for declara-
KHATIZA
BIB I tion is maintainable, though not strictly within the
v. purview of section 42 of the Specific Relief Act. In a
'MA SmT
AND SIX. subsequent case namely, Sheoparsan Singh v. Ramnanaan
Prasad Singh (2), however, Sir Lavvrence Jenkins, in
delivering the judgment o.f the Privy Goundl observed
that the Court's power to make a declaration, without
more, is Clerived from section 42 of the Specific Relief Act,
and that therefore, regard must be had to its precise terms.
The apparent contradiction between these pronouncements
of the Privy Council has ho.wever been explained, in our
op~nion, correctly, by the Calcutta High Court in
Chaudhuri Mahammad Manjural Haque v. Bisweswar
Banerji (3}. Tl;le following passage in the. judgment . of
Rau, ] . in this connection may be usefully reproduced.
The learned Judge said at page 652 :
" It wouid, therefore, seem that the expressions, ' merely
. declaratory decree' and ' declaration without more' used in
the Privy Council ju~gments in Kattama Natchair's case
{supra) and Sheoparsa:n Singh's case .(supra) refer to a declara-
ti.o n which merely serves to define rights, present or future,
without giving present relief. The power of the Courts in
India to make merely declaratory decrees in this sense is,
under the above decisions, governed entirely by section 42
:of. the' Specific
~
RelieAgt!.i:'~~~~
. -:. .- .... ~ -::o .,.? ,J,~~ '
:where .a.- d~c::ree
.
bas..J!.. the effect
'>!:-'~.{! i
-of giving present 'relief as well, the power to make .if wm be
governed by the general provisions of 't he Code of Civil Proce-
dure,. e.g., section 9 .9.r ,1. t
Order .
VII, rule
.
7 of the Code . -1
and not
by section.42 of tb,6: .Sp~(.:ic ReJ4~f Act. Such a vie.)Y. would
. 'be consistent, not only':w#J:>. .7heir-Lordships'
~ ' '
.,,)'~-""b.")" ~.,: "'I ~~ .~
observations il)
, '..the above two cases, but:~a1iO :.iii :~Fischer:s case (supra). .Ori .
;<Hili Yf~wl the pr~~~r "'tiN\Wt )iq(~~:goy~J.!le<!;b.Y.' ~c~9h:
. < i2 of, the : ~peci#$~:, . ".. "~ .: _::. -..; .:.~~;;.. :1;.~~:
In om opinimL ,.. , ''P ~tiffs in the case.f:lW:{Y-~-dlid.~r .
:appeal need not ask for :any rellef other tha1;1 .a ~eclaration
(i) I.L.R. zz. Mad. p. 270. (P.'C .). (2) I.L.R. 43 Cal. p. 694. (P.C.)
(3) (1944) 1' Cal. p. 644.
that the compromise decree dated the 15th of December c.c.

1965 .
1960 in Civil Regular Suit No. 13 of I955 of the Additional
District Court of Mandalay is not binding on them in the . KHATlZA
BIBI
way in which they would be bound had they been parties to o.
MA SINT
the compromise. No doubt, the defendant-respondent AND SIX,'
Khatiza Bibi had opend execution proceedings against them .
on the basis of the compromise decree in the Additional
District Court of Mandalay. But, the learned Additional
'District Judge is bound to respect a aeclaration in the sense
indicated above, which had been given to the present
plaintiffs in the suit now unaer appeal. There is ample
. authority for the preposition, that in such a situation, the
plaintiffs need not ask for anything more than a declara-
-tion. .
In Ganga Ghulam v. Tapechri Prasad (4), the plaintiff
came into Court alleging that he was the owner and jn
possession of a certain house of which one of the defendants
had executed a mortgage in favour of the other defendant.
The mortgagee filed a suit and obtained a decree for sale,
'in execution of which the plaintiff's property was
proclaimed for sale. The plaintiff asked for a declaration
that the house was not liable to sale in execution of the
..decree obtained by the mortgag~e. It was held that
sectioP, 42 of the Specific Relief Act was no bar to the suit,
the pla~tiff not .be!zlg obliged to seek any,..other relief (as,
for e:Xampk cancellation of the deed o~ 'mortgage) than
that which he had claimed. In Umarannessa Bibi v.
Jamirannessa Bibi . (5): it was hel4 that whether it is
' incumbent upon -~e plaintiff to ask for consequential relief
must depend-:UPOn thecircumstances of each case and that
....t" ~-t.-~1:-
wheth~. <!~~J~9#3l~n_
~ .-..
~-- .... __._
_.-~-
js.:suffitient for _,,
--~---.
, th~
....,_.. protectiQ!l,
. the -
pi~.tii!:~.Q(re compelled to_~.f.~.s~~quentiat relief.

ln. SrHNrisbna Chandra v. Mahabjr..P..r:<I.Slld (6), a Full Bench ~
.:of 'the Allahabad High Court held that where a plaintiff
t4) I.L.R. z6. All.p. 6o6. (s} A.I.R. (1923) Cal. p. 36z.
(6) A.I.R. (1933) All. p. 488.
c.c. merely asks for a declaration that the previous decree is-
x5
not in any way binding upon him, his suit is one for
KHATIZA
BIBI obtaining a dedara~ory decree only and falls under
v. Artk:le 17 (3), Schedule 2 of the Court~fees Act, 1870.
MASINT
AND SIX. The whol~ matter was however lucidly explained by
Verma, J., in Munnu Chamar v. Hari Narain ('7). There
the learned Judge pointed out that the object of the proviso,
to section 42 of the Speci.t4.c Relief Act, was to prevent a
multiplicity of suits by preventing a person from getting
a mere declaration of rights in one suit and thep. seeking:
the remedy without which the declaration .would be useless-
and which could have been obtained in the same suit, in-
another suit. Accordingly, a declaration should be
granted unless it would be futile without such further
consequential relief as an injunction, etc. Therefore, even
assuming that the present suit for declaration is governed:
by section 42 of the Specific Relief Act, we consider that
it is maintainable without a prayer for consequential relief,_
such as an .injunction. .
The learned Advocate for the plaintiff-appellant Khatiza..
Bibi has invited our attention to the case of Daw Aye Klliri
v. Daw Sein (8), where it was held that a person in wrongfuJ"
possession of immoveable property cannot give a valid.
title to another by creating a Jease in his favour, and that.
where 'a .decree; ~ot:~:poss~sibn oC;iinmoveabJe,} prope~;:
was obtained against that person ..on the ground. that .he..
had .been in wrongful possession of the same, his tenant:
cannot resist the 'execution of that decree. The learned', ;.
Advocate contends'' that even if .t he decree da.t~ the 15th oF .:;
December I 960 is noCbi~dili1f UPR P~the present pla~tttiff~f
:. respoiia~nts.

in tiie,
..
.mariner
... -
lif'whi~ihey
.., ' '-r;,;,,
:~ ~ . !~\. t?{~-,v-.~-.....
would
-..
~;' ~~
,.be ;bt':hirid1:~~~i:
.. . .i-:. ..
~~:,;;:co- :~.';\:':; ~~;
had they.been.t>~~f~g~~he compromise; th~y,:.._l?.si,l)k~t~)l~n~;:'

. . ::~"!'~ ':k 'd . . d h
o'f Daw Tm U::~n'OF'ua s1gne t e compr<i5~e''' ,petmon,:.
:m..::t;':,~""~ ~
were liable. t~ );~''eject~d on the. principle' 'enimti'ated in .

-Daw Aye Khin's c~se. However, weare not concern~.
(7) I.L.R. (1946) AlL p. 8s~. (8) (r96o) B.L.R. p. x. (H.e.).
with this question at the !present moment. All that we

.are now concerned is whether the plaintiff-respondents are
KHATIZA.
bound by the compromise decree in the manner in which Bmx
they would be bound had they been parties to the o.
i\1A SINT
<:ompromise. On this question, there is no other answer AND SIX.
than that which we had already given above.

In the result, . we see no reason for setting aside the
judgment and decree now under appeal. ACcordingly, the
appeal fails .and it is dismissed with costs, Advocate fees
beiy.g assessed at K 85.
APPELLATE CRIMINAL
Before U San Maung and U Saw Ba; Thein, JJ.
c.c.
1965 LEE LAW SHWIN
I. )"
Mar. 24. 2. Y. C ..SWAN }--(APPELLANTS)
3 DAW YI J
v.
I. DARAMSIN I
2. UJAGAR SINGH }-(RESPONDENTS).*
3 R. S. CHOWDHURY J
Receiver~der directing payment of commission to r eceiver-whether appealable
Supervisory j urisdiction of the Chief C~crt-S. 4. UnionJudiciq,ry Act.
Held: An order of a District Judge drrecting payment of commission t<>
a Receiver, is not appealable under 0. XLIII, r. t(s) of the Code of Civit
Procedure. . .
Nevertheless, the Chief Court, in the exercise of its powers of supervision
under s. 4 of the Union Judiciary Act, can interfere in such matters in suitable:
cases..
Hla Nyun for t:he appellants.

S. L. Verma for the respondents . .
U SAN MAUNG, J.-This appeal by Lee-Law Shwin, Y. G..

Swan and Daw Yi, three of the defendants in Civil Regular
Suit No. 3 of 1957 of the District Court of Myitkyina is.
against the orde:r;:. of .tg~ }~,ned District ]U.d.ge, dawd :,the-
3oth of September 'x9,63: irr'Ovil Miscellaned~~: C~e;No. 3-
of I96o, arising out:of the aforesaid civil suit, whereby the-
learned District Judge directed t;he payment t9 the Receiv~r
of a sum of K soo -as . in~.tal.ment towards the commission~ .
. which he was entitl~~<htoj:jinder . Clause (b) ~f Rw : :i:.of
~, Or.d~:r XL Civil .Pr:oced\fr~~tode~<dt is contended -'6 n/ reniuf "''
ot . ill'~ appet1~I{tl.iilt
.. ...
tf.Ishit~; ilikit~ceivef\t;;'?.it~ditg;.: 'at~-~~
~ 4 ::-.~)~~~ ~H:;..N.~:'( - _.. , :.~l~j}l:J.::..~::. ' .
Civil Mi$C~~~P~il~".t:'of 1963, againSt th~~~~!f(jf, ;tii~ District.
. Court of Myitkyin~, :in Civil Misc. Case No. 3 of x~6~,''~ted the 3oth of'
September 1963. < - :
BUR!\1A LAW REPORTS 281
properties worth about five lakhs kyats, mostly consisting ~~-

of motor car spare parts, for the purpose of selling them I. L EELAW
he was entitled to remuneration only under Clause (a) of SHWIN
2
Rule 2 and not under Clause (b) thereof. On the other 8~.,;
hand, the learned Advocate for the respondents Daramsin, 3 n:':'Yt
Ujagar Singh and Chowdhury contends, firstly, that the x. DARAMsm
2. UJAGFR
order of the learned D1str1ct Judge dated the 30th of Sep- SINGH
tember 1963 is not an appealable order as it does not come cJ~!~~Y.
within ambit of Clause (s) of Rule I of Order XLIII, Civil
Procedure Code, and second).y, that since it is now clear
that the Receiver would be unable to sell the property
which he had taken charge of, owing to nationalisation
measures taken by the Government, the Receiver would be
entitled to_commission under Clause (b) of Rule 2 for so
much of the property }Vhich had not been sold.
In our opinion, no appeal lies under Order XLIII, Rule
I , Clause (s) against the order of the learned District Judge,
dated the 30th of September 1963 as the order, sought to
be appealed against has not been made either under Rule I
or Rule 4 of Order XL. Nevertheless, this Court in
exercise of its powers o{ supervision under section 4 or' the
Union Judiciary Act, can interfere in such matters as the
present, in suitable cases.
Regarding the merit of the present case we are of the
opinion that, if the Receiver is unable to sell the bulk of
..-!!~~~ ~r~~r;~ . of W:hich he haq tak;~./.:~cgge, h~ would b~
-entitled to remuneration . at one. per cent on the estimated
,-alue of the unsold property. Regar~g . the portion of
_the property ~ld, he would undoubtedly be entitled to
. r~muneration at five per cent under Clause (a) unless for
special reasons. the Court orders ~J;em'!Jlleration to be at
s~me_ o~er:!ate: . . . . ~. . ,. .~ ~...
,_
/:~~'
~-A..~
ri{th~
-~
~i~~ ~~f the ma~r:~r~~-
~~ ~
;: : ....
no re~~n for inter..:'
,; .... .,:.:.:
~!i~~rence at this stage. The ap~ is accordingly ~~~_.:.

with no order asto costS.
.282 BURMA LAW .REPORTS
CRIMINAL REVISION
MA MYA THWIN (APPLICANT)

v.
Mar. 19.
KO MAUNG THAN (RESPONDENT).*
Maintenana-Criminal Procedure Code s. 488-When a father is to maintain

his child who has attained majority. Amount of educatio11 ro be pro~tided
for by father-consideration of father's income. .
Held: There were two lines of thought in India and Burma as to whether
or not ma~tenance allowance to a " child " should cease when he or she'";"~"'";d
the age of x8. Certain High Courts have held the view that the word " child
ins. 488 (t) of the Code of Criminal Procedure means a person who has not
attaine4 the age of majority, whereas others have felt.that there is no limit of
age placed by the said section for maintenance to be awarded to a child, and
that such an allowance is to continue as long as the child is unable to maintain
himself.
BaranShantav.MaChanThaMay,nRan.68z; UBa Thou11gv. Ma A~e
to Ran. 194; A. Krishn!JSfoami Ayyar v. Chan!bavadana I.L.R. 37. M ad. 565;-
Hemantakumar Banerji v. Manorama Debee. 62. Cal. 639; Jambap~tram Sub-
bama v. Jambapuram Venkata Reddi. A.I.R. (1:950) Mad. 394; Baran Shanta
v. Ma Chan Tha May, 11 Ran. 682; Tekchand Partabrai Bhavnani v. Sh.
Kalavantibai Tekchand, A.I.R. (1941). Sind. 214; A. ThumbllSWamy PillaY
v. Ma Lone and one, 9 L.B.R. 49; Mst. Khedani Rajwarin v. Lagan Si11gh'
A.l.R. (1921) Pat. 379; T. Kanniah Naidu v. Rajammal, A.I.R. (i941) Mad. 685 i
Sm. Purnasaihi l)evi v. Nagendr Natll Bhatror.herjyee, A.I.R. (1950) Cal. 465;
W. [,,Faria v~ ..fl!l!ta"Merlene Faria and another, A.I.R. (1951) Cal 66; Bakshi
Nonih~l v.' ~.St~f.a!'. ~ubhoi aud others . . A.I.R. ~~~~~~Jammu and ...Kashm'ir~
p. 16, referred to. .~ . .
The.correct opinion of the law on the subject seems to be that that the ques-
tion whether!. person is a major or a minor is not wholly irrelevant in a procee
ding under s: 488.of the Criminal Procedure Code, for if a person is a minor,
no
there can Qe preSUmption against him that he is able to maintain himse1f.; b ut
thatonthecontrary,ifitisshownthatheisamajor there would be a ,presumption
against him that.he lfi';a:Qle. ~ maint:ain )).imself. Th~re mai b"e cirl~ces
where the'a~l' : ~yjf!5tbe relieved\~hhe responsibilitt 6r 'm~ili~GU.J~~
child, altnd'" '. . have .attai~ed tb~ age of ro"aj~riey.;<;: ~. . ::. ...- -: ''''::_;~
'.,"~ '. "!".7-.:' ~'-!~-:::~ :~' "'''-' . .,..
c~~~~~ ~0. I98 (B) of ~964 in twd?Jft&;;urt

of Burma, being
the ~eview of. the
?.tder of the Sessions ~udge of "iiemada; dated th~ 1z3rd
<>ctober 1964, passed.in his Criminal Appeal No. I i of 1964-
Bakshi Nonihal v. Mst. Ram Lubhai and others, A. I. It (1953) J ammu aod c.c.
Kashmir p. t6; The State v. lshwarlal, A.I.It (1950) Nag. 231, referred to and x96s
followed. MAMYA
Held juYther: T )le contention in the case under consideration that the elder T HWIN
daughter who is between zofzt years of age cannot maintain herself because v.
KoMAuNa
she is studying in the 9th Standard cannot stand, Under the said section, T HAN.
a father is not bound to provide anything more than th e cost of minimum
amount of education which the Conventions.of the country call for.
Maung $hwe Ba v. Ma Thein Nya, A.I.R. (1939). Ran. 95, refe~ed to and
followed .
Regarding the second daughter who is xS/rQ years old, the contention
that although she is taking in sewing, her income is only K t/K ~~ per day
and therefore was still unable to maintain herself, also cannot stand. The
Respondent who is eacnin~ only K too/zoo per month, and has a second
family to maintain, cannot b e expected to contribute any more to her main-
t enance.
Kyin Htone for the applicant.
Khin Maung (4) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNG, ].-This application for revision by

Ma Mya Thwin is against the order of the learned Sessions
Judge, Henzada, in his Criminal Appeal No. I I of I964,
.wherein the learned Judge. set aside the order of the
2nd Additional Magistrate, Myanaung, in his Criminal
Miscellaneous Case No. 30 of I963 wherein the learned
::Magistrate awarded to Ma Mya Thwin, a sum of K 30
. f or th~ . ,maintenance of her elder daug~ter, Ma Yin Myint,
~: aged .tween io and 2I and K Io for her yolinger daughter
,~:>Ma'-N[~v,.hiiif.~ged
~
.... ,o ..;t~~~
~ ...
between I8 andd~.~~~~
: . ~i{{OcJI-.~."1.4~~.,;,.., rfacts ~ving

"riset:o:.l he present application are bne:tiy these: .
In t pe year I948, when Ma Yin Myint, the elder
.;_daug\lt~r. was about 4 years old an4
_.Ma Nu Khin, the
younger~ daughter -was about 2 y~i!:>ld. the respondent
. Mauri{Than~~wa(~Iderea to pay to ~i~Y.:~ .Thwin K Io
~~ . r ;;~_gnth_,.,f:or ~ih
-. J~,.~~~~;~~ ~'t. !----
. 'eir......
5iiaintenance:,
;_. ~
J: ri~'l
~'u .
":a63, Ma . Mya
:..~?'~
~~-f~a;:an ~ app)ication be(o -~~nd Additional
M:. ~ .;._:f'Myanaung, for en.blie iii~"'of the .mainten-
~--~-1):... ( '-" '""~: '
~~~. ~ll~wimce on the. groun~ .:t)laf'f.f~~der daughter was

20
c.c. then 19 .years old and the younger daughter 17_years old
x96s
and that the maintenance allowance was insufficient,
MAMYA
THWIN especially as Ma Yin Myiht was studying at school in the-
v.
KoMAUNG 9th standard. This application was dealt with in Critp.inal
THAN. Miscellan~ous Case No. 30 of 1963 of th;1,t Court. Maung
Than med a counter-application for cancellation of the
mainteftance order passed against him ji1 the year 1948 on
the. groUnd that his elder daughter was 2 r years old and hiS
younger daughter was 19 years old and that, therefore, they
had attained the age of majority. His application was dealt
with in crimina~ Miscellaneous Case No. 32 qf 1963.
The learned Magistrate after examirijng witnesses cited by
both the parties came to the conclusion that the respondent
. Matmg Than being the owner of a Burmese medicinal shop
a
derived net income therefrom of abqut K . roo to K 2oo
per mon:th, that his elder daughter Ma Yin Myint who
was between ?-O and 2 r years of ag~ being in school was
tinable to maintain herself, and that h;i,s younger daughter,
MaNu Khin, who was between r8 and 19 years of age, .
though augmenting the family: income by taking in sewing
~om which she earned about K r to K r Yz daily, was still
--.unable to maintain h~rself and that .therefore, .Maung
Tlian should pay the maintenance ~llowance as already
mentioned above.. Being dissatisfied with the .order of the
:learned Magistrate Maung Than appealed and the learn~d
~~S.$jPns.~.JlJ,._Q.ge, Jjenz~9a, b,ql.~ng on., ' :~UJlgri!Y. of .~h~
t~c..i'eosion'

cases
~- ill\he an
of.Bat Shantii ...... .. __ti':Chiin:
\ . Tha May
.
.
(r) and U Ba Thaung v. .Ma Aye (2). no maintenance
1101iliT:::Ilrl('~- is payable to persons who . attained the.age
. majqrity alJowed Maung Than~ . . . Hence the
ifllreslent application ... ....
~
for
....... ..
'
reyision.
.
age of 18. In A. Krishnaswami Ayyar v. Chandravadqna c.c.

1965
(3) it was held .t hat the word " child " jn section 488 ( J;) of MAMYA
the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, means a person who THWIN
has not att~ined the age of majority. This dictum of the
.,,
KoMAuNa
Madras High Court was followed 'by the
Calcutta High THAN.
Court in Heman'takumar Banerji v. Manorama J)e~ee (4),

by th~ Madras High Court itself in ]ambapurarn._Subbama
v. ]amba'puram Venkata Reddi (5) and by the:.Rangoon
Hig~ Court in Batan Shanta v. MaChan Tha May (1).
In Tekchand Partabrai Bha.vnani v. Sh. Kalavan'tiba'i

Tekchand (6) a Bench of the Sin9.. Chief Court seems to
have held by necessary implication that a father is bound
to giye sufficient maintena~ce allowance not only to feed
and clothe a child but to pay for _his necessary edUCC\tiOn
until the c~ild reaches the age of majorjty.
However, the Chief Court of Lower :Burina had in
A. Thumbuswamy Pillay v.. Ma Lone and one (7) doubted
the correctness of the dictum in Krishnasawmi Ayyar's
case (g). What Sir Charles Fox, C. J., observed was this:
"It appears to me to be unnecessazy to deal with the
question of :.w hether the son ceased to be a child within the
puivi.ew. of the section after he reached the age of x8 yearS.
I hesitate w adopt the view of Sankaran Nair, J. in
A. Krishnasawmi Ayyar v. Chandravadana (3) Without further .
, . .. . ~~,r.n~~.''.~!t~ppear~. to,_ me that ,~e Le~lat.ure may. have
mamtenance
..iiitended tO.~iie. a .father :liable for the !to f his
chiid 'thr~~grou.;i its life if, o~g to some m~nbl o~ tor!>oral
defect. it i$ unable 'to maintain itself. "
v: Lagan Singh .(8) the dictum in

~:v. Cli4p.draY._adana (3) wa5 e~q
,ress1
(6)
(7) 9.t.~~R. 49 .
(8) A.I.R: (19~1) Pat ..379
c.c. with approvaJ by the learned judge of the Patna .High
~ Court in coming to the conclus~on that there is no limit of
MAMYA
~HW!N age pl~ced by section 488 for the maintenance allowance
v,
KoMAUNG
to be ~warded to a child and that ~uch an allowance is to
THAN. continue so long as the child is unable to maintain hiinself.
To .the same effect are the decisions in T. Kanniah Naidu
v. Rajammal (9), Sm. Purnasashi Devl v. Nagendra Nath
Bhattacl:iarjyee (10), W. L Faria v. Anita Merlen~ Faria and
another (II) and Bak.shi Nonihal v. Mst. Ram Lubhai (12)
and others..
a
In later case, the Rangoon High Court itself took a
much more logical view. In U Ba Thaunn v. Ma Aye (2)
the iearned ]~dges composing the Bench opserved:
. . .~
There ~ .no definition in the Code of ,Grimina:I Procedure

as to the 'meaning of the word child'. It is argued on
belialf of the petitioner that the word child' must mean a
person under the age of majority. The term child does
ordinarily signify a young person but it is also sometimes
used as synonymous with the. term son ' or daughter '. "
'There is authority for the view that the provisions of
seetion 488 as to children cannot apply a fter the child has
. attained the age of majority, but cases undoubtedly do arise
where . a son or daughter after attaining the age of majority,
is unable to maintain itself and we should hesitate to lay
down as a, rigid rule that in no such case q:mld an order of
maintenance in favour . of a child be enf~iced as regards a
... m~jor.'\.~ :.,t~~ . ; .: .: '.'.' .~; . ;--~-:',c:.~:.o\" :.:;. .:
1n The State v: Ishwarlal (13) it was. opserved that the
qu~tiQn w~~t,~r a person a m~jor . is
'minor is ~6~
:wh.olly irrel~~~t jn a proceeding- .488 o~
Criminal~Procedure
t:';
. : . .:. ~
Code

for if
.
a
- ~ i).

6.8s. (rr) A.I.R.

465. (12) A.I.R. and Kashmir p. 16.
(~3) A.I.R. (I9SO) Nag. 23 . . ~'~~:/.~ ',-<' .
. . .. : . ~ .
that he is a major there would be a presumption against c.o.

1965
him that he is able to maintain himself. This observation
MA.MYA
was made by the learned Judge of the Nagpur High Court TBWIN
o.
after an exhaustive survey of the a~thorities bearing on the KoMAUNG
subject. Furthermore, it .is very akin to the observation THAN.
of the Bench of the Rangoon High Court in U Ba Tha~ng

v. Ma Aye (2).
In my opinion the law on the subject has been correctly
laid down in The State v. Ishwarlal (13). Normally, a
person who has attained the age of majority will be pre-
sumed to be able to maintain himself. However, there
may be such circumstances as physical and mental in-
capacity in the case of a person who has attained the age
of majority, which prevents him from earning a living in
the way open to a normal person. In such a case a father
will not be relieved of the responsibility of maintaining .
such a person although he might have attained the age of
majority.
In the ~ase now under consideration, to say that
Ma Yin Myint is unable to maintain herself because she
is studying at school in the 9th Standard would be no
answer to the above question. As held by Mackney, J ., in
l'vfaung Shwe Ba v. Ma Thein Nya (14) under section 488
of the Criminal Procedure Code a father is not b<:>und to
1~?J~~~i~J':-tlc~-!~j~~6:t o~f:c::trtar:~:~
for. Ma Yin Myint'is the daughter of a seller of Burmese
:
medicinal her~ wh_?.,~~e~arning an income between K xoo
and K 2oo. Therefor~1 .J:he father is obviously not bound
;~to .. maintain his datigh~er the age of majority
,;p~r~ly . ~9-,use further#per prospects by
~Studymg~ up io '}:;mere is nothing'
:In the evideil~ due to physical -5l!.L~*tal
incapacity Ma was unable to maintam~i'rielf
'<~4> :A.I.R: (x939) Ran. 9S
288 BURMA. LAW. REPORTS
G:C. althoJ[gh she is. niore than 18 years old. As forMa Nu

r's
~
Khin sl?.e is already: earning ,about K 30 to K 45 a inont;h.
MA:MiiA
THWIN So~ her father who -hj~elfisearning between K too to 2oo

KoMAuNG a month and has a second family to maintain; cannot be
THAN. expected to contr-ibute-, any more for her maintenance.
According1y~ in my qpinion, the learne~ - Se~sions judge of
Henzada was quite j'ustified in reversing the order- of th~
2nd Additional, Magistrate, Myanaung, although I -do not.
agree viith him that . under no circuinstarices c;a~ main-
tenance allowal}ce be given to a person who has. reacJ:led
the age of majority.
. For. these reasons. the application for re:vision fails and
l.t: is dismiss~dwith no ord,er as to costs.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 28.9
APPELLATE CRIMINAL
BefMe U San Maung, and Dr. Maung Maung,JJ.
MAUNG THAw KA AND ONE (APPELLANTS) c,c: .
THE UNION OF BURMA

v.
(RESPONDENT).* .
-
1965
Mar.x8.
~onjessi<m-voluntary, tho11gh given iu the hope of becomirzg approver. Exculp_atMy

Statemtnt--tUJ ctmfession. Retracted corrjestion--requirement uf corro-
boration-no hard and fast rule as to amount of corro~Mation required.
Dioergences between exculpatMy statement and inclupatory c<mfession-effect
uf. When a c<mfession of0111'. accused cars be ta~en into consid,eraticn in respect of
anotlur accused. Abettor of crim-an rmu:illing specUI(q, of a crime not
.on ~or.
Held : A confession may be enti_rely voluntary in nature, although

it is quite possible that the person giving the confession may have hoped that Gy
giving a full confession, he would become an approver in the cas~.
It !s se~ed.. law that. no statement whic~ , cont~ips exculpaJ\)ry ~et~~r ca1,1
a91ount to a ;co{lfession, if the. exc;:ulpa~ory stateme!lt is of some fact which if
;proved would negative the offen alleg~ to.be confesSed.
Maung Han and otf.ers v. Tm King, (1.947) R.L.R. 37 ; Chit Tin {a) Su Thi
-and onev. T}leT:JnjonojBurma, (1951). ~~.R. 142(S.C.),ref~to.
'I;he. statement of a person that he was the t.~nwilling spe.ctator of a crime
-which he did n9t approve .of, is no c~nf~on at ~ ~s anUID'jilling sp~tator ia
iDOt an ahettor of such crime.
S.arjuPrasadv. E7(1peror, A.I.R. (1914) Oudh a.6z, referred to.
. HJdfurther : I t is settled law that.the of(ijnaey rule. of. nrA~~_qce is .that69.m~.
, . .Jtind of, corrobof!\tWJ.l:is n~~ in .t~e ~ . of-a retra~- confession ltnlea
tbe circumstances ~ ace~tional . '
The Ki'lll v. Hla Mau,.g, (1946) R.L.R. 102 ; TM Union of Burma v.
1h Hla(a) Maune.Hla a_nd two others (1958) B.L.R. 29 (H~C.), refe.rred t9.
1
. It is however imwssible tp lay ~own: ~Y..hard: an~! fast .rule ..$.' to w4~t
<.9J:lstitutes s~ci.~t cp_r.rphorl\ti9n. Qf a re!Cra.9~e~ ,confe~io~. lt;mus~ 4eP,~~-~'
.on .~~ pecupat circum~tan~s of each qase. /
.~dasll>: If two confessions whlch ar~ ~iirely ioculpator!7 in nature in so
'far. ~;;~ ~nfessj~~-~ .concerntd., are.~iifv~t,in~~eriJ.l;~~c:J.~lfrs, i~.
woul.t\,~ a.~J.te.!iif~~~ co~!~.~Wl~~;~~.?t&~fu.~~!.qr lw.~
. .Grimini~~-)'No."'3o of .15 (~dalay); . A'ifpW~m~ili~.o;der or
t.h~ a.pd. S~I\.f.)'\ld~~<U:a;q.~~Y. t\a~t:Mh~~~~~.d.Jiy, -~f:JAA~f!lt>.. tp.65,.JWJt4:
'h: Qnm.in ..l-o ..;.l.P T 'a} '!OJ ~ f
ll. ,,_,.s -,-,-:;n ...J'!:'&~J fl -/'-.P ..,.o I9.m.
1. .
.
'
o.o. these confessions should be rejected as untrue. However, where the so-called
'1965 confession of one accused is entirely exculpatory, while the confession of
another accused inculpates not only himself but his co-acc!lsed, it will be-
M.A.UNO surprising if there are no divergencies in these statcm.~nts.
THAW KA
AND ONB Held further : Although the confession of an accused person is good evidence-
as far as he himself is concerned, it can only be taken into consideration against.
TaB UNION his co-accused, if the other evidence on record is sufficient to establish prima
6FBUIRMA.
facie that such co-accused had also committed the crime.
Khaw Taw and cme v. The Uniun of Burma, (1948) B.L.R. 310 (H.C.) ; Unum
of Burma v. AhHla (a) Maung Hla, (1958) B.L.R. 29 (H,C.), referred to.
Where the evjdencc against the co-accused is his own exculpatory statement;
and the statement of his wife which is by itself insufficient to implicate her
husband, a prima facie case of murder cannot be said to be established.
Hla Nyunt for the appellants.

Ba Pe (Government Advocate) for the respondent.
U SAN MAUNe, J.-In (:riminal Regular Trial No.6 of

1964 of the 2nd Special Judge. Mandalay, the appellants.
Thaw .Ka. Maung Nyunt and tw~ of the co-accused Maung
Lat and Maurig Kyin Sein who were discharged from the
case were sent up for trial under section 302 (r} (b) of the
Penal Code read with section 34 thereof for causing the
.premeditated murders of the -'deceased Maung Tun Sein
and Maung Saw Mauiig jn furtherance of a common
intention. The appellants Thaw Ka and Maung Nyunt
were convicted as charged and each .of them was sentenced
to death. Hence the present appeal.
Th~ facts giving rise to .t he present appeaL are briefly
these: -The deceasoo Maung Tun Sein was th~ husband
of M;i K4we (PW 2). and the decease<I ~.faung S~w -Maung
. who .was in the employ of Maung Tun Sein. ~as the
llusband of Ma Chet (JW 3).. niece of Ma Khwe. All .of !
them,:~ived together in Kaingd_aw N:orth village. since the

. . . . . :u..,:r..r~ .,.
9~h.i.I~. of Taau-, 1325: B; (21"3-:64), Ma.g .TJ.Ul :Sein

. a nd M:~\ing saw;~uni :were'-~diii'g ai a.:A~4t)\\1~about
~0, miles aw~f.;fi6II1_ Kaingdaw .North-.vHJ;~~1rabout
aCall:s dis_tance to the ~~rth. ot Segyigone\rilJage Where
, U Hla Din (PW 1) resided. In the ~mail hours of the
BURMA LAW REPORTS 29t
morning of the Iith lasan of Tagu 1325 B.E. (24-3-64), c.c.

196
Ma Nyo (PW 5), daughter of Headman U Hla Din was
MAUNG
awake at her house. She heard shouts for help"mt&ro3<[o1" 'IRAw K~
AND ONI!
from a direction to the north of Segyigone village. She, v.
therefore, woke up her husband Maung Sein Maung THBUNION:
OPBURMA.
(PW 6) who in turn roused his neighbours, Maung Moe,
Maung Khwe Nyo and others from their sleep. Together,
they went in the direction in which the shouts for help
were heard, and at a .spot about a call's distance to th~
north of the village Maung Sein Maung saw in the light of
his electric torch, a man lying apparently dead ori the
cart-track. Not daring to proceed any further Maung Sein
Maung and his companions returned to Segyigone village
to report their discovery to Hea'dman U Hla I;>in. U Hla
Din then accompanied by Maung Sein Maung and other
villagers went to that spot and saw jt was the deceased
Maung Tun Sein who was lying dead with a gaping dah-cut
wound on his neck. In the estimation of U Hla Din this
spot was about 2oo yards to the north of his village and
three bamboo-lengths. away from Maung Tun Sein's own
field-hut. They went to look at that hut and saw the dead
body of Maung Tun Sein's nephew Maung Saw Maung with
many dah-cut wounds of his body. U Hla Din sent Intima-
tion to Kaindaw North village. He also went to the police
. station at Singu about ejght miles away from his village
. ,ang there lodged the First Information Report, ~ibit <'m"._
: Ac-companied by police officers U Hla Din came back to
the scene of the crime whence the two dead bodie~ were
conveyed by the police to the hospital at Singu. Post-
mortem examination showed that the deceased Maung
Saw Mauhg had five incised wounds, three on the head,
op.e on the jaw and one on the nape of the neck. The
;;~.~jlijury on the 'neck Which -involved the- severance of the
t~spinal chord was Il~ly. fatal. Maung Tun Sein,
whose dead body wa5"'found on' the cart-track, had no"less
than 16 injuries of ~hich three were only superficial. He
:292 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c: h~d four wo~nas on the head, three on his back and five
196S
on his hands. It would appear that the injuries .on his
MAUN.G
T.fL\w ~A hands wer~ received while Maung Tun Sein was trying to
AND ONB
v. ward off the blow:s which were rained on his head. There
"THBUNxoN ! was one injury on the nape of. the neck .which was
.OF BURMA.
nece~sanly f ata}. . The. oth ers wouJd; m comb'mat1on be
suffici~nt to cause death.
The polite were quickly on the scene and their
investigation led to the .arres~ of. appellant Thaw Ka on the
28th of Marc!l 1964 and of the appellant Maung Nyunt a.
day later. The appellant Maung Nyu:p.t promptly :na'de a .
statement the next day, namely, the 30th of March 1964,
before the Township Magistrate, Singl;t. This ~tatement,
Exhibit ''o"which the learned trial Judge cpl)sidered. to .be
a confession was entirely exculpatory ih nature as .we shall-
point out later. On the 2nd of April , 1964, after he had
been in custody fo;r five q~ys, the appellant Thaw Ka gav:e
his . confession. Exhibit "m"; bef()re the same Magistrate,
in which he entirely ipcuJpated not only h~ms~lf but two
of. his. co-accused, Mimng_Nyunt and Maung Lat. He. did
not inculpate the 4th a,cc.used, Maung Kyin $ein. At the
time Thaw Ka gave his confession the exhibit- dashe. was
before him . an.d he identified thts dashe as the on,~ w:hich
he had borrowed- from Maung: Kyin Sein-for. the purpose
-of: murdering ~he two deceased persons. This dashe was
the one i se~ed: ' t!y)\::t:he police from'!: the_' lipuse . of the
-discharged.-acc;used M~ung !<yin Seip. or{ the 29~ of.March
1964. Accqr~g to. :t-4~ J:Isjn K}'i (RW'9). wife. of. Maung
Kyiri Sein th~ cl!;lshe bel9nged to 4~;r-. h~sband, Two d~ys
. after:h~)ng: of_th~:;~<iaths of. Ma~pg: Y.un''~ceill: :~n:<J.rMau.ng
~.,sayv. Ma;un~ _s'li:fJt~'.~ -~ah, ~d }lid-- -~~;~.:::tY~7 r~~!~~
;;~betwee. n '' ..lie<~<.
.tNf ..,,.rgc
..-~.
- Ut~.:-
cdurldn . .P 'l. ~tations
.
:'.....\!..)-' .;.,.,f...
. ...,.,bel

v
..
:n. ~ :C:~f.. o'i... -Mati.ii'
.. ._ R,,gm:g_
.
- ... :g.
.~ .~- ' .. ,:. '1 ..~~ . .":"' '"' 1 .-...>:"~ . -.
"Nyo.;. , ' a~g:B.a ~:~ . Qle s~( '' . a~ :so.be~.~s~- :

she , . -: _ . ~a: &iat tqe,.poUce"ill~-~1:1~.. -,. ,, ~intQ tll~murd~m
<>f: the. d~i~se<:I~ persops; wighti_g_q~ro\!nd/t'Jr~- viii~ as'J<.ing.
~u~stioqs:: 3,hQut: P.Q.$SeS:i91) Qf~ lethal_; w~~pq~~:. A~oor<Ung
B~ LAVV REPORTS
to U Maung Gale (PVV 14) who acted as a search witness,

Ma Hsin Kyi produced the dah when the police station
MAU}jll
officer U Hla Pe told her to give up t}J.e dah- which appellant THAw. KA
Thaw Ka had left with them. Accord~ng 'to. the same AND.~NE
witness U Maung Gale-Ma Hsin Kyi made fur.ther state- THE UNxoN
OF BURMA.
ments as to how and when the dah was brought ba~k to
the house by the appellants Thaw Ka and Maung Ny~nt;
but these statements .were clearly inadmissible in evidence
:under section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
We shall now dea1 with the so-called confession of
.appellant Maung Nyunt, Exhibit ceo" and the confession of
appellailt Thaw Ka, Exhibit"m". What Maung Nyunt said
was this: -At about 7 p.m. before the night of the murder
the appellant Thaw Ka came to his house and called h~
.away to the house of U Mye, father of Thaw Ka. At
U Mye's house; he met the discharged accused Maung
"Kyin Sein. and: Maung Lat and together they chatted. At
about 8 p.m. Thaw Ka went to fetch a bottle of. country
--spirit. After Thaw Ka's return. the four of them p~rtook
"'Of this. liquor. till about 10 p.m. Tha:w- Ka th~n. asked
them to follow him to a spot outside the village and, they
went to a spot about two .calls' distance away to the east
qf Kaingdaw North v.illage. There they sat dow.n under-
neath a large mango-tree. Thaw Ka .then. prod-q~ed: the
exhibit dashe. which he had brought hid<le.n . UJldemeath- a
]q_:giJyi w~Jl;~.,}:~~g;;]'(.rapped t9~n~. ~ ~Y ~e ~sked ., :
the three '6f ~tlie.rli,' yiz., Maung! Nyunt,. Maung tat and: '
Xyiil Sein to- $m-en it. They. complied. Thaw ~ then
--said, " r hav:e..YP."!ll" lives. j.n_my pand.'! Beil].g afraid Gf
him; they~k.~L~1~...W.h!lt.his plan w~, anclTha:w Ka sai4-
tbathe cog~w:Riat~,co~tting- ~ur.~er thcttnigP,t. They
thereupq~J~~~)ijfu.~whom- he. ~.as in,tenrung:.J~~;murder:
. ~~~jffii~ _;~1':-l~Ifed: tha~. ~e: ~~iliknd~ "fd. :inume( ..
-~~~--~a; Savs: MfUmg~ ~~~f.::~ eri~~ted 11im. ~
idesiS4 wher~upon. Th~w. -~ said: tQ.at. unl~: th~J'i
.a.cemnpaniedi hip,l; tO; th61 s~enft oij_ m.ttr-cl.eJt tbey~ also w.o~d
c.c. be put to death. They were afraid of him as he was the
. 1965
only person armed with a dah that night. . So they had
MAUNG
THAw KA to accompany him to a spot about 10 bamboo-lengths
~~N.B . away from Maung Tun Sein's 4ut where they arrived a,t
TmBU~oN about 2 a.m. From a distance they saw Maung Tun Sein
OP UliMA. .
and Maung Saw Maung seated l?,eside the fireplace in the
fielq-hut. Then, while the three of 'them remained near
the trunk of a Kokko tree Thaw Ka went close-to the hut
to see. what was happening:' He came back to say that
the inmates were not yet asleep. They waited till 4 a.m.
. Thaw. Ka alone then 'proceeded to the hut and no sooner
had he arrived in it, than they saw tite re-place lit tip~
.. Immediately thereafter, sou.nds of ;cu_tting were heard and:
a inan was seen running . out. of the field-hut shoutmg-
"w jGo:>3'il.U)" :He was being ch~sed by Thaw Ka. Soon after,.
voices were heard from. the direction of Segyigone village
indicating that there was a hue and cry in response to the
shouts for help uttered by the man.fleeing from Thaw l(a_
The three of them, therefore, ran back together. Even .
when they arrived near the mango-tree where they hacb.
originally rested, they could _heat _sounds _indicating that
some one wa~ being cut. A{about noon the next day,.
Thaw Ka came on the road in front of Maung Nyunt's.
house. an,d after calling him told him not to divulge-
anything. on p~n of qeath. - . .
. , Appellant ,Th~w-.:Ka,~iiad:i~+.Wtferent stotikt9 tell;~il) h~~-
. confession. Ac~rirding to Jiliii~~~it..about no~'ii ofth;ciak:-~
bef9re the murders. he, appell<Wt Maung Nyunt and the
. ~~charg~ acc\1-i~ .Mam;tg ~~-~~~e .a plan to
m~rder th~.;i
, decea~ed M~ung run::Seiri/':,{i~:~~:raingly, a:Caboiit 7':p..m~ J
:"tha(~ight
~ -~"~')...~ ..
he ;.:went
~ :_:
t:6'~tb.Jiii7r-~'i~LMaung
-.u: : ~. .;;s--~~--<~ ;.-.,. .. , .
Lat cti\~llii{t' e; :"i
~}.!{ ..~~=-~-~:'/ _ :~
.: had~liquor, tog~t)le;r;i~~\fAt' ab_ii>u .'.: ;~he wenH:o.~tlfouse~~:\
of tv1iilll N~-!:.?i~J~~:ltfatfu:"'' . ,:;r~ei~'dif~;:~thiJi~~~
bringing~ -~&i~~gi~a{niN~n-1W~l~bg L~t :
he went to f~tcli ' a 'oottle of liquor and :t' :heil.'went\o hiS ::
father. U My~sc~mpound. where he,. :Ma~g..Lat and .Mau~g .
. .
Nyunt drank liquor underneath a mango-tree. He woke c.c.

1965
UP Kyin Sein and borrowed from him the exhibit dashe.
Then he, Maung Nyum: and Maung Lat went out of ~UN~
Kaingdaw North village each armed with a dah. At a AND ONB
0
s pot about one and half miles to the east of Kaingdaw THl! UmoN
North village they came to the field-hut of the deceas~d oP BURMA
.Maung Tun Sein. They saw Maung Tun Sein warming
himself near the fire-place inside the hut. So they sat
down at a spot about five bainboo-lengths away to th~ east
of Maung :run Sein's hut. At about 3 a.m. he alone went
to see whether Maung Tun Sein was asleep. He saw
Maung Tuh Sein awake, splitt;ing bamboo in front of the
fire-place. He came back to report to Maung Lat and
Maung Nyunt, and they decided to murder Maung Tun Sein
even though he might) be still awake. He and Maung
Nyunt went up the hut after ~king the precaution to hide
their dahs iilside the longyis which they had wrapped
roun~ their bodies. Maung Lat waited from behind the
hut. When Ma\mg Tun Sein saw them, he asked them
whence they had come. They replied that they had
returned from Maung Nyunt's field after seeing to the
irrigation of that field. He then suggested that Maung
Tun Sein should sleep while they warm themselves near
. the pre. Maung Tun Sein then went to the platform
where Maung Saw aung was fast asleep. Maung Tun
~~ .t:r,:j~ ~o wak~:JH~ ,~~~g ~~-w ~aupg wit;4o-qt_success.
,,Matmg Turi Sein then<lay himself down beside Maung Saw
Maung. No sooner had Tun Sein done this, than he ana
M~ung Nyunt set u,pOn Saw Maung and Tun Sein. Wh.i le
.M~ung l':fyunt was. cutting Saw Maung he (Thaw Ka) tried
.;:. .to,M~ Tun Sein who wt:iggled ;.n trying to avoid the blows.
li~R~.~ei..l;i_pon cut ~~ Se~jlp:_he re.~op of the neck. Tun ..
r~iii'iarrqut of ~e.~,~~iit ~hou~g ;~~~oo5~?1'.~un Se~
! ~as ~ased .by .~~l-~t and himself an4.1>-q!lJ.; pf. them
joined in attacking' Maung Tun Sein witi'iftheir dabs.
Tun Sein feli down and the three of tbenf then returned
296 BURMA L'k.W REPORTS
C.C. to the . village where they arrivea at about dawn. The
i' s
dashe which he had borrowed from K yin Sein was left on.
. MAu~G
THAw KA K yin Sein's cart, K yin. Sein being still fast asleep.
AND oNE
~
As motive for the murder, Thaw . 'Ka said that he was
~ UNxoN once leader of the gang of workmen engaged in picking
oFB~. groundnuts. Maung"Tun :sein was instrumental in taking_
this. work away from him and jnstalljng in his place one,.
Maung l-Ila Aung who was a richer man than he. That
was why he was ~der a:sense of grievance towards Tun
Sein.
Maung Nyunt in :comt retracted ,his statement,.
Exhjbit. "o". He dit nqt elect to give evide~ce.on behalf of
his own 'defence:. However,
. when
. examined as an. accused .
,; '
person h~ said that the police first examined him after

plying him .with liqu9r. When he refused .to talk the
police officers took him jn a launch, bound his hands and
threw him into the water until he consented to speak
about the murders of Maung Tun Sein arid Matmg Saw
Maung as instructed by them.
Appellant Thaw Ka ;:tlso did. not ~lect to.give evidence
on behalf of his. own defence. When examined as an
.accused, 'he sajd th~t the. police ilitrea~ed him by pouting
lime-water into his. nose thus suffocating him, until at last
he consented to gtve a .confession as tutored by them. The
. kf:O~es;!o~r~~1ji~~; .~ccordi4~b:'~~~~:K.
he
In support of .his ,defence that
~~~;~;::
was 'illtreated and
thus indu~ed to give 1( co~fession appell,~nt Thaw Ka ..cited
three Witw~sses~.,.n.~wi1t.~:~1aung Ba ~~ ~ww r)~ 1.'1.~'~ii&: ' :
, Kyaw (DW .3) ' ,.. g- 'i]i~ung Turi (DW::4). :Maung Ba
:::.Kyi whilst sta 'TI:l~\V Ka was ,.tn !ii~"'~iii&;ioa&:ic: .
~:~t~ihiJ.k~~#ti:. . , :.-~~~P~ ,w~ ~ ' - .~.,~.~~~~t~i~X4.f
saic;l p;;, , ;.pw .~:Ythmg ._;;;a ':e:: . a:lleged :,:m~n~~{
~eatrii . . ,t.o _,,~pp~Iiant -'Qiaw Ka.. ;:.,~.,;. ,~"~,. ...,. 'yaw (Dw .3} ',.
-on th~ otlier.:h~a, said that Thaw K3. ~~~:~en out:every . .
'rught 'between 'IO arid I .I p'.m~'to . be exammed'and ~at he .
was only brought back into the lockup after about one hour.
H~ used to hear Thaw Ka's voice shouting "G?n5olstlJ "
MA.UNG
He did not ask Thaw Ka what had happened to him because THAw KA
he was sorry for hun. Maung Thaung Tun (DW 4) was ~.om
more specific. He sa.id that Thaw Ka used to be taken out THE UNioK"
. OF BURMA.
at about 9 or Io p .m. from the lock-up to he returned
there about 5 or 10 minutes later. After his return
appellant Thaw Ka used to tell him that he was beaten by
the police after being questioned. Thjs happened for three
nights.
Now, apart from the cliscrepancy between Maung Kyaw
and Maung Thaung Tun (DWs 3 and 4) as to the duration
of the time "for which Thaw Ka was taken out of the
lock-up for the purpose of ~ing subjected to third degree
methods, there is a serious cliscrepancy between the
evidence of Maung Thaung Tun and the statement of the
accused Thaw Ka himself as to the manner of illtreatment
by the police. According to Thaw Ka the police tried to
suffocate him by pouring lime-water jnto 1ris nose ;
according to Maung Thaung Tun (DW 4) Thaw Ka told
him .that he had been beaten successively fot: three nights.
From the statement of the police station officer U Hla
I?e (f'W 20) in cross-examination accused Thaw Ka when
arrested did . not make any co~ession. Jt was on~y on
.~...~he mo!p.ing lris~..~oJ?iession.,,"Yr~;.rtcprded th<;tt he said that
:'.. he wo\ild conf~::. TI;l~ scit'emell,f!was 'relied 'upon by the.
learned Advocate for the appellant as indicat:lng that
Thaw Ka mnst have been. sul;>jected to torture in the mean-
time, and thus induced to con(ess: . However, it is clear
that Thaw Ka could .not have, ~n beaten, up for three
: nig~~.;in succ~on, ~~he :~~~ve been if the d~f~nce
wittiess Maung-:;rDaung Tun'%-~beUeved:~ When the
Magistrate )VJl.rde'd.Tha~ Ka's coyf~~n ~ed
his body in ]ie]>resence of two Witnesses 'ii& a trace of
any injury was-found on IU$. -So the-evidence of.the wo
"298 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. defence witnesses, Maung Kyaw and Maung .Thaung Tun

tS
(DWs 3 and 4) is palpably untrue.
MA.UNG
'T.!;woN~ Th~n again, if the .appellants Maung. Nyunt and
...,... o.
.J.Sil UNtON
Thaw Ka could
.
under torture
. .
be induced to. make . state
()F BoRMA. ments .as instructed by the police, we do not see how there
could be such clear contradictions between. the statements
of these ~o persons before the Township Magistrate, Singu,
who recorO.ed Expjbits "o'' and "ro". ln our opinion what
really happ~ned was that after Maung Nyunt had given
a so-called confession exculpating himself, Maung Lat and
Kyin Sein arid entirely inculpating Thaw Ka, . ~he latter
decided to go one better and gave a confession fully.
inculpating himself, Maung Nyunt and Maung Lat. For
. some"reason best k.novvn to himself he did not inculpate ' .
the 4th accused Maung K}in Sein. Accordingly, we
consider that the confession of appellant Thaw Ka was
entirely voluntary in nature, although jt is quite possible
that he might have hoped by giving a full cqnfession to
become an approver jn t4e case.
Regarding the statement of Maung Nyunt, Exhibit "o"
it is cl~ that Maung Nyunt did not admit that he was in
conspicicy Witb Thaw Ka and Maung Lat to 'niurder Tun
Sein as stated by Thaw Ka iri his confession. Maung Nyunt
also said thatit was fear of .instant Q.eath at the hands of
Thaw Ka t}lat compell~d him, Maung Lat and Kyin Sein
,;..,,, ~ ' ..:-1~$-r~"'~".,'t .. . ' '., , :,'.' f ...: ,'' . :,~ ' ...
: ,~?J:~(:~~~~Y::~tn ; to the.\fi.~Jd-h:u~;.o MaW}~~f:tl~ :~epw;~t t: _\,I o!
On am~g there the three of the~ remamed some.d1stance

. away fr<im.the .hut while Thaw Ka a;one w~~t. to coriun~t.
,f.h~ . ,.. . ~~:~ ', ~ , . _ ,. }?C'If~t- ,.:~ .: ..
that a confession m ust.adrilit.in.terms
~._~~ .' ~ . ... ...,~~..'l..''"..;> ,.
;s;~~~J r6~A~~;;\14.l~~lf~~;~:Il4~: :,_;i?/f

"'~IIU'........ '_e:>cC1ulp,at<>r m.l.lfinj~iPouilt to'' i~6ni.:-$~. 'i
exculpatory st~tetneft'1:::', rs.:- of some . .fact' wl1.f~ . ' .~:::' '
......nuArl would negative the offence alleged to'.pe conf~sed.
~t.
(See Maung Han and others v. The King (1) and Chit Tin ;J;
(a) Su Thi and one v. The Union of Burma (2) where the MAUNe' .
late High Court of Judicature at Rangoon and the late THAw KA
Supreme Court of the Union 9f Burma cited with approval AN~.om
the dictum to the above effect of the Privy Council in the Tm!BUNxo~
OF URMA.
{:ase of Pakala Narayan Swami v. The King Emperor (3).
Applying this test, the statement of Maung Nyunt,
Exhibit "o" was no confession at all. According to Maung
Nyunt he was an unwilling spectator of a crime which he
did not approve of; and it was held by the Judicial
commissioners, Oudh, in Sarju Prasad v. Emperor (4) that
such an unwilling spectator is not an abettor of the crime
which he was compelled to witness.
Even assuming for the sake of argument that the mere
presence of Maung Nyunt and of the two other persons
named by him near the scene of crime, was sufficient to
<:onstitute abetment of the murder of the deceased persons
by Thaw Ka, section 94 of the Penal Code would be
applicable. (See Um.adasi Dasi v. Emperor (5) where it
was held that having regard to section 94 of the Penal Code
a person abetting murde.r because of threat of instant death
to him cannot be convicted of the offence. (See also Karu
v. King Emperor (6).
The so-called confession of Maung Nyunt being the sole
foundation of the charge against him, the statement of his
wife Ma Hsin .Tan (PW 19) lending corroboration to the
:so-canea confession is insufficient by itself to implicate
Maung N:yunt. Regarding Ma Hsin Tan's evidence we
shall discuss. it later when we deal with the question of
the corroboration of the retracted confession of" the
appellant Thaw Ka.
Now, it is settled law that although a retracted
confession can form the basis of conviction of the maker
(1) (1947) R.L.R. 371. (4) A.I.R. (1914) Oudh. 262.
(z (1951) B.L.R. 142 (S.C.). (s) I.L.R. 52. Cal. xu.
'J) 6!>. I.A. p. 66. (6) I.L.R. (1937) Nag. 524.
21
c.c. thereof if the Court believes it to be tr\le, and if it is,
1"5
found to have been made voluntarily, the ordinary rule of.
M.AWG
Tm.wKA prudence is that some kind of corroboration is necessary
AND ONE
e. in the case of a retracted confession unless the
THE UNION circumstances are exceptional. [See The Union of Burma.
OPBURMA.
v. Ah Hla (a) Maung Hla and two others (7) where the
dictum in The King v. Hla Maung (8) was quoted with
approval.]
Now, what are the corroborations in regard to the
retracted confession of the appellant Thaw Ka? He said
that while Maung Nyunt attacked Saw Maung who was
fast asleep he attacked Maung Tun Sein who was fully
awake and that Maung Tun Sein tried to escape the blows
which were rained upon. him. He also said that Maung.
Tun Sein on .being cut on the neck ran out of the -hut
shouting for help " ~u5Go:r5w1
,, "and that thereupon he and
Maung Lat jointly attacked him. The nature of the
injuri~ found on the deceased Maung Tun Sein and the
fact that Maung Tun Sein was found lying dead on the
cart-track about three or four bamboo-lengths away from
his field-hut corroborated Thaw Ka's story on this point.
Furthermore, the evidence of the Headman's daughter
Ma Nyo (PW 5) lent some corroboration regarding the
deceased Maung Tun.Sein's shouts for help.
Next, tlie motive for the crime ; this is corroborated

by the evidence. of u Hia..$41n (PW 8), Maung Tun Ya
(PW .12) and Maung Hla Aung (PW . 13). The sum-total .
of their evidence is that there were two organizations. o"f
workers, one headed by the appellant . Thaw Ka and the .
ot}ier headed by Hla Aung. The deceased Maun.g Tun Sein
whc) had at first promised to engage Thaw Ka's men broke
his word and employed Hla Aung'.s men. For this the:
appellant Thaw K.a was -'dissatisfied and ac~ording t<>U Hla
(7) (1958) BL.R. 92. (H.C.). . "\8) (1946) R.L.R. xoz.
BU~ LAW REPORTS 301
Shin (PW 8) the deceased Maung Tun Sein told him that ~9~5
Thaw Ka had threatened him for this. According to
MAUNe
Tun Ya (PW 12) he knew it for fact that Thaw Ka was THAw KA
dissatisfied with Maung Tun Sein, and actually came to a AN~.om
spot on the south of Thaw Ka's house and threatened as TH~ UNioN
" ::&'?Go}~? ". That such a threat was made by Thaw Ka, oF URMA. t
who also used abusive words, appears in the evidence. o~
Ma Khwe (PVV 2), wife of the 'deceased Maung Tun Sein.
Next, regarding the exhibit dasbe which the appellant
Thaw Ka identified at the time he gave his confession as
that which he had borrowed from Maung Kyin Sei_n;
there is the evidence of Kyin Sein's wife Ma Hsin Kyi
(PW 9) who produced it when the police station officer
told her to produce the dab left behind by Thaw Ka.
Ma Hsin Kyi also said that this dasbe belonged to her
husband Maung Kyin Sein. Furthermore, at the time of
its seizure by the police some blood-stains were d.etected
on this dab, and when sent to the Chemical Examiner for
examination it was reported that blood was detected
thereon although the quantity of blood was insufficient
for further examination regarding its nafure, Exhibit "o ".
Then, there is the evidence of U Pyi (PVV 4) showing
that early in the morning of the 12th Jason of tagu
1325 B.E. when the murder took place he was on his way
from Kaingdaw North village to Nyaungwan when he saw
'the appellant Thaw Ka at a spot midway between Kaingdaw
North village.and the deceased Maung Tun Sein's hut. He
could recognize Thaw Ka because the latter came
sufficiently close to his cart ; but he could not recognize
the three other persons who were proceeding towards
Kaingdaw North village at th.e same time as they were far
away from him. This fact will show that the appellant
Thaw Ka was up and about early th~t morning and was.
founci at a spot where he would be if he was refur$g
after committing murder at Tun Sein's hut.
The above circumstances are in our opinion sufficient

corroboration of the retracted confession of the appellant
T~~~N~A Thaw Ka to warrant his conviction for the offence of the
mnv~~e murder of the deceased Maung Tun Sein and abetment of
THB UNioN the murder of deceased Saw Maung. As already observed
(1P BVRMA.
above It. has been 1a1"d down m. Th e unzon
. ot. Bunna v.
Ali' Hla (a) Maung Hla and two others (7) following the
decision in The King v. Hla Maung (8) that ill the case of a
retracted confession some kind of corroboration is
necessary. It is impossible to lay down any hru:d and fast
rule as to what constitutes sufficient corroboration of a
retracted confession. It must depend on the peculiar
circumstances of each case. .
The learned Advocate for the appellants has commented

upon the divergence between the so-called confession,
Exhibit "o" of the appellant Maung Nyunt and the confes-
sion Exhibit''<"of the appellant Thaw Ka and said that in
view of this divergence Thaw Ka's confession stands
contradicted. In this connection w e must say that while
it is true that if two confessions which are entirely
inculpatory in nature in so far as the confessors are
concerned, are divergent in material particulars, it would
be a matter for serious consideration whether one or the
other, or both these confessions should be rejected as
untrue. However, when as in the case now under
consideration the so-called confession of Maung Nyunt is
entirely exculpatory while the co_nfession of Thaw Ka
fully inculpates not only himself but his co-accused Mau..'lg
Nyunt and Maung Lat, it will indeed be. surprising jf there
are no divergencies between these two ~tatements.
Therefore, this contention of the learned Advocate for the
appellants cannot be allowed to prevail.
Apart from the corroboration alrea-d y mentioned above

we consider that th,e eviden_ce of a Hsin Tan, wife of the
BURJJA LAVV REPORTS 303
appellant Maung Nyunt also affords considerable corrobora- c.c.
x9fs
tion. of the retracted confession of. the appellant Thaw Ka.
MAlJNG
According to this witness, at about sunset on the day THAW KA
before the murders of Maung Tun Sein and Maung Saw ANDONB
tJ.
Maung were discovered Thaw Ka came to her house and THE UNION
OP BURMA
took away her husband Maung Nyunt. As Maung Nyunt
did not return although two-pots' boiling time had elapse~
she followed him to the house of Thaw Ka's father U Mye.
There she saw U Mye, Thaw Ka, Kyin Sein and her husb~d
Maung Nyunt drinking liquor together. Later, all of them
left in a northerly direction. She came home to sleep
that night alone. Early in the morning her husband Maung
Nyunt returned home. She could get a peculiar smell
from him so she got up to look. She saw two spots of
blood on his banian.
Now, this witness was examined by the police on the
16th April, 1964. She did not then mention about the
blood-stains. She shifted from Kaingdaw North -village
after the occurrence of this case and went to work at
Thabeikkyin so the police could not cite her as a witness.
She was however. informed by a villager U Maung Gale
(PVV 14) that her evidence would be needed. She,
the~efore, came to Couit to give her evidence. -
Regarding this wiine?s, the '4~fence had suggested to
p. her, in ::d'o~s~~~-~aE~~li~~at :.after~.her ..l').usband Mau,ni
Nyunt was arreSted by ~11.~ po1i<;e she took another husband.
She denied, this allegation and no evidence was given on
behalf o{ the .defence }o .contradict her on this point:
Therefor~, if .Ma Hsiri' j:'~ b e believed-and we see no
reason for ~crediting her-story-Maung Nyunt was with ~-;
~. ~~ppellant .~WJ81.-~~at:e~~n_g ; .h~. did ..~ot return ~o~~.:2
~\b.at
~\ ,~-
night s.and~'
. ...::,
w1i'1!~~~J!~:etUrD.ea
..; ~.:. c!
home early
,._
the - nb~t>'
t~'--:.

~?morning he was' b . . -~- C<t These facts fit .W 7~th:"'':
111aw Ka's conftJ.<?rr<,:'that M~ung Nyunt was =an
accomplice in the m'Urd~ of lyfaung Tun Sein and that
. . .
304 . BURMA LAW REPORTS
Maung Nyunt himself had actually cut Maung Tun Sein's

nephew Saw Maung.
MAUNG
~wo~ Now, although Thaw Ka's confession is good evidence
v. so far as he himself is concerned, it can only be taken into
Tw! UNION
oF BuRMA. cons1'deration . .
agamst h.IS co-accuse
. d M aung N yunt 1'f t h e
other evidence on record is sufficient to establish piima
.facie . th;lt . Maung Nyunt ha<l also committed ~e crime.
This was the dictum in Khaw Taw and one v. The Union
of Burma (9) which was affirmed in The Union of Burma Y.
Ah Hla (a) Maung Hla (7). l;here is, in our opinion, no
prima facie case against Maung Nyunt as the statement,
Exhibit "n" made by him before the Township Magistrate,
Singu, being.entirely excUlpatory in nature is not admissible .
in evidence against him, and the statement of his wife
Ma Hsin Tan (PW 19), taken by itself do~ not establish a
prima facie case of murder as against him.
Nevertheless, in our opinion, Ma Hsin Tan's testimony
can ~ taken into consideration in corroboration of the
retracted confession of Thaw .Ka so as to lend assurance to
it, as against Thaw Ka himself. In this connection the
cise of Umadasi Daii. v. Emperor (5) already cited above
affords an analogy. There it was held that although as a
general rule a charge of abetment fails if the substantive
offence is not established against the principal there may
. be an exception .where .,...a ... substantive offence wasi::;
,\' ~-- .
undoubtedly committed ana 'there
... . ., .,._ ~,!).' w
is .,..
evidence, such as -ai~

-.;.:~~
...
retracted confesSion by .the abettor, on which the jucy.

might l:iave fqund, as against him, that the offence was,;;.
.:Committed by ~he principal, though, as aga~t the latter;:4~
the confession woUld be insufficieilt: for: a .conviction of
...;murd~r~:~
~: ....,;...'"{
~ , '
~:,.
IIitb.e-Pr~~nt.
- . ..
~ ;,./<!~ ''
f3ef;~thp~gh :...M ating. .~. .yunt
.
~(.- . -":-r.?,~;-1: ~: : ~,..~!~'!'-" '
: be;icquitted because--':ThaW;:
r:_-;:~,~ ~..:-.o"'\:-..
:Ka~s'ici>rifession as. against
J~\t.:f~~.,.~~~~,~~:.-

~~hffinot be used to conviGf:Mliirl}Vihe fact aJ>J:>earinJ!i
il-~~-- ~ ;~ ~: ~ ..~ ~.-; ~~- .
Thaw Ka's confession thaf'Maung Nyunt also coJrrmutt:oo.

. "'\. ''.: '
murder of Saw Maung is corroborated by the testimony c.c.

<If Mimng Nyunt's own wife, Ma Hsin Tan. z96s
MAtrnc
For these reasons we would set aside the conviction THAw KA
.and sentence of Maung Nyunt and direct that he be ANJ? ONB
acquitted and released. As for appellant Thaw Ka, we "
THBUmoN
OF BURMA,
will confirm his conviction for the premeditated murder
<If Maung Tun Sein and abetment of the murder of Saw
Maung and the sentence of death thereunder and direct
thathis appeal be dismissed.
.,306 BURMA LAV.l REPORTS
APPELLATE CIVIL
Before u San Maung, j .
. t c.c: OM RAO AHIR (APPELLANT) .

. t5
:, Feb.. 4 v.
NOOR MOHAMED KHAN {RESPONDENT).*
Warrant of arrest for non-payment of money decreed-when can be made,..

o. :zx, r. 37, Civil Procedure Code. Enquiry unde1 o. :u, r.4o-canbe
made without arrest.
The arrest 9f a judgment debtor under o . zz, r. 37 of the Civil Procedureo .
Code, is only ~ means to ensure his attendance in Court. It is not an end in
itself.
Thus where the judgment-debtor is notonly not absconding but has actually;.
appeared before the Court to plead for time, a warrant of arrest cannot be
issued again~ him.
The impression of the trial judge that he could make an enquiry as envisaged
in o. 21, r. 40 only after the Appellant was brought to Court under arrest,
is entirely mistaken.
Kyaw Htoon for the appellant.

M. Ahmed
. for. the responden~..
U SAN MAUNG, J.-This appeal by Om Rao Ahir, the .

j~dgment-debtor in Civil Suit ~o. 88r of 1962 is against
the order of the learned 3rd Judge of the City Civil Court.. .
~~goo))., ,elated the :.29th,~:-~~J!.er r964. in ~!$.. cfv:iM
EXeeuqmi No. 409 of r96r:mt~cting that a . warrant of':,.
arrest should be .issued to t!'te und~r Order 2 r,.
Rfile' 37 (r) of the Ciyil . The facts giving.
riSe to'' pr~:sentappea1 are :~n 5th or:: the
1\Tn"Pl'nhi~'r' 962, . .tl}e_ Moha111ed Khan .
.;PPlt@.llf$\~.:an~ex appellalJ.t}Pm .
cos~s tlu!r~qn_. :.
respondent asked
. . Misc. Appeal No. 47 v >.;:.yvq., the order of the 3rd. Judge>
City Civil Court, of Rangqon, in s:.r.c:o:;uwn No.: 409 of 19.64.'
c.c.
execution of the decree by the arrest and detention in 1965
civil prison of the appellant and a notice was issued under OM'RAO
the proviso to Order XXI, Rule 37 (r). It was in Civil AHIR
v.
Execution Case No. 1298 of 1962. The appellant then NOOR
applied to the . Court to allow him to pay the decretal MOHAMED> KHAN.
amount by monthly instalment of K 15 and on the 30th of
January 1963, the appellant was ordered to pay the
decretal amount by monthly instalments of K 6o. On the
samedate Civil Execution No. 1298 of 1962 was closed.
Apparently, the appellant was unable. to go on paying
instalment rates as ordered. .He therefore made another
application dated the roth of April 1963 asking the Court
to reduce the monthly instalments to K 25. After due
notice to the respondent the Court ordered on 31st May
1963 that the decretaFamount should be paid by monthly
instalments of K 50 failing which execution would proceed:
against the appellant as prayed for by the respondent
without notice to the appellant. On the r6t1t of January
1964, the appellant filed yet another application for .reduc-
tion of the monthly instalments. : After due notice the
Court ordered on the rst of April 1964 that the appellant
must pay the decretal amount by mon~hly instalments of
K 4o. This also the appellant had apparently failed to do
regularly so that. on the ,28th of May 19.64, the respondent
filed an .application f6r e~ecution by arrest and detention
'"':, in civiL pr,~on, !?J,"i.~iii~~J?P_~n~mt a~~.~A5~':lY.;.~_o,,,.him of a
. notice~ 'Accordingly;:.;:i:Tnotice returnable on the 9th of
June . 1964 was . iss~ed. On .the 31St of July 1964,
the appellant fil~.i:j~yet . an~the._r .. .application_ for
time saying that _h~~yyq~ld ,.pay the .~n~talments regularly
in future and-::~thcii:'..ii)t+the ' meantinie he ~:should not. _be
1~~;:~~~1:-~?~r:~~)?:;~i;~!n:rot~~
_ qppe!l~~!~~flii~ .d.etenfion in .ci ~1 ::r~e:re _considere~ _
simultai?.eously, . In the cours_e,. o( ~ese pro~eedings. tlje.
appellant
.
:himself appwed
. . . . . ..
' .
in.p~rson-
. .
~for-e
. .
the Co11Tt
.
o~..
.308 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. the 21st August 1964 and on the 24th August, 1964.
1965
After hearing objections against each other's application
OMRAO
AHIR the Court passed the order now appealed against for the
v.
No oR arrest o the appellant. It would seem that the learned
MOHAMBD 3rd Judge of City Civil Court was under, the impression
'KHAN
that he could only make an enquiry as envisaged in
Order 21, Rule' 40 of the Civil Proced:ure Code ~fter the
appellant was brought to Court under arrest. In _this he
was entirely mistaken.
Now, Order XXI, Rule 37 of the Civil Procedure Code
reads as follows :
"37 (r) Notwithsta!Jding anything in thes~ rules, where
an application is for the execution of a decree .for the pay-
blent of money by the arrest and detention_in the dvil prison
of a judgment-debtor who is liable to be arrested in pursuance
. of the application, the Court shall, instead of issuin?; a
warrant for his arrest, issue a notice calling upon him to
appear before the Court on a day to be specified in the notice
and show cause why he should not be committed to the civil
prison:
Provided that such notice shall not be . necessary if the
Court is satisfied, by affidavit or oth~rwise, that, with the
object or effect of delaying the execution of;the decree, the
judgment-debtor is likely to abscond or leave the local limits
.of the jurisdiction of the Court.
(2) Where appearance is not made . in' opedience to . the
: .~9~~~~. th~ cowt shall, ;# ~he deqee::.h9l~~l;~,J~qui~es, }~.~e
\~1/.warrant fo( the arrest'of.'the. judginellt~~~t.Qr:!' : :':::{
' ;; ' : ~.A. ' ...
<
~ lt is clear that in the case now.

..:::appellant had already app~aied. h~+,.....~if.l..'.;;. ~r.o~ ......
1
t9~~,(~-~tice ~sued to bini to
.nor1~e ttommitted to civil
. _..t.f~.;;~~I6f;:fin;:${lf ~'now : .t.i'n'.n"'u ,~,.,.,.,, .-~
. nients. -~~r:1:I1e 1~~~a~f ""~~~&~~~;s
:\.:,: ~~ considered . . _ time s~?-~ld b-~ . . .
1 ~hould proceed to make the enquiry envisag~d in Order
'Rule 40, Civil. Procedme Code. His:order 'for the 'issue of

BURMA ~AW REPORTS 309
.a warrant for the arrest of the appellant at this stage of the

c.c.
196s
proceedings is entirely misconceived. Besides, from the OM RAG
proviso to Rule 37 (I) Order XXI of the Civil Procedure AmR
~
Code a warrant of arrest can only. be issued if the Court NeOR
MOHA..\'&D
is satisfied that the judgment<lebtor with the object of KHAN.
,aelaying the execution of the decree is likely to abscond
~r leave the local Iimits of the jurisdiction of the Court.
In the present case. the appellant is not only not absconding
but is actually before the Court to plead for time. In thls
connection. it should be borne in mind that the arrest of a
judgment-debtor under Order XXI, Rule 37 is only a means
to ensure his attendance in Court. It is not an end in
itself.
For these reasons I would set aside the order of the
learned 3rd Judge of the City Civil Court, Rangoon, for
:the issue of the warrant of arrest of the appellant and
~ect him to prOceed with the respondent's appliGlti.Gm
for execution according to law in the light of the remarks
made above. There will be no order as to costs of this
.appeal.
ORIGINAL CIVIL
Before U Kyaw Zan U, j .
. c.c.
1965 IN THE MATTER OF THE" E?fA1E OF P. SOORIAH (a)'
May zS. P. SURAYA NARAYANA MURTHY
v.
MA KHIN THEIN (PETITIONER).*
Buddhist Women Special Marriage and Successi<m Act, 1954, s. 20 (1)-whm . .

a couple living together is deemed to be husband and wife. Photostat copy
of 'deed-v.;hen inadmissible. Second wife----right to grant of Succession:
Certificate. Pro-vident fund moneys-nomination of first wife 'by deceased-
w~ invalid-effect of provisions Of the Budt!hist Women Sp~cial Marriage-
and Succession Act, 1954
'f?.e Applicant, a Burmese Buddhist woman, had applied for a Succession.
Certificate in respect of the estate of the deceased, her husband, and which
estate was comprised of Provident Fund, balance sal::ries ~nd other moneys.
The said deceased was an Indian Hindu who had died at Rangoon on xoth April:
1964 and also had an Indian widow in in4i~.
The Apptication was contested by the mother (and agent) of the said .
Indian widow, on the ground that the Applicant in any. cas!' had been divorced .
from the deceased, as per photostat copy of~ deed dated 3rd December .1962 . .
Held: : As there is evidence on record tb show that the couple had lived :
together as husband and wife, and h t\d been recognised as such <~ccnrd ing to
Burmese Buddhist law, they must be deemed to b e husband and wife under
s. zo(x) of the Buddhist Women Special Marrizge and Suecession Ac:t of 1.954
.; ,Regarding the question whethe~there was a divorce -by m1,1t\lal consent,,.
.,; 'lh~~~ is io proof that Ill.~ thlimb imP'~~ss'Iii~_o.ti~ i:li~ deed is thai<Sf.}i{e,A pplicant.
The phototsat copy cannot be adtnitted in e.J'idence,
as the ~ri~illal deed was.:
. not _pfuduced, and no evidence was give~ U:Ucier s. 65 (c) of the. E.;,idence Act .
to. show that it had been destroyed oi Joot. . -............

: ,_.., ,. ' . .. ..t :r: -:.: .... ,
~~_
.... !Ja.ung Thein Zan and ()Tie v. The Unip_n of f!.t!Ytn,O, (1956) ~~:-R::_303, H.C.,.
iefetred to and followed. :~r::3: -;~-:, .: ..:.-! . . ~
: ~{~' 'Th'e
'f:Of~~J;. ...
AJ>plicant must theref~~~-;;b'/a~~~~di
~~, ,.,.,., .., _,J. ...
least to .b e 'the
-~}r~:'>;) ~/- ...
sec~n-d ;'wife
,.,. . , ..
ki,;of,tihe -~ed, and has primaj.~';~,\t~;~l~t~~tle _~o .the '
'R$i~fiifi'Jls-':.to wliri haS: ': ..,.. " <fi'iti~%1ii11~~c:1~e . . ,o. :~
..; Suit. . ~ . ;..;~~~ ' , ~~~ ~::~~~ " : . .. - ..
. . Held furthei : :ifit:'!f}fi~~hfq~~do~ 6 the
in ' India as the recipient' of-:e Provident F~d Moneys?'
. Civil Misc. No. 77 of 1964.

appears to be vaEd unders. s of the Providen t Funds Act, I92S, but it can have c.c.
no effect in view of the relevant provisions of the Buddhist Women Special 1965
Marriage and Succession Act, I954 Under the latter Act, the Burmese !!': THB
Buddhist law is made appl icable to cases where a Burmese Buddhist woman MATTER OF
takes a non-Buddhist as a spouse, reg.1rding questions of marriage, suceession THE EsTATE
and inheritance. Under Bum1ese Buddhist law, such nom:nation has been OF
held to be in valid as a testam'!ntary disposition.
P. SooRIAH
alias
Daw Saw Yi11 v. Matmg Kyi, (1962) B.L.R. 227, and 1Vla N" v. Ma Gun, P. SuRAYA
NARAYANA
(1924) I.L.R. 2 Ran. 388, referred to.
MtlRTHY
Ma Kyway v. Ma Mi Lay and atzother, (1928) I.L.R. 6 Ran. 682, referred v.
to and d istin.,auished. MA KHIN
THEIN.
A succession certificate will therefore be issued to the Applicant.
Dutt and Kyi Kyi Win for the petitioner.

Shwe Baw for the respondent.
~
U KYAW ZAN U, ].-This is an application of Ma Khin

Thein, a Buimese Buddhist woman, for a Succession
Certificate in respect of the estate comprising of Provident
Fund, balance salaries and other moneys amounting to
K 15,400oo of P. Sooriah (a) P. Narayana Murthy, an Indian
Hindu who died at Rangoon on 1oth April 1964 on the
ground that she as the widow of the deceased is a fit and
proper person to obtain the certificate. She has two minor
children by the deceased who also left behind an Indian
widow in India with two children.
The Indian widow P. Rajamma through her mother
.and agent S. Janakamma opposes the application on the
ground that the alleged marriage between the applicant
and the deceased was not subsisting at the time of the
d eath of the deceased on accoun~ of their mutual divorce
effected on 3rd December 1962 as per Exhibit No. r,
photostat deed. The applicant denies any knowledge of
.the said deed.
Acco~ to the applicant she had been married to
the deCeased about ten years ago and has now two children
by him living with her aged eight and six years. In the
Social Security Board Death Certificate of the deceased
?9f; (Exhibit m ) she is shown as his wife. The Local

IN THB Administrative Committee also testifies as per Exhibit "~ '"
~~
.._..,.
tEs"BR oF
TATB
that she is the widow of the deceased. The
Exhibit " o ''
oF is the household list issued by the National Registration
P.SOORIAH D
alia epartment shOWing . th e names of the deceased and the
~~~~~ applicant besides those of the two children. U Aung Lwin
MURTHY
v. (PW I), a member of the Committee who ha"d lived close
MA KHIN to the couple has proved Exhibit "~ ".
THEIN.
The respondent who is an Indian national deposed
that her daughter and the deceased evacuated to India at
the beginning of the war and got married there.
Admittedly, she was not present at their marriage. Her
"daughter never returned to Burma. According to her she
too has two children by the deceased living in India. She
said the deceased showed her an original divorce deed on
3rd December 1962 on which. she saw three signatures in
English and one in Burmese and also a thumb impression,.
but she dJ."'d not say whose they were. She could not read
it as it was in Burmese but she said it was explained to
her by the deceased who gave her a photostat copy
(Exhibit No. I). She stated that she did not take out the
death certificate or the dead body from the hospital, but
she admitted that she saw the applicant there. She further
admitted that whenever she visited the deceased at the
hospital she saw e applicant. M. A. Dawson (DW 4),
the Chief Cashier of the Strand Hotel 1:1nder whom the
deceased had worked as an accounts clerk stated that the
deceased had given him a deed which he could not read
for safe custoay but he (deceased) used to take it back very
often. He said the deceased had nominated his Indian
wife to be the beneficiary of his provident fund but he saw
c:\ Burmese woman, meaning the applicant with the deceased
w'hen he -was ill and .w hen he . was in :the hospital.
According to Tan Bin Paw (DW 5), the .accountant of the
Strand Hotel the nomination was made some eight years.
ago as per Exlu'bit No. 2. U Aye Maung {DW 3), the
BURMA LAW REPORTS 313-
Chairman of the Local Administrative Committee who

li~es. close to the couple identified the applicant as the
IN T HE
widow of the deceased. He recognized her as such and MATTER oF
issued the cooking oil pass to her. He also testified that THE 0r;sTArs.
the deceased's landlord returned the deposit amounting P. Sol<?RIAH
a uz1
to K r,ooo to her after the death of the deceased in his P. SuAAYA
NARAYANA
presence. MURTHY
v.
The learned Counsel for the respondent contended that MA KHIN
since there was no registration of the marriage under the T HIDN.
Buddhist Women Special Marriage and Succession Act (Act

No. 32 of 1954) the marriage was invalid, but sub-
section (r) of section 20 of the said Act says :
<<(0) <:f.~o:l")::D'JOC
. <: CJ<JtOXD2;
C' C' c G C' C' OC'
Gill'JffiJ':>~o:>e:~c. tz~o:l")::D'JOCCJ'ftCJ
0 o ') C' C' OC'~ r,::;: C' C' A; 0 C' Q o
roe:<J?.GOIC:~mGfOOLCDl'itt:S~::D2 romm~ OOL O(.'~De:cq: t(~o:l'J::D")
ere .'il c rc, c c c
OC~;>CJ-:>~CJJl~QJ~: ~ID~G::D'JI tf~OJ")::D") G~::Do:lrr.;J'] I COCCJill'J:tT.'P
t,: . C' C' ') C' C' OC' ~ r,::;: o 'iJ C C' .(' 0 0 C' 0 0
GEJ')O)CJ~ GOIC:<.IlmG~OOLC Dt'[eJqCJul: \91DcqjCI CXl_"~o;j_::D2; OOL~
'l C' C' C' OC' r
GoJc:~m~mocroCJ:lf.1'J:Q
lJ
'6:x>:TI()) CJo:>ill9CJ:x>
<- C
C'
l J
C'
II. (.!.
C'C'
c1 0 0 C'
oo:x>ro:x>:n
l il ot
m]
C.:. C::J
(' 0(' ~ 'r,::;: (' (' (' (' "
SdmeoGsro9, ooCJ:~:::~-:>=~~:x>e;utroe;: <:;m~9 CJ 2 u
As there is evidence on record .to show that the couple had

lived together as husband and wife and been recognized
as such according to Burmese Buddhjst Law they must be
deemed to be husband and wife under the aforesaid Act.
I do not quite understand why the photostat copy of the
divor.ce deed (Exhibit No. r) was relied upon by the
respondent, if the marriage was not valid. The respondent
herself has recognized the applicant as the wife of the
deceased. There is clear evidence to show that the
applicant was seen at his side when he was ill. If the
marriage was invalid there was no reason why she should
be with him till the .end. The Death Certificate and the
ho'useh~ld list are in favour of the applicant. The .Local
Admi~trative Committee also supports her and clearly
r~gnizes her as .the widow of the deceased,.
. 'Another important point is whether there was a divorce
by mu~al consent. U Ba Thein (OW 2) a bar licensee
c.c. deposed the deceased and a Burmese woman came to him
1965
but while the woman stayed outside the bar the deceased
IN THE
MAnER oF
brought m . a 'deed typed m . Burmese
. on a revenue stamp
'THE ::TATE paper already signed by him (deceased) with a thumb
P. SooruAH impression on it. The witness and two other persons
alias
P. SuRAYA signed the deed as attesting witnesses but he did not read
NARAYANA
MURTHY it properly. He never saw the woman put her: thumb
MA vKH1N impression on the deed but he said he could make out the
THErN. signature of the 'deceased who used to come to his bar for
a few drinks on his return from work. His evidence is
not satisfactory. He never saw the deceased and the
applicant sign or affix the mark on the deed. There is no
proof that the thumb impression on the deed is that of the
applicant. . The original deed was not produced and no
evidence was given under section 65 (c) of the Evidence
Act to show it has been destroyed or lost. Hence the
photostat copy (Exhibit No. I) cannot be admitted in
evidence. Mauny Thein Zan and one v. The Union of
Burma (I).
When the respondent has failed to prove the alleged
divorce and has not ?}so $UCceeded in proving that the
marriage was not subsisting at the time of the death of
the 'deceased the applicant must be deemed at least to be
the second wife of the deceased at the time of his death.
Prima facie the applicant lias a clear title to the succession.
TI1e question !'is to w.ho has a-superior title will have to
be established by a regular suit. The respondent did not
file a cross application .for the certifi.ca te and since she is
not a rival claip:1ant it is unnecessary to decide who has
the preferential claim to the certificate.
~ t is tru~ that his Indian widow .h ad been nominated in
1957 by the 'decease~ as per Exhibit. No. 2 tq receive his
. mqrtey in his Provident Fund and t~is nomination appe-.ars
to be valid under section 5 of the Provident Funds Act, .
1925, but since the deceased was governed by the provisions
(1) (1956) B.L.R. 303 I.,H.C.).
BURMA LAW REPORTS
of. (4e)3uddhist \rVomen Special Marriage and Succession C-:

~-~s
Act, .~9.54, the point for:.. determination now is whether ~ ~
this nomination has any effect. Section 4 of the Buddhist ~~- !lF.!
Women Special Marriage and Succession Act reads as ~;,-:srf..TJll
follows

. .1?.. -!3-?RIAIL
alJ4S.
'p, SURAYA <
~~YAN~.
:Ml./RTHY.
o.
l'v;I-'KHIM.
THEIN.
They are thus governed by the Burmese Buddhist Law.

Sub-section(I) of section 24 of the Act is also to the same
effect so far as their ownership of properties is concerned.
No":' Burmese Buddhist Law recognizeS no form of succes-
. sion other than intestate succession 7 The dispositio.n in
the instant case in the guise of nomination must be held
to be void as contravening the fundamental principles of
the Burmese Buddhist Law. In Ma'Nu v. Ma Gun (3) it
was held that the nomination of a person for the payment
of the money in a Provident Fund on the death of the
'subscriber was a testamentary disposition, and invalid
where the subscriber was a Burman Buddhist, h:ut in
Ma Kyway v. Ma Mi Lay and another (4) which was a later
(z) (x96z) B.L.R. 227. (C.C.). (3). (1924) I.L.R. z Ran. 288.
(4) (1928) I.L.R. 6 Ran. 68:z.
22
case the decision in Ma Nu.v. Ma Gun {supra) was referred

to and it was held the provisions of section 5 of the
J:~F Provident Funds Act, 1925 which came into force on the
THE 0;fffATB Ist of April 1925 enabled the Burman Buddhist to make a
P.SOORIAH valid nomination, though _such nomination, being in the
alias
P.SURAYA nature of a testamentary disposition, is prohibited by his
NARAYANA
MURTHY personal law. I may remark here that when the Buddhist
(}.
MAKmN Women Special Marriage and Succession Act, 1954, which
TsmN. came into force only on the 23rd of April 1954 was
enacted, the Legislature must be fully aware of or at least
be presumed to know the decision in Ma Kyway v. Ma Mi
Lay and another and the Provident Funds Act, 1925. The
Buddhist Women Special Marriage and Succession Act, as
pointed out above, makes the Burmes~ Buddhist Law
applicable to cases where a Burman Buddhist Woman
takes a non-~urman Buddhist as her spouse and the
questions of marriage, succession: and inheritance respecting
them are involved. The authority laid down in }\.fa Nu v.
Ma Gun (supra) must therefore be held to be applicable to
the present case.
In the circumstances the application js allowed with
costs. The certificate will be issued to the applicant
Ma Khin .Thein on .furnishing security in the sum of
K 15,500 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the
Registrar of the Original Side. Advocate's fee five gold
mohurs.
'BURMA LAW REPORTS 317
CRIMINAL REVISION
uNION OF BURMA (APPLICANT) c.c.

196'
v. .war. 6.
u KYAw LIN (RESPONDENT)."'
CCriminal Procedure Code s. 517-disposal of pro,flerty regarding which offence
has been committed-Sale proceeds of stolen property-whether stolen property
s. 410 Penal Code.
The respondent who had bought certain stolen gold bars had converted
.'the said bars into jewelleries and had sold them after such conversion. T he
"})roceeds of the sale of these jewelleries were later seized by the police with
Other l!tolen property. The money seized was returned to the complainant.
Hdd: T he money which was seized and returned to the complainant could
not be considered as stolen property. as money obtained by the sale of stolen
propertie.> cannot be consider~d to be stolen propc:rt}' as defined ins. 410 of
the Pcmal Code.
The learned Judge had no power to order its disposal under s. 517 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure which only deals with di$pOSal of property regar-
-ding which an offence has been committed.
Public ProsecutQr v. I ndia China Linrf.ah and others, (1954). Criminal Law
Journal, 583, referred:to.
!Ba Pe :(Government Advocate) (Mandalay) for the applicant.

iRespli.mdent in person.
U SAN MAUNG, J .-This .application by Sao Sam Hpon

:is against the order of the learned Ad<Utional Sessions
Judge, Tau.nggyi. i n his Criminal Regular Trial No. I of
-1962 l>y which the learned Judge ordered the return to
U Kyaw Lin the sum of K s,o4o which the learned Judge
b eld were received: by" the confessing accusclEi Nawn (a)"
Nan Lon from U Kyaw Lin for the sale of two
bars of gold
.and-one go1d be1t.
Criminal Revision No. 7 (B) of 1963; Review of the order of_the Additional
:Sessions Judge of Taunggyi dated the 17th December 196z,- passed in Criminal
!Rgular Trial No. 1 of 196i .
3.1S BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.e. The facts have been fully dealt with by me in the
1965
connect~ Revision Case No. 6 (B} of t963 in which the
UNION OF
BURMA applicant Sao Sam Hpon. asked the-Court to set aside in
.,. revision the order discharging Nan Kyein Kham. It would
UKYAW
LIN appear that "o n the 27th October 1961 the police seized
. .. \ l
from the house of U Kyaw Lin (P.W 8) not only t~gold

belt which was ide~tifie(i"-as -stolen property, but .also
U
K'-s:67o..which Kyaw Lin adritted wa~ the pro~eedS of
the . saie:(;>f tvyo .bars of gold .solg_ to him by Ej N.awm .(a)
Nan ' Lon which he had sold after converting them into
articles of jewelleries. This sum of money was directed
by the Additional Sessions Judge to be returned to Sao Sam
Hpon, whil~ the variqus sums of money aggregating
K 5,040. which were traced to the possession of Ei Nawm
(a) Nan Lon were directed to be returned to U Kyaw Lin
as these were the sums which U Kyaw Lin had paid for the
pUrchase of the gold bars and gold belt, to Ei Nawm (a)
Nan Lon. In fact, what would have been a proper order
to pass was to -have directed the sum of K 5,040 to be
returned to Sao Sap:1 Hpon and the sum of K 5,670 seized
from U KyaWt:in~t:O.be returned to him. Thls sum of
K 5,67? cannot be considered to b~ stolen property.
In this connection, I need only cite the case of the
Public PrQsecutor v. India China Lingiah and others (r).
There the learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court .
cited with approval the following passage from the
judgment of a Bench of the Bombay High Court in Criminal
'Appeal No. 1847 of 1942. It reads:
" It is necessary to prove tl)at the property~ which is
. produced is . the property which was stolen, but it need not
necessarily be produc in the form which it po.ssessed wheri
it was stolen. If a gold ned<lace is ~tolen, and exchanged
for .ar).otber necklace or a bullock.. it is obvious that the,
se~ond necklace or bullock is not the st~len property. But,
~f the gqld necklace is . melted down and converted into an
. . .
(x) (1954) Criminal Law Journal, s83.
ingot it does not cease to be the Sa!lle gold as was in the c.c.
necklace. What was stolen was gold in the form of a I 90S
necklace, and what is produced is the same gold in the form UNION OF
of an ingot. " BURMA
v.
UKTAW
LJN.
Following this decision the learned Judge heid that the
money obtained by the sale of stolen propertit=:S cannot be
considered to be stolen properties as defined in.section 410
of the Penal Code, although when a gold jewellery js stolen
}:he ingot obtained by melting dpwn this jewellery may be
considered to be stolen property.
The sum of K 5,670 seized from U Kyaw Lin not being
stolen property, the learned Additional Sessions Judge ha<l
no power- to or.der its disposal under section 517 of the
Criminal Procedure Code which only deals with disposal
of property regarding which an offence has been committed.
However, as in this case U Kya'W Lin to whom a sum
of K 5,040 had been given does not complain about the
seizure of K 5,670 and the return thereof to Sao Sam Hpon.
Therefore, I see no reason for interference of the order of
the learned Additional Sessions Judge directing that K 5,040
be given to U Kyaw Lin and K -5,67o be given to Sao Sam
Hpon.
ORIGINAL CIVlL
Bej01'e U Kyaw Zan U, J.
c.c. U AYE MAUNG (APPLICANT)
z96s
Sept. z6. v.
DAW AYE AYE SHWE (RESPONDENT).*
Guardian-meaning oj~under Guardian and War ds Act. Applicatum [by
father of min01' children !tnder s. zs-:-wlzen maintainable.
Hel4: A "guardian" under s. 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act, ne-."'i
not necessarily be a statutory guardian, but includes a natural or even a de fattO>
guardian.
Accordingly, a father of minor children ca~ ~pply for the custody of [such
children under s. 25 of the Guardian and wards Act, although fhe is not a-
statutory gUardian appointeCl by the Government under s . 7 of the ~said ,;Act.
Hla Pe (2) (Advocate) for the applicant.

Sein Hla and Daw Thaung Tin (Advocate) for the
respondent.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-The applicant filed this application

under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act against
his wife for the return of their two minor children
Ma Thawda Aye, ~ged about four years and nine months~
and Ma Hla May Aye, aged about three years and eight
months, who were alleged to have been removed from his
custody by the wife, 'who has filed an appiication iri the
Co.u rt of the 5th Additional Magistrate, Rangoon against
him for maintenance o~ the said two minors being Criminal
Miscellaneous Case No. 19 of r964, which is now pending.
The p'arties are Burmese Buddhists and it seems no one has
taken proeeedings in Court to be appointed guardi~n of
the minors under. the Act.
A preliminary. objection has. been raised py the wife
that the applicant not being a statutory guardian appointed
Civil Misc. No. 49 of 1964.
BURMA LAW REPORTS. 321
by the Court under section 7 of the Act cannot apply under c.c.
zs
section 25 of the said Act. I shall therefore have to
U AYB
confine myself to the question whether the application is MAUNG
maintainable or not without going into the merits of the "
D I>W AYll
application. The section does not say whether it means AYB SHWB.
a statutory, natural or de facto guardian. The word
"guardian" is used in wide sense. In section 4 (2) of
the Act it is defined as " a person having the care of the
person of a minor or of his property, or of both his person
and property." It therefore -relates to guardians
generally. ''A guardian" in section 25 need not
necessarily be a statutory guardian, but includes a natural
or even a de facto guardian.
The point for consideration therefore is whether the
applicant can make this app~cation under section 25 of
the Act for the return of the minors who were alleged to
have been removed from his custody by his wife, the
mother of the minors. Any person " having the care of
the person of a minor " is a " guardian " under section 2 5
read with section 4 (2) of the .Guardians and Wards Act.
Guardianship is unknown to the personal law of the
Burmese Buddhists. It is governed solely by the Guardians
and Wards Act. There is no dispute that the wife left
the husband taking away 'the two minors from the latter:
Setting aside the order of the lower <;::ourt that the .applicant
who was the father of the minor claiming to be her natural
guardian must first get himself appointed or de<;lared
guardian by the Court before he applied for the custody
of the wJnor under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards
Act the High Court of Bombay in Dayabhai Raghunathdas
v. Bai 'Parvati and another (1) held that an application
under section .25 could be made by a guardian, who.need
not be a certificated guardian. In Ulfat Bibi'v. Bafati .(2)
it W3J? held the e):Cpression " guardian " -use'4 in section 25
is not "confined. to statutory guardians, but inclu~es t}:l.e
(x) I.L.R. 39 Bom. 438. (z) I.L.R. 49 All. 773
BURMA LAW REPORTS
C;C. lawful guardian, such as the father, and the custody
1965
referred to iri that section includes both constructive as well
U AYB
MA~o as actual custody. Following these two authorities and
v. dissenting from the authority. of its own Court in Sydney
DAW AYB
AYE SHWB. Hugh McSweeney v. Margaret Arbuthnot (3) the Calcutta
High Court in ]iban Krishna Dutta and another v. Sailendra
Nath Shee and another (4) held that the word'' guardian"
used in section 25 applies to any guardian, testamentary,
certificated, natural or de facto. In Zynab Bi (a) Bibijan
v. Mohammad Ghouse Mohideen (5) where the father was
alleged to have taken away his two minor children from
the residence of their mother it was held that tci entitle a
guardian to apply for custody of a minor under section 25
it is not necessary that the mother should show that she is
a legal or natural guar~an of the minor and that it is
sufficient if she shows that she is a person having the care
of the person of the minor. In the instant case since the
minors and their mother were living with the applicant
(father) when the minors were alleged to have been
removed by their mother the applicant being pater familias
must be deemed to be in custody of the minors having the
care of their persons, arid as such I hold that he can make
the present application under section 25 of the Guardians
and Wards Act. I make no order as to costs.
(J) A.I.R. (1931) Cal. 563. (4) A.I.R. (1946) Cal. Z7Z
(s) 'A.I.R. (1952) Mad. zl4.
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS
u BA SEIN AND ONE (PETITIONERS) c.c.

1965
v. Apr. 1.
THE COLLECTOR OF RANGOON (RESPONDENT).*
Land Acquisition Act-s. 19-re(erence by the collecwr--notification under

st1b-s. (x) qf s. 4 of thl' Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of a piece of
land for the Natimuzl Housittg and Developnz.."'nt Board-another
noti_tication in respect of the same piece of land under s. 19, sub-s. (x) and (2)
of the National Hou.sing and Det~elopment Board Act, 1951 read v;ith s. 6
of the Land Acquisition Act-whether the compensation should be calculated
OI'J the basis of s. 23, sub-s. (1) and (2) qJ the Land Acquisiton Act or as
directed ins. z8A of the National Housing and Detelopment Act.
A piece of land was requjred by the National Housing and Development

:Soard, Rangoon, for the purpose of erecting a building to house the automatic
telephone installation belong to the Department of Telecommunication of
:Burma. Notification No. 590, dated 15th December 1955 was issued by the
D eputySecretaryofthe Finance and Revenue Department and was purported
'to be made under sub-s. (x) of s. 4 of the Land Acqujsition Act. However,
on the sth October 1956 a new notification was issued in respect of the same
land by the Additional Secretary of the Ministry of Finance and Revenue and
'Was purported to have been issued under s. 19, sub~s. (x) an~ (z) of National
Housing and Development Board Act. In the proceedings which follow,
the Collector awarded compensation to the Owners who accep.ted it under
-protest.
Hd.d : There was nothing to prevent the Government from issuing a fresh
.notification under s. 19, su~s. (I) and (z) of the National Housing and Develop-
ment Board Act 1951, as lfas been done in the case now under consideration.
'The second notification must, by necessary implication, be considered as
.having cancelled the first.
Held Further: Under s. (1) of the National Housing and Development Act,
19sx, the President of the Union of Burma can, at the instance of the BOard,
acquireland~ortheuseoftheBoard. Sub~.(z)ofs. 9 enacts that in respect of
such acquisition the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894, will apply
.mutatis mutanJ.is and as amended thereby . Among the amendments are
'the deletion of the first clause to sub-s. (x) of the s. 2J relati~g to the market
-value of the land at the date of the publication of the notification under s. 4,
.su~s. (t) and sub-s. (2) relating to the award of is per cent of the madtct
value in consideration of the compulsory. mture of the acquisition. If these
ptWO amendments were to stand alone, clause second to sub-s. (x) of the s. 23
Civil Misc. No. 140 of 1g63.

c.c. of the Land Acquisiti.o n Act would remain intact in so far as acquisition of'
1965 land for the National Housing Board is concerned. However, s. 28A of the
National Housing and Development Board Act, I95X, is specific in that not-
UBASBIN
AND ONE withstanding anything contained in other acts or in this Act, compensation
v. must be calculated as c.lirecled in s. z8A.
THII
CoLLECTOR
oPRANaooN. U Ba Gyan for the petitioners.
U Toe Maung (Government Advocate) for the respondent~
U SAN MAUNG, J.-This reference under section 19 of

the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, by the Collector of.
Rangoon arises out of his Land Acquisition Proceedings.
No. 8/54-55 The facts giving rise to the reference are..
briefly these : .
A piece .of land measuring 0274 acre situated jn,
"'(atkwet No. r6-D. 2 of Rangoon East Circle was required.
by the National Housing and Development Board, Rangoon.
for the purpose of erecting a building to house the-
automatic telephone ~stallations belonging to the Depart:-
ment of Telecommunications of Burma. Accordingly by
Notification No. 590, dated the rsth December 1955 issued:
by the Deputy Secretary of the Finance and Revenue
Department it was no't;ified that th~ President of the Union.
of Burma required this land for the aforesaid purpose.
This notification was purported to be made under sub-
section (r) of section 4 9f the Land Acquisition Act. The
Collector of Rangoon was appointed by the Prf'_c;ident to
perform the functions of the Collector under the Act and
it was further mentioned in the notification that the
provisions of ~~ction 5 (a) should not a.p ply., to the
proceedings.
On the 5th October 1956, however, a .n ew notification
No. 444 was issued by the Additional Secretary of .the
Ministry of Finance . and Revenue. It' was :i.n respect of'
o2o8 aqe .of -land in Ya'tkwet. No. r6-D... 2 of Rangoon East
Circle and it is common groun'd that this area was part of'
the area of 0274 acre which was the subject-matter of th~.
previous Notification No. 590 issued by the same depart- c.c.

ment. By this new notification it was purported to have t96s
UBASElN
been issued under section 19, sub-sections (r) and (2) of the AND oNR
National Housing and Development Board Act, 1951 (Act Tim

No. 63 of 1951) read with section 6 of the Land Acquisition CoLLECTOR
OFRA.NGOON .
Act; 1894 It was mentioned that the President of the
Union of Burma had declared that the af.oresaid land was
required for a public purpose by the National Housing and
Deveiopment Board in order to erect a building for the
purpose of housing the automatic telephone installations,
that the Collector of Rangoon was appojnted Collector
under the Act, and that under section I7 {r} of the Land
'Acquisition Act. the President had directed the Collector
to. take possession of the land after the expiry of 15 days
from the date of the notice to persons interested under
section 9 (r) of the Act.
In the proceedings which followed, the Collector
awarded compensation amounting to K 12,200 to U Ba Sein
and one, who were owners of o-o35 acre. He also awarded
compe-nsation of K 14,984 to U Pe Kyaing and seven others
who were the owners of o-043 acre of land. These
amounts were accepted under protest and the Collector was
asked under section r8 of the Land Acquisition Act to
refer the matter regarding the quantu.m of compensation
to this Court for" determination. . This was accordingly
dop.e under s~ction 19 of the Act by the Collector. .
. The question which calls for determination in this:
reference is whether the compensation should be calculated
on the basis of section 23, sub-section.s (r) and (2) of the
Land Acquisition Act or as direct~ in section 28A of the
National Housing and Development Board Act, 1951.
, Now, it cannot be gainsaid that wide powers had been
given to the National Housing and Development Board by
section 24 of Act No. 63 of 1951. It was the <luty of the
Board to perform all the functions .necessary ~or the
development of the towns and for the furtherance of health>
c.c. communications and other amenities of the people of .this
I96S
u BA SEIN country. The erection of a building for the purpose of
AND oNE housing the automatic telephone installations belonging
T~B to the Department ofTelecommunications is undoubtedly
CoRLLECToR one of the functions which is within the power of the
<OF ANGOON.
Board to perforin.
The only question which requires consideration is
whether in view of the previous Notification No. 590,
dated the 15th December 1955, the Ministry of Finance
and R~venue of the Government of Burma was competent
to issue another Notification No. 444, dated the 5th October .
"1956 in respect of the same land which was required fm:
the same purpose as set out in the previous .notification.
If so, whether Notification No. 444, dated the 5th .October
1956 can be considered to be in supersession of the
previous notification.
Now, under section 19 (r) of the National Housing and
Development Board Act, 1951, the President of the Union
of Burma can, at the instance of the Board, acquire land
for the use of the Board. Sub-section (2) cf section 9.
enacts that in respect of such acquisition the provisions
of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, will apply mutatis
mu.tandis and as amended thereby. Among the amend-
ments are the deletion of the first clause to sub-
'Section (r) of section 23 relating to the market value of the
land at . the <;late of the publication of: the notification
under section '4, sub-section (r), and sub-section (2) relating
to the award of 15 per cent of the market value in
consid~ration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition.
lf these . two .. amendments were to stand alone, clause
second to sub-section (r) .o f section 23 of the Land Acqwsi-
. tion Act would rem?.in intact in so .far as acquisition of
1.a nd for the National Housing Board is concerned.
H9wevet, section 28A of the . National Housing and
Development Board Act, 1951 is specific ~n that notwith-
standing anything contained in other Acts or in this
BURMA LA'N REPORTS 3~7
Act, c.ompensation must be calculated as directed in c.c.

1965
section 28A.
u BASEIN
NO\\, by the previous notification No. 590, dated the AND om
rst}l December 1955, the proceedings were brought to a Tv~
stage '?.'here the President could make a declaration under C~cToR
~ub-section (r) of section 6 that the land in question was oP cooN-
needed for a public purpose. The land will only vest in
the State free from all encumberances after the Collector
had m.;;de enquiry into measurements, value and claims
under section I I of the Land Acquisitio1.1 Act, 1894, and
after m~king an award under that section takes possession
under section r6. Accordingly, there was nothing to
prevent the Government from issuing a fresh notification
under section 19, sub-sections (r) and (2) of the National
Housing and Developmeat Board Act, 1951, as has been
done in the case now under consideration. The second
notification must, by necessary implication, be considered
as having can~elled the first.
Accordingly, the compensation to be awarded to U Ba
Sein and one and U Pe Kyaing and seven should be
calculated as directed in section 28A of. the National
Housing and J:?evelopment Board Act, 1951.
This has been done by the Collector in the case now
under consideration. Accordingly, the award made by
the Collector of K 12,200 to U Ba Sein and one and
K !4;984 to U Pe Kyaing and seven are confirmed. There
will. be no order as to costs of this reference.
.
nw &,e,ce:cbc.o et'oe.c:
.;) .
11 @eccd.umr-ilroe&n:o
.) ~ ()' :r 0
11 ~cc JJJ"
c.olhcce~
~ .>
cccMlo~
0
:och:I~:J~aR~sbro&x:.coe'e
.) :::::::::1 .;, Q.) ::J .> .)
tfGbcoc:~@cce:dx.o
S' .>
0 .)
u~4bs~
0 ,) .) 0
coto3 ..,)<:oeo&bo&::~
.:> .:)
@cd.u:Cbrodbec
.) 0
,bes (r) (co) (;_) b~:~b
::J
6s6:koPco,
,) 0 .) -
.)cocc.o>d~ l .;o&>:lr~e....cccc~&:c.u~m
S' 0\.
@cc:h:l&:<hco:
., &.:J ibcoceo:~u u,Jwrecot;J:k~ooo
.1 .,):J oo .;>
I!.J~cbcb:xocc6
.)O.) ..>
:o&>roule~:1~
.> .> ..J.) ~
b-J 6&b:5JYJ\.(;<&>J,.
.> f;.:J'.l fG(j\10::
~.J.JO
nl;~:e~::Mil
0
:
,) .>O...J
ecw:ob t:a:lccah14occ.or!l:o!:> c~4bcchl: och:l~l;a o&>bec9~ec:Qcc~: flo~ccto@cc .

.> .J .>:.3.> :5"" .:J .> ~ J ~ o ., ::J "3"" a .> .>oo o ,
o&)~&.s~cc@Ma
.) :.:1 .) .) oo uhlco~:owc.occ@CCM
e,j.) .) 0 :J 00
wh:>:cbco
0
efueSII

II .)wrecoQ:be
;, :l .
oi @,:::.ro~ore~ COlOCCl'l;4~.f".f;roca:; rJbbCbroa::<l:lflfl

1
.> ---L o .> 0.) ~ .> o oo
:Xo:b rd:leGe>:tecc~
~ \.
O~CC~core
,)._, .) .)
bC of:re:cecoea::c.M
.) t.,.. .>
@cd;o;d,coefuec
:l-00 .) 0 0
u:;?o:!rww ~Lew~cc?"-(r) (co) c

b~:~b ..) :korwcocc.,cl,--
;;,. flS:O ~ ;, .) 4oc.cor~e:cl,co
.,) ') .,)~bhl:oc.c::IM&:tl;-bv
:.:1 .) :::::::1 ,) esh:h.lcocc~ch
.) o:::.r,
uwb
oc ro~~
.)
Cs!c t
v ~
0<013~11:1 oro: :>S'OO:
'" c: 'J ~,.
ec:coco
.1.
.> ::> :> e .e
S~"HOdffil M V1 VW1Ifl9
CO<C~w ~ccc.oeco
_]_ 11 ,. 1<
a~ s-~o::>cce~ c.cc~oc.o~
~
1:~ u _ 50 r 1!:'?
:::>c. ]~escc:ccce
..-:1 1
.
.:> . .:> o '1. e .:> .:> .:> ..> o . .:> . .:> o
(,;)
m0 ~ ~
<? 1
...)'bxococwee
~1 ~ m ':":1 ,
os-~occ:o
..)
.1. 11
..) .
ccccro:wcoecoes
..) 0 .

reesccc~:ce~00
l. ..)
1.r r ~ 1 1 ':'J 1 1 1 ~ 1 o t r ~ 1
ftW c.~w k:oesro::o r:cc:roc.cc:;,ccce cocc:cci os-~:::>co:c~ c.~cc:ece:000ft
..) ..) 00 ..) ..) 00 ..) '- ..) ..) '\,..).
COtoe') coto:2co&~~o&:::~
.:> ..> e .:>
C2ccto:cbcoe&es
..> o o
1bes1:b
o-
(f) 1(w) 1(c) "'3
lv..b
1?ln . _l. ':"] ~,, . _l. fi l 1 ,, 1
ecmco::>
::~ .)
cocoo~w Jcc:cc:
..> ..> e
cc:wco :~W(.ese>
o..> .
rwro:mccemes
o
s-sx:o
..>
':"J ,, ~>
11 ..)cc:cc::>lga:a.;co 1
cccw: ,, ~
:::c. ] ~:c.cc n
:c. l ~:c.
we~:::c.roe>o
;)00 ::1 0 .) .) ::1
,. - "
ccw:ccocc::>c.w~~coC> WS'ea~g ~ 1~
o \ a .) .) c ..> ..> .J
1b..>cc::.:ces-co
.., 19 c~ro:oxoemes
~
'1..>
r r,
o
r
_,_ -- 1!

20~r
1cmo.:>
cc~cc
n n'' c.cc~
ccccecchlcc ,, 11 ccccro~ce
':"J , , "'""'~ ,
cocc:ccroa.:co:c0eo rrb,ww1e
11 ~ v
:)e
.> .:> '.:.J .> o .:> o .:> t....>o o o.:> .>
bo flsh:~cocc.o>cb
;) e::J.>
a.;::::b
.)
,~hlccorM
;)~
mKxc~
1., 0
:4~e0toc.cc
;) 0.)
~~~0ro
':5" ;)
S] 1 1 or 1 2 J.
cocct'l~ 1c.e:o ~ co1obcceft o~:1e :ces6)~s-0: ::;ecc tcooweooes w
1 ~
o oo o .:> t... ..> .:> t... .:> o e .:1 ..> o ..> .:>
mrw
o
:cc:CDC.Oro:wco
'"'"l
eroes
,
uo~o~:::>c.
.1. ,. rr ]~ m00S>cc:
.1. . , '"'"l]' , n,
co~a.:wrec.ea.:co
9
.> .:> o o .:> .:>o.> o .:> o .:>
6Z S.DIOdffii M V1 VMI.O\J
0
ui'eecec
~ft l:occcc:~o:cf?
0 ;) ;)
ohlcc~
:>:::! 0
:cPocuPeeccecocc
;) ;)
cccewcroek
;)
;c))cccc
;)
.:ooohles
:J:.2! . tbro cl;\~
;:) ;)~~ b~c ft80
:J '
:~cocc~cb
e:l:>
t:ces
.
roi:o:<bc.o
0 0
eroes
.
w:txocese
:J
tbes :cr~wree
;)
ccewcc
;)
ccce:ree~@
;)
hi :)CO f?wcci:o:cbco
:.~b ;) 0
n. Pee>ceCoft @~lu 4bhlt'i>e> .t[bft()(X) :)&~e~I(B . tfb@hl:hl
;) ;) o :~ :_j...v ::> ;) :~ ~ ~ ~;) :::~ e~
hl,6>e c~:x:OO~wre:)bcb:txocese
-;coo :_j._v :> :J ' :J :> e o.)
tu:c.P~cb::)Pe::::c~OO:;~es
o :> :> :::::1
II ccccEDboe'&-les
.) . ;:::J.)
tc:&lf7-
0 ~
ohlcco~ra.:e~
:J::.:l .) hxros@hles
0 .) .):_j
~~wPecohl:te
;) .) .) :::1.
:c~~~@cccecof?i'e:hj&::cbco
., .>.:..J .) ~-
(o~<~~)
-> .;;,
:&r..s tlffi:hj:Jccoe
Oj ~., w1oeesro::)b
o .,
.wtxof?a.:&
o .) :J
o~ :~rew&
.:> :~o :>
i:o:cbcoeroesu
o o
:1 :4ccc.cco~:a
:> o e
:~&Klsc.o
;;::J
11 ~h.14e\5eb:'k:B tccecc:2n 11 wl.oece:c'hc.oe&ec

~ 0 . e ~ 0 o '
11 cce>:~&:Clu
.) e ., ~eck:c'hcoe&ec
uw o
~
l; ,
_(e:CbcoeCloes)
.,.. 0 0
~~~cfl4Q~~ccoe@hl
.:>~ .)
o_.:>O .) ~
r
:)~
:>
(:cPfJ~:cbco~&es)
1r 11 1
fteCOe.GCOO.Q>CI)
0 .)
S.D:IOdmi MV1 VW~flg

. ~eli:J ~~ oxp:~~c u~?~ c;;~;;f9:m 3JU?._.5 oxp:~~ mc;;uT

C". C" r: C" C" C" C" r;;:. C" C" C" r;~ C" r: C"
c- o c:- . c- Gm?m~:~J~OJG:IY> SJjgDSm::O~ '=IJ?:~;;:::ot:J~ Uill(9J<DtJ: 9c:mtl()
eoo>;;o l;: ~c c- c- ~ c c- c- c- ( c) c o c- c
" ; ' S(!)!JdiO?:I mcqu~~S GOO?C8(l) 00 O)~...D '()f71 <DJ~G~-ji :;lj~
.' :;.8
J
("
::OCG

?C:C" co ~C
GV:>cp:
w
C"
J 0 l
("
-:n9c~
( ) Q C" 0
0 aJC!COO:m
--l t. l
0
S'dm:
l
.
mm?: ~~
l )J
C" '
~ GOOI?CDCO
B~r;oo?6~ 1 m8:x>~ 11
6t\n~8cu_;
~
..
0 ') C"G
oo~o1 1 GU:>~e: 1SC" oz9cu
C' ( )
o
G C"
()9coq:~c -
C"
, Tht principal obj~t of punishm~nt is the prevention of

. offences and the measure of punishment must, eons~uently,
vary from time to time according . to the preyalence of a
. particular form of crime and other circumstances; An amount
of severity may be very appropriate at one time which would
. be quite uncalled for at another.. It may generally be takeq_
as asafe principle to follow, that punishments should be made
as moderate as is consistent with the object aimed af. ft
is politically and economically a mistake to keep a man in
prison ~onger than is absolutely reqUisite for his own reforma-
tion and for a warning _to others.
.The associations of a jail are liable to become demoralizing
after a time; and therefore. where a short sharp sentence is
likely to be sufficiently punitive and deterrent, it should be
preferred. where possible and suitable, to a long term of
imprisonment."
(x) I.U.B.R. (r897-I901) p. 330 (331).

~~965] ~YR;MA LAW REPORTS 333
('
rr.xx:J:T.>G~I
"~"....
01 l:r.lG
6 ('
?G:01?:G
I.J
')Cc
o
000:>~
&I.

axo:<.U
--l- L
0 (" oc
corooo.s: .1\'\C0
A T J
('
O(iUj
C C 0 'l' Co (' ('
CO:J.l(JO)O)SJGOI GG'd?:DD:~l(JO)G:D') tl<D0 008c:l?: m: 00~1())()) OC
('
C C 0 C"
c o corf.J~t&
A J tol ] ll J .!C. Jl -1 .U L
:..&o
c c c c o c . r;::;:: c o r c cr,:A; 6 T J
G'Pro ~:T.>::D:D9f CI.(_GX>Xl?G:D? mGt:! ?c: 0~:DBq 8'dOJ~Dl~l 9c:~ 0
'l' c c 1;7 c c o c cr,~ c o C'
l:r.lGOI GOO?:i.l'J: oWOJG:D? mB<D3C8)0J?:fl1 ou:>~J<Dtj: CjC:~m?: OJ
c c
Go:>?nXD~CI 'PC'O):Dt:!~ <-l3(J
c-~ c
rg9
. f,7C c c
m91 l:r.ll9000:~ OO~C mcqot:!(Jg ~<' PC' ~~
cr;::;:C'
C C C CQ o C C' C~ C C r,:C ~f~?~CCI

it~ GCO?G8C8) 00 ,'D<D CDJ~G~f 1q 'PC':Do:>t:!: <-l30 r~j 3XJI ' l:r.lcjO
c c cc C" c c CQ c c c
GU::D:D SJ(JO)C 8'd000 0:.1\'\C GCO?G3([) n ~<D<D ())IOO<DCI.SI GCXY)C300
[.,!, .11.. t. L J . J U -IT
c co '"lC c o c r,:c C'A; oc c o c c
.~<D9or71 oo~o1c:oo~: mJOlG9r Cjc::x:c91 rn(J~ ~J'ioo cqro::n~u
412ccz~~@l,h,J:o
~ .) .) o o
roc dcori'JC.O
;,
:loobccoc.m~
~e.;a
1'e a~Vc 1(b)c.m
;.J ~
10'bl
.)0
IUl~
nCb c.~corflc.c
.)
.~c '<.ow:loobc coccco(;l;)m
' ,) 0 ,)
ul.v c.~corflc.c
.)
'"c ~w uloobc
:J \.
cobsB
.) 0 .>
ntot746:ooco<J>co
o .) .> 0~ :ci:7J::x..I:7J~
~ .) ::::'J
1of6otJ:.J:looo~~
.J .>:J l'::J.JO-
~gsore~}~ ~;clx.o .>@cc~:clxo _r&;~.GC.CC:o>~&>j>~ ~S~ II usore09i~
nka~b:rn>A~~ec
0 ~ 0\.
:c.m<kc.ccl:)bb~core:.oo
.) .) ::J.) (-c. coco
~
~
0
r
:?~
(~:cb~toro) =t~J,C~
S.UIOd31I M V1 VV'rnfiH t
SJ.(fOdffil M v1 vmoa
336 BURMA LAW REPORTS (196s-:-
:)e~j
o C 0 C 0 Q C C <> CC'C r::::: C 0 ~
~ooxp:~t ~Gf~t::~ ~c<Xl:~J?:tr.l'JI Of~g~!S0GD?c:tt ~:}:>?
c Q c 00 0\ c . c 0 ~.
co~:t tr.lm~ro::;, g::n~:n
c.:. ~~'l":;,::n:n tr.lOCtr.lGa:mt tr.l().)~rn:ro
~;sT~f: ~
c o C' c~ c :;;.
It -l .JI
c c
~ 6 --;I l
c or;:: c ~ ' r,;: c
lL T . t.
C''
Gprorr.l~Goo?:;D(~ttG~':f4>9J t oJ t0m~c:1 GQ)?c:~ec:~D(~:od~t '
4.1:8 '~o1 jll
C' ('o
GI.I':>CGCY.>J'JC' tS e:GSO':l 01 0 0 9c<Xl: 0
CG O'l GC'o() C J:C
~CI ~:r:JO)(l)')gQJClXlXJI ().)~s;IQI 'J
C '\"
o 'l c o c or;::c ~oc r:::;:: c c ~ c

tr.l~ls:l~~~G']:cqt GO)?:;:~tjC:~D(~GD?c: GCOJ~<>a:>~ II
~m::x-nro:co
0 \ 0
0ao:o::n~~m
c 0
GOJ::>m~
c c:m'J:
c ctc ,
!l'JOJ=xn:~
0 ~-
. il~--l L A l G. .A L Jll tl---T -t..
o ~ c ' c~ c OJ: c c ocr;::c.
<>~?5lG~te:l: G~pm:oox; tlQJm~?t tr.l~wxp:~I;IS;)~~ ~~~:~c
O\
~:::nt ~m=ro:OJO)c;s
o _c;: . c c coc c ~c
tr.lOC~9~~:? ~mao:;~:ns;~ ct
c
G.S?C~Q
J'l
-Jf ll ___ L ol b J L Ci. T
'1" "l c c o oo cr;:: c o c c c o c r,;:c c o .
. G01ffi::D?g2s;~~rq OJ~roi:Jc:g~G0'Jf1
GOI 'J~~G:x>?~axx::>?:lj'? g~q{gJ~.
c . cr;::c ~ o
a:l'2 :~t?:G~:x>fi:Jc: gl)(~G()I~
ro:urom~
C' ('91 . C' C
0::n0?:as~?
. o 0
s;~mQmro:corot
o 0
mmOJO)rn::;)Q')~?:t
OC'
s:~~:r
L -IT -J IL -- T L tl -r-- -.\.
c
~CCO:x>CO~
J L
co
lJL
'oc
Q)ro
6 L
~G
c:~ g1
l
-~G
-:5:;:o ?: o c
~ 0)~0? oo:a.scoot~::D?:
to -IT l I
co., ~-
r,;:c_c;: cc o c cr,::coc c _Q_C:

lj4>~11 . 3?0?~3. ~~:~:0~ OOQJC:!:j4>mg~J ~ooxp:otc;s
c c
~~C&C <O.S~
oc. cc c
c: 0())~ c
<0~?(1)00(.).)~:
c c_o c ..
~ O)OJ?:QI(J)CD OJCD:;)\
"
o J T L C:,- -t Jt. li l. tJ L
\ C
~3) ct 3'3o:>':lroo:>O':l .5tC oecsrC' G C' 0 C''l "l
ur!nUI':l: ()
J G C
oocco:t 0 C' G 0 C';
ooro!J'lO':ln.s.
..: 6 J LA tJ -~ L L "1
(' ( ) G C' o C' 0 C' C' 0 C'( ) G C' f,";: C
'~ f?~: ? ~C<X(~I ~JfO:' ~~ rofoo:w':l:ro?u:> 9 0'JC~~p: ~:ljO)
CO?I:>J:"'OO'JI (J;):;QOI
('
r. ::W~?:J.'
0 '1
~~.1:\:i.10:X:O~;:;,:n:-n;n
0 0 <;' c c 0
rr.l:::>Jr::~ < al~(OCI m{))~
c c "'
.. L. J. ll .:.- .. l .... L....
"'U A ll .
.. 0 _1: - C'~ \ C C OC ' C 0 C ? 0

mco:cor:~;)C QICD$.C c;:;.sroca:o<> ::>:>
- ..,- : ( " 6 L. J c. T l o Cl
1 s:~m~:x>m:com cc:O)m?:t oo~m
u..
o fl o t. l . ,L Jt. L
c -r
'or;::.c: ~G r;:;: cr.:;::: o ,. c o . r;;: c-
c r,;: c;;. r,;: o..
~Oli~:~,c:~D't.~l ~-~D?:;:e:l?S t. COO~~Go:~r g~GD?c: ~:ljo:>9J. '>ljQ:(~
9Goo~~~ -~ .
('~ ~
~<X>roG:x>;, 0 OOG
' (' .
o
c
?c:~;~,t?:G
tJ
0 ('~~
?CI rom:;,:n:;,c
)l
- LO l
. 6. c
l <O~?:'n~O)f
it.
(' .
c c:. '
o . c o c c c ( 00~-.Y.:DUQ~
o~<;; c;OO?<DOO().)Q_Cl:ffi QI~O)GJ;>?tlo:tCQIO)&C
'c c
OOU)~.S
c ~
1! J ~ .... IL'"''] L U-; U J ll tt n.-----l"T .
oc 'o , ~(: : OC' CC C C C c- 0'\ c Q.
:;nl,lS~I?:ffil mx:t). ~C~')i~C (.)().)()I(OO.S~C 00(.l):;IOXD:CI)0())~~
-lt 1.1 l C.:. 1. -o. u--n. 9 . a. --T t.6 U ..1L L.
\ 0 t 0 C' G Q C fi. C 0 <' : C , . . .C C 0 C' C'
~~::>.)(?is:lo:te:t !l~QJ'10)9JG<>:9t' 'i):o:p~c GO)?roGcopm4>9ro'q_
(With ~oits throughout) \J.>~f.QN~~o3i>~u
!\;" ~ cr,;:c c
g)l'il:G~GtG:OJ'1?
u
j~ ffiJ<>tjiOG~~2?,11
.. ' . . .
(:>) ~t~~:1 . ~: :l' o;~Jo5 ,.,~j:~n

., (5) '~ri'loS ~~cq:1 ~- o~r o-5wJoS~., e'1"
(?) ~~, ~c4:r -~: ~~ >~JoSt., -9:1"
(<f) _<O!DI #1 sn-(~)1 _(oe?fi)l <O~D~cq: 4>':l~JoSp OOjU <03<11
OC' "
3<IC ..
L '
8)')(9) {oe?e) I ;'ltcrif~'Jtaili 4>~JoS~':l .Jeou . . -
,
~CCCOC.OflCC
11 be:?coar r.eoc.or.
I . , 1
CO(.()f\CC
'L !'
I s-P.eG lOW I C
, ) be RcC:c~n<lckec 1oeec:ob .
'\ ., .> .> e e :> o .:o . \ Lo~ W ~
~ ~oe::co<J~
'"
-:ccooc.cc~:c.co'!l~
.J :> o
wcta1o .Jecce
,
o .> L
-., 0 ,
.> .>o
1 ':":)
1ecce
.) (C) '!.'cb~ :C.a:~c.b
uC2cc:~ol;:c.l:!e
,) .)
IS:~~@b
::::~, ~.) .) .)
to c .>c.cc~co~:d:KoJ;'l:oobcr:::::~c.fl41:!
<> .> ,:, . O .>o . .>~
.-e cCtlc :4cc:kzc of: oc.ra:~
.>o o e .) ::J
le ICO
e e
ucotoR@fl d::c.oo
,~.).)~,.
, ,. I
<Oc.f6~wcb~oo
.> ;, .:>
:::>bc.cc~4b:P.ccwrGJco(.()fiX
..> .J .> .)O .> .) o ~:::>bc.cc~4b:c.oo!So:
.> .> ..>
ocewbwc
~ ..)0 o e o ccooe.cc
~ 6~
.~~ec :,t:l~whlocoC.o (lo) ~a')(l!:~l2~t;6 ~co~o:b~r.~:n bee (c)~c aco
.JO .>~ :.:J.l 0 L .>o~.) .J o .> .>:::::Je=J .>
. t:Jeo2wa::ob
.:> .>
wax.rooco:ccol'o
.> e
ofi)ec:<;Jccab;&bee::::~cof,rebcoc
.l....J ~.... :J-.J .l-.J.>
cd:.oa'Cc
e e .J o
I~At..c
.>o
1i :JC2ccbco~ lo2ccoro
o .J: :J
1oi, : .loc.h:l;,ehl
~ ~ - .>~.,
C2abeQ&beiol:!co~rebcoc
.>-..J .)::J.> e o
cd:caO::
.> o
.~am
.>o
~bo?r:c.:owc.f6~wcb~oo
.) .)0 ,) .) .)
1bec (c) Cc a ,)cbs~~::, 0
1,)C2cc&
0
:obc.cc~&l;ba~;~lo
.) .) 0 .) l,.
~JJ;;
.:>0 ~.>
1:obc.cc~:Lb~
.J .>
of6c.ooro~ otoc~o2ccec
,) o ) .>
:b~c:h:l:h:l
.> ::::::1 6.:J
e:e.b:b
.> L
Cb~hl'!fl
.l o ~O'J
L s~11odmr M.v1 vmng:

. . ..-.. ... .:
)
S~)IOdffii .MV1vwmUI
6 S.DIOdffii M.V1 V~H
34{) BURMA LAW REPORTS
(~)
(c:)
(ro)
1965} BURMA LAW REPORTS 341
~
t.
C'
c:m :;oc:G~ COJ::G 0
L
0 C' ~
t. o
0 C'
l
f ?C:t C' 0 C'
:))00)0) ()IO)O)Y: ~CG
L t. U I.
?C&l
C' 0 C' 0 C' 6 (' oes:l:
r,: C' C' o c~c C' oc- 'l C' C' C'~OC'( '1 C')
tj~pf:COJ::x>~:-q WCe~CCD~C rr'..(Jg!:G:x>?<;c:t ~Dl.g~ OIQ0 <:sTO'.Xi'>lj!f
C' 'T'~"l
0
'l~~:x>?qc:
('('.,
CR::DC:G(SI tJOI eoos~~Q
('
Oj
()
0 SXJ s..l 0
C' C'
OC<XpmGropmro?:~9~' ~g~' ~ ~<Y.>9~Jcrme~c:
C'
o1~.,d
OC C' OC' 0 C' 0 G C~C'
J
..~

r,;:c- q;;:c- ~ C' 'T' C C 0 r,;:c- OC'J

:;>'JOil tj0'JQ2::t:J0Gel?c:GOI ~C:x>~ GC9::Dt:JSI GdQ~.' .v.8 0.11 ....
o c e e c~ c r;;: c c G':. o
~G<J't<Y.' S:l-"j ~Jip.>tjC:Q<Xj:lj? [90:x>~8dtr--l ~e:m.
c c . (' C' ~ r,::;::c
G<D'X1XI.> CJC:~eoos ~SQ O? 0 Gd')l e3:e!OG'):O-f00'r.'
c 0 c)
o c cr,:oc ( :1 c) o cr,: r,;:c oc o c-
'J9f::022 ~C:1Ytg~ voQ~ f11o:>Ctjm?(:)~l9<tl ~Y~I q:{(:)<Ip
G Q 0 OC ~ C C C' 0 . C C OC C C' C
~COOO) :;oc:C~tCX>?:'J.SG:x>?CC:t :))QO)(J) (.~IO):x>Q:O.SGO)')CC::
--- 5 t. 1. ~ ,T I ~l t. U IT I
c c c oc c c- q;;:c c-
OCG'Pro Gropmro?:~cG~~ UfO'lft:J0:x>~ll
0 0 c (' 0 0 OC' ( ) Q c (' L~G': O(' '1 c ,.r~ ~("'

<1.>1 01 Go:>J'>C ~S e:~:o:Jfl 0 jC~:qc ~r:J~'P <;t:9g:.,."el:e30
c c- () ~ r,::;::c c c
G9: Gd:De<JGS~SG 0j 0 SXJI el:e!OG'J:Ofc:x:l<f 2(.)4)')0)~ :
oc c c~oc
G.SCO:;o.sg:; <).Lds
("'
OIQl> t') o G
OOG:xl?::O:Dl C'?OQCD o~ o:>OG::O?"::x>
c o QCc~oC
, Q.S.
T &. -. T fol l;; ~ Jl
-, "' -~ Jl L L t. fJ OL 6 0 .. ~
'1 C') o c~ r;;: c . ~ o oc cc C' ~ c r,;: c
( o1oo <11 roctlm')QJI:1S' <'!'XJ~ ~=~'Jr!9ooe~x: ~=em
o:>:>:G::O?ro::n:t
c-
COCDOCCO:ro
c oQ C' o c
O:O::ClCCUO)')::>.:>.:DGd::>ll
c '1 ror o c
IYIU~C'P
'l
C, :og::;>:
C'
C.:. L- -~ L t. Ji!_. L.!. ~L_; l -~
~ r,::;::c c C' ( ) c croc ( '1 c) o

e1:e!OG'}: Gd<De<>"S<fSQ Of 0 Gd'}l arrJG<..l!G::n~ ~i)l_Y~ ()1(:)0 f111'
c c c ( ' .., c-r " o oC' c c r,;:c
9c:8d;'))eo"G'f3Y Oj 0 )SX)I 't):~...c!?,G::D~ 2:0(::x>;;: :::0~1 ::P~JC:(9&-
r 'T'QCO:D~'
GtYG:o c "l~ ::n::o~c smc~rgm
o cC'
::lc: ;;q::n c c o QDX'l:))c
(]~:).).:Dffi cl- G
o~ J o 4 ('. -1. ---, ;JJ .J , 5I. ..:J c.:, L 6-1 .
0 "' G C C ~ '" 0 CO C C' OC C OOC 0 C"
s;>CO<O I GA:!COO::;o::n m !)dg$C ooroqm::n:r.;~c OXDO) g:;;c~G() il ::DGX?
--~
L
09 c
ro-r.ocro:ox
-1--f t o
c
l t:,:,CJ Jl.l< L l' l 1.:...-.J..
~IQO:'OO?~G:x>:>
l.i J
c
l.t

eoosg:nol tt~---1
~
L
oc
;;ocm
t. T
'1 c:
ct:Clg:~
J I
g ~
C'
t.
ooo:
I
c C' ( ) C' croc ( , c o o c
g;)'J..20080!3'=1 0'\ 0 !DI:\1 O:>()):;:'J~G:O') QCIUI,l~ Ol(:)t>Jm QGO):l::l.):xl~ l
L ';" ~- -, L ~ Ut ~ t ii ll G
C' C C ( ) G 0 OC ~ C' C' C: C'
CJC~8d(1)200St(BQ Oj . .o ~91 C'J'}~"t :;qc:~9JCO:>:'Jf OCG9?~"1j':>CD
~c r,: o c c . 'T' L~~ oc , c ~ r,::;::: c: c c-
co:>:e~c: Dt.C\100~CI CJC:~ol ~~'f> Cji=9G:~ e:1:e10G9: !DIDB<JGS~~Q
oc o c o o c ~c r,;:c c o c c. cr,:c
09 ~I GdQ~I q{Q~o:> SOXJ~Jcrooro?:tjc: ~9~t!09f> ~!DO::>.:>~ COCr:JC
c .
m:;o:U:U II ;
l\. '- .i
~ c c o c c- c L~f]'~. '1 c .
l:!JI~ 'GOO~JroCOJ:~~ ~(J.)?Qm5p:Df>.::D~ lfltf"'t"'f> <f 1 :'Jg:~
~ r,::;::c ~ ~C' c c- cc r,: 'Y' c
~:e!OG'J! 3dme<>"S~SQ O? ( 0 ) SXjl t.j:e;!UG9!0fc:x:l<f
c
Gd~Jc:aoooGOI .
C' OC C' ' C~OC("l C) 0 0 C C' C 'T' 0'1 C
qcGf~9f ~::;Dl.g~ 01(:)0 <11 'J~GO)')a:>~:t CJC.!~OI ~:;,qol8diD20GS
C ( ) OC 0 C G G C ~C C \ C o
<tSQ 09 0 S~')l ~I~ SID'jQ>J<fX>CO?!eJC! ~~: Gro.J'?<D

OJ')!::>O::>.:>
-llL
"' GO C 'T'
OIOOQ(J.)'XXJ)~GOI
I.
C
GOOI?O)CO?:
)I
OXD ClOG:))') 0
fl.cL IJI-
0 Q G C'
SCOO&C
---lJo
C' ()
Q:x>:::O
C.::. L
BURMA LAW REPORTS
4
oe~:.~
~ciT'~~'->OJf
..
:;.8 0
i~ .
4)1~oo?wcrl
. l
:r.f
Jo
ou
-
noc.ese>":~kc:C!(:c0COto)
~ oe - oo
coto(')o:C!
ooe
11 ~cese>:4cc:2
o ~ e
11 ~bldwe>:2u 11 co&>ese:cbcoeibec
.>~.J e .:>
11 @re:Cl o1Pde>l5e>wcooe>wro.u
oe~ o o -
uco&>ed:\):~coeibec
o ~
* (:cP<"~:cbco~~ffi)
~c
;J
10
t.,;
c.a)g~
e
cobco:!;4~:creco~
e :J :J :J
1COCO<"CDClDg~
.:J oe e
cobw:esre::::>~g~:crewft
:J e e .:> o .:> e :J .:>
uc.ol, cr M
~
-l
- ~OJ!>~ (~:cba:'~~es) c
. 's~+ cc <-J b cb~:~cc:wcco~j:::>~
r ':\ r o 11 l 11 "
o
:::>~
.:>
v ;JCO<"eBClDCC
J
cc .:>
1C1DCC: ~roo:::>
.:> .:> .:> .:> .:> 0 .:>0
o&~~
;, .>
:x.o:4&nc
.:J
:~&:<boo 1.:Joc6oo:2
eo:::J o~
:~&:cbco 1:~k:C!
0-joo~
olre:h:l&:
e:J
:t S~'MOclffii M.V1 VW(fflH

S,DI0d3)! M V'l.. VW'tifiH
They require pme for inquiry and consideration before taking

action and must consult the local officers, to whom they
cannot delegate their powers.''
tz
(c) ~c ego
oe
., \. .:>:.:1 bes (c) 0c echc~o2coec

u@cce:o~<llRes .,) ., :occes:cbcoe
.:>
:cea.
&::coococ
.)
Jk~ I.)@cc:i;coc.es~
.)
~:coocoees
~ 0
'co
0
1
e f :.)t".(.OCQ)I.)o!:> II :J@ccte:c;!ro~to
0 ~ ~,
@cce:tx:C.O~WOO ec.o:flC.OC@core ~oe I @cctc:c.oococJk~ :@row 2@\;:o(~cecoJrees b
.) \ 0 .) " .,) .) .) .:> .) .) .) 0 .) ,J \.
ohld)
.J~.)
- u~ccbe:oQ~ot,
)""' .)=::]\..)
eo@cce&>~oc@~C.OC@CCC~@~:
.J \ .)
o~ 4b1broo
.)O ..) :J
h>ib@cc~
0 0 .J
c.o'&xw; t:re~ :ces:ob co:2cooob(ll~~~w t Ecb~ec~o&>ftro~&:coococlke

.l o J e .J O.l :..h J J .lO '> .l
UOb~f
* ( ~cbe:ccoc.oc~roe>~b:)ce:)51)
0 ..) ..)~
..) ..)
00~~
CsfJc l
L.t S.L~Od3.~ 1\AV1 VW~flg:

348 BURMA LAW REPORTS [196.>
C f.':C' (' (' (' C' G C' OC'
oe~:~~ ljC<lOC'jfGOOproco:>::>;1m~ro II 112:~-fOO;;(C II
r.: (' (' C' (" ('
~~= tJC<X>C9fGO)J ?OOCO?:~~m~ro II
Q
ne:rQ>
C' ( 0
m~:'JG~f I!
)
C:-~ '~("
(X!QCO:>ccz ~ G (" (' (" c L<? C'f,<?
~C OC' O'>'f:orr~~ eaG<o~?CGW?C II liGC\]'JOXO?:~ Yl:JG~:OO"J:I~o:>~IOS'*-
r:lfln~CU
.'f>O'XT.>c- (
m~:
) c-.
'P~oro oxp:~e1:m1 ~tori'Q) G~x:mJt=~roe:;~
~ cc c- c- <" e c--
C' 0 C' (' ( )
C'\
Q)O)~(.))~O)~ Gmm?l Yo:xp: 00~: romeoGs <[SY
C' C'
Y2 ::> 0091
c-r.;:::: c- c- oc C' ' C' cr,: C'
c- c- c- c-
8J90e:fY:;~ GOO?CSCP j ;Q> rnJ~G~f roY~ QJ')lo:> ~0)211 ~flliLfO
0 C'
oro 0 ('. ~ c C' . C' ' "''
CGC t<JO::>.:>rr.>l Or.tllC :i>~CI. WOOCV j j ClCY.lG.fiCOI C?OOGC?C C
C" ('
t. i2 l ll t.; 7 LJ ~I Teo
G C' C 0 0 C' C' OC' \ C' ("

W G::>.:>:0'3?SI G<JO:t ::POrr.>oo OOJ::>.:>OOOO
o o L. t. t
OWIDQ~ ~c:GO<'J::>.:>:l:>IDI
- fL -r1 a. o a. c.:. mwooc
Jl 6
'
e>oo~uro a~
0 (' 0 \ c II OOQ>?
:no.:> 0 C'
OJmGo:>Q C' "
lDI:Jo:> 0
m " 001 C'
GY?CGSJ?C~
(' (
ro 0 )
j
.:> L )I L. L J L L -l.
C' C'OC G C C' C'\ C' 00 C'
ro?: r roro;;ro<"Y{C 9 2:ro '='~:~Got:ro?: GO:'J-j> m0~~2~ roel:(~OJ21t
C' C'
GY?CGlD?C~ml Q>?m 9
0 GO):~
~c;: OC' 0
8:l9o:> o:>?:G():roJ Y
G::x>:::x>:nC' OC'C"
s;>y~
0
<:)QO) Cl
]I
C'
.-,
I.
C' ~c;:
cc:~u
b "T.
C'
YQCGOO:ro GO:Qo:>:TI())
A
0
Al
L A
'
C:.L
-(
C'
GY?CGS:l?C~m
l
C'
6
C'
G
0
COGCO
l
~
C' C' C'

o:>:nu O)()YGo:>?m y Go:>:roc:~~ a-:>o:>mroc comro Q>Q>g: CJc:roc:o:>~
0 ~c;: C' c- ' 0 C' C' C' C' C'
l:..:t o -. Ot o L t J1 ~
"''C' C' r,;: C' r.: ~c;: 0 C' 0 C' C'
OOQI;31 o:>o:>c: lD'Jtj~l YtjGOl:~l :J.iY~ op:G'Pm 5J:}Gcrt>J O)O)GO)~
:J.iYo:>
('
m OJ<i.>L G<(?Q~O):TI " "
<DOCfOJ:TI II 000~3J
0
l ::x>mGo:>QSJYO>
0\ C' 0 C' 0 [ C' C'
J All C l ... C.:. l J
cc "r,;:c r,: c: C' C' o C' c c c- c-
O tjQ>Go:>? ~t::lG~t~ Of~~roa:r~JCT.><J{ GQIC:02 OX>CO-:>:o:>e; Q>JO:>Y:
"''C
C' (;""" 0 C'~ C' C' 0 C' r.::::: C' C' \ C'
3' '='r:root:m ~ro~c;g: ;~ 9c: ~~:c;~x:l ~;;~o:>? 9 co ~~m
J;'~ C' r.:: 'T' C' C'\ 0 C'~_ C' A;
CJCJ"'~:T<; Sdtj?: OOG<JI YJ?: <DC:Q>?:~rx:xp.>~'J?I CfCO~Gs: T'? G96>::JI
C' f1
cc:ro GC O)IU ::>o roo:>G<J: :rotC! GCO:I
C' C' C' 9
O?O())o:x:l oo:>:nrom
C'o C'OO C'
I b u 6. t>l c.:. ... l OillGO:
L Jl
c c- r.C? cr.<? C' c- o C' c- o C' ~c:. e oc-
9'\'TC: l:;lo:>~L~ ~Go:>? cpea ~t: Y:Df:elt Gf~Gm~c;:o:>2~1 GY~Go:
C' ~ 0\ r.::::: C' O_QOC' C' C' C' C' ~ C' L1? cr,<? 0
'JfGt)~C'I:(~ee::::l cxt~~:GQ>o:>~ Sd~O) 'Jffi jO :>lt Sdt:j~Cil:Jo:>l!itqz
A; OC' C' 0 C' C' C' C' 0
~?:~ Yo:>-;>:~~0{ ~':>G~'f> Y~9.?l 022:Yp: ouxp~ro2: CJ']I ~
~ r o ere- o C' c- ooc- c oc- C'
G
6 ?C ~(\)!CJCGC: COO) oo:n:ro:n: ~()~CI GCCO:TI: (.))QO)C'
t. lJ ~
SG<J:Q
L eC. C.:. lt. i!l. c..;:, L t. T -1
Go:>:r.::f: Y8o:>r,;:t GoTCoo~:r.::f:o3ci1r m~r.:~l CJr;:Go:>:m~:l f.':& cx:>6o-:>t
t:j Jl tj J.:l ~ L L ) Df~ e:} b lj Jl Jl
Q
Q>9C;;l c:
C'\C' ~('
Oo:>:TIII
C' _0
OOG
(':>CI C'
SJI:lo:>C
C'
00~())
0
SdGOO~m
C'
roo::>?:o:>Y?"
0
l:.:t \. . Jl. 0 t. J
C' C' "" 0 "C' 0 C" ~
0:>\I)GO)Q 0'31.lo:>
~ J
ro " t:l(\)
L
CGC:m G<J:o:>:n OOG::x>?
oC:)
C'
C:.:, L
Q>?~C
C'
.to
O)O)GO):;).
mc,~ro
c '' 0 " Y Go:>:ee
~c;: C' C' o C'
OS~ 000)00~ 1 ('1) OOG::x>? 0-:>o:>()C ltQ>G()O):TI II
o o c- ~c c-
J 1:. T 0 l lJ L ot. lJ C:.:.
y c; o:>:ro1 yroruee
~
~s
OC' o
coocQJmmCJ
C' C' ' O C' C' o
0mCJcc:~:o:> mu:>~QCOt
C'\
6 IL -LI~ lt -~ 0 ~ . lJ :- Jl 1J ct. tt. o-r
C'f,'; C'' 0 C' (' ~ .(" C' cc "
CJGS:~-:>:::l:JC~GQJ II 02?SJ Q>CD5!C oxp:~e1:m1 ~G::l)Q ~CD m
C' 0 c-r.: C' r,;: (' C' C' r,:;:: C' C'
0~0)~1 qro~~G~: OO'Jl (\)~Go:>~ Q>~ljQ>O)~ COrr.>Q ~e:f2o:>2"
"1
ce
1':"]
cocccclo:fliCOCC
1<;> 11
c0::xw~
1
co:
6
~coro ~:::>::>
I"
1::> cc:cce::>woa:>
111 1 or
o~g>
0 ,) (., ,) 0 ,) 0 ,) ;,- ,) ,) \.,) 0 ,) ,)
:3~~QOJ~ ~COCCO~ ICO~~::>COX~~

_,~_, o _, \. . . _, _, II CCcc~
_, o _, . ~_;
o ccccoPetecoOO
_, ;, c~
. hJb:>)
;,Jo
.
- 6)~::JCO::JC~~
1lo1
CCC~:cceecco~
]
fl CO J:CCOfl oCOCCCOO
11~
O'li'COleeB
. o r n
CCC~
_, _, ;.o _,o . _, _, _, _, .
cocccccn
11 ':"]
.) .)
L
ccnccc~:cccm~
.
co:oe>oroc:;,
C?
.) ,) 0
1 r
ct>,c.cn:oo
,)
JOCOOXCII
,) 0
1. 11 1 1 ':"]
ccoo~
,)
brem
11
.. ""
, ':"J 1r
COCCCC:Co::JOO
11 t n ..-:1 o 1r
IOC~COiee:G cccce~
6 .,QOCO 1r ~ 11
Cfle:G:CC~
~
1
COC@CO II .:>
1 .--, 1
CCCCS'~
.) . .:> .:> .:> . \0 .:>.:>0 0 0
.fbcnbl ccn _co
.'5' .:> .::J (( "
co~ro
.)
ecc~cocc
.:>
ICCcc~Peen
.) .:>
coew l:::>fEDcni;l
. 0 ,)- .:> ~
0
&wto
0 \ 0
u2cco~cnhl" @<'lbcohl:te IGC2co~ Ieece IO~eB

,)
' .
.:>~ .) .:> ~ '5' .:> .:>.L 0 0
to
-coPeeccecocc
.:>
ccc~~4rco
0.)
JIG:c\;m~
'5' _, ~m<'l<Occn
0 .)
o
(( " .)
co;,~ ecc~wcc

_, 0 0 .)
v J. 1 . 'J I[ 1r . 1 1 1 n l_ v v
ococos-6)0~ :ccn:ccn O<'lo ccecocc cccerooe JCOC.Oiea::cn 1oero:cce I?
.:> ,) _, 0 0 ,) . 0 .:>0 0 .:> 0 \ .L
1:JcQ~& n2cchloco
_,::::Jo _, ~_,
~hl::::>cj:;"j~t;6
_,~_,::::Jo
c<cel<'.c _,ood..Oesto
.:>oo
1:C2roc.ocnt:2
_, .:> e
:Q*d5~
e:::J 6:b>ro !Sccco
0 0 .
11 C2cco~:c~oooc~C2cdecnhl
.) .) .) .)~
:ftcoccn ccceo~
.) .:>0
ei?COOJ
0 .:>
oo:cbco .)~
.:>
cnhlro .)coredo
o.:>
CCC~::lOI?
.)
eccec.occ
. .)
l~hlcccnhl :ftCOCCD
.)~ .:>~ .)
CCC~~cco:to:6e cokDro co:tt~Q~ 1Ccn4e(; ~tolrero611 CCcc:ctt:cQ h)~
0 ,) .:> ~ .) 0 .;: .) " .:> :::::1~
-c0:ccc:~ eo:ookhl~l? cco~4!W IWCCCC:O~::lCCI? JCCcc:o~occ :cro
o " .:>o ~ _, .:> o .:> _, .:> _,
:&ehl~? c.o:crt?:cccb 1C2cc1ocnhl ~folPero @cc:&~QI? 1Ccn:ce~cn0 cod:>
~ " .:> (., .:>~ .:> .) .:> ~ .:> .:> .:>
h>:&~Qfl
.0
oeocb:~?~4-ro4hl
~ .:> ,) .)~
:cro :roeoco:::>cl?~
.:> .)
II C2cccnhl
.) ,)~
cc hlb:J
~0
ICCCC
.:>
.:ro~ocooc~?~ ccce:cco:comecoi?WOJ cnli> rocc:cee(])cn
1 1. r ,, . . 1
co:e~c.occn ecce
.) .:> 0 .:> .:> .) .:> 0 .)
:oe-::cmo gCli?:CCO'O
0
1 .--, , ~ , n .--,.., o 1 1n ':"J 1 1 ':"J 11

COCCo:>
.:> 0
IICCCC<:e::::>
,) 0 ,)
COIOeOOJOII?
(., ,_, .::J
:ccOJWCOCCCC0
,) 0 0,)
:::>
.:> .) ,)
mccwce I6flCCD :ccOJflo:> C?gOJQ1 ICCI? :ccrow:oe:::>
~ _, r ,)
<> r .--,, ':"J 1or1 I. C?~
(\)Q g:)~O I ::>'li'S'~e:G:oo
.:> .:> .:> 0 0 .:> 0 .:> .:> 0 ,) ,)
1 -:J n n
1 , v -:J 1r 1 L 1
IIIOS'flflCOWI?
l. .:> _,
o:ro

iccCC:CII?WieW
_, _,
Ccceol 0 OCO:flCOCCDCO II CCCCIOOWOJ
ol. _, .:> o .:> l. _, o
1 6 r , , ~1\7 ] n
:oe :co: eCOAWOJ W:flCOC<lio:> I oOWC e 0 CCWC1ee:fl ~cro:::>:::>
o _, _,
~ L ~-
o .:> o .:> .:> .:> .:>o _,
:C2roecbea<Dro
.:> .) .:>
:)hl:flrc.o .)oto:~
,)~ ,)
IW:::>tomw:cceblfl
.)0 ,) 0 ~
uC2cc1o<llhl
.:>
~cQe>
(., .)~ .) :::::1
:ob16e :to:6~co~wro ~:o:ncoccnto J2cn4el; otoolrees b C2cc:&e>bll?
.:>::::1 \. 0 ,) ,) 0 .) 0 .:> 0 .:> .) " .) ~
ccc~oo .)~cQ~coccro
.:> 0 :::::1 .) uocoeol?
(., .:> coPedo
.) .)
ccc~oo:cbco
.)
~r Bch
1bro :::; .:>
c~o2wro ecce>c.occ ICCcc:~?coccn o co~ro eccewcc lc~cchl-:::co
.:> .:> .) .) " " .:> .) .:> ~.)
r1 P. r 1" 'J ~ 1 1r 1r ':"J r1:
11 :>:>~C.fi~CJ o'li's-e>ro co.ees
.:>
BOO 1r
lw:::>rocns-l?:c
-_,
1!
: s-eoe>..,c.cco ~cc:ccococ i<De
-'O o _, e e o :> .:>
. .)0 .)~
- ~~~ r
~'Z
IICCCC
.)
~~gA ~':"]
e cccoro wcow1e
, 1 0 . 6
o en
0 fol
olg~flro
11
u;:~:oOJI?
i!. .
10 ccecem
11
C.OC2cccoc.bl e>
~ ' _, o o .:> J e .:> .:>o ::> .:> " .:> .) ~
c3 ~c cnhl wPee&o ccc~::>o eccewcc 1:C2roC2cc o cof,ro ecce>wcc

.:>~ .) ., .:> .:> .:> _, (( " .:> .:>
'
~.6t Sl'HOdmi MV1 VW~ng [596I
11C2cc~ 4bore cocc :C2roh.JC2cce'llJ(} :::>l:l:c.Q::>to roCb~:c.~
~ o ~ ~- o ~ o-~ ,:_j . .:>:::! ~bo ~
tcQJ&>@cc@
OO~
~esb
'\ '\ ::>
u:Jb:~es
0
rtu:::>c.~6bc.@
o~::::J
&w"l:o ICCccbces~x~~
0'\0 ~ .) ~ .

u@ccOOa,t::l ~b:c.@:2@ ~Pe~Pe ~Pe~Pe rwrorees c.cc~b3 @cce&>b [:,oo
~ .:>~ .:> . .:> .:>o .:~8 .:> .:> o .:> o .J '
:c.P~:~Pro:::>c.cc~
.) .)
Wc0 r~C.~~to
0 .) ::::1 0
n. o~coto~
.)
C2~:2me
.) .)
4bcnecrore
'\ .) ~ .)
ro&
.) 0
, r v 1 r 2 ,, 1 1
wco ol:cc~ ~ rc.ccocoft oreco ~= co ro:c. es c.cc~ccw loc.es~::>c.~~
~o ~ '\~ ~ e O'\ ~ ~
.)
olb:>~cn~wce
0 ~ ~
M:oS
.) ~
5H~
~
:d~&:~rw:oc.cc~
~ . ~
1~!=:1 <X!cccoco
.)~ ~ ~
c.ro:c.Cc :<X!ox.oc.cnec.o
~ .)
rfbrocccoo
'S'.:> .)
5-btoecbb.:>es
~ .)0 .)
cnoro :~es
.) ~
:C2roC2cc:&~bl~,besroPeb3wro
~ ~ :_j ~ o ~
::>h>cnw
.J o .J o
bc.es~oc.~~
.J ~
,...J:J&,
S",jo
11C2cc
~
k0 tocc~
0
wbc.es~::JC.f)~
~ ~
rtoC2cc:o~fl
0~
C2cc:o~ 'S'.)
.)
lf:&xoo :c.Pfl:CC~o
.)
w
:Cc..J:Jfl
~:_j
IICCccte
.:> o
to<X!cccdo:c.cdn
.:> .:>o
~c.hl~ m<X!cciObc.oc.~~
':):_j ~ l. .:> :::::1 rbflCOcc&fl
'\'\
v
w:oo~oefl uees ,.
c.cc~:o~ ccro:oo~oefl OC"C c:cc~
v 1
lc.tx:eccre _':':) v ] ,WC.@
~
~':':)
.:> l. o .J o ~ e ::> o
ccro
.) wbc.ro:::>OC.fl~
.) .) u<:accm>GIJ
.) 4b:c.&:~
.)::! .) tosc.Po:@~o
0 .)
~co:&:~Q"

rli::
:.J ':)
oc.re~ otoe.@ woc.es~ocoxfl~
~ .J -=> .,
olb:>b3besc@
o
o&><h&
., o
11 <X!ccl:e
.J o .,
@ccetl
'\o
.:~
:o~ ':).)
fbwcb~:c.~ ecc=:ro
0 .JO
:&~!;!~
:.J
rwbc.es~oc.~~
. .J ~
c.ccel:e
0
@ccl;b
.) 0
ks;,

:2 oww~wro
6 .Jo tcc.~to 11 .:><X!cc:c.cococc:tero bo~:o~cno :<X!c:oW
e ~ .J o o .J L; .:> o .:> .J o
1
CoCCCC@ coWGccr:c.e~ rc.c.J:e ucnco:::oo cnfl:ocw~ lwrow~:o~:b~
0 ~ ~ e o " ~ .:> .J ~ l, ~ o
:@4:@~co
.J
~
~w
0
~t2:4ccfl
.J .)0
uocco~o~
l, .)O
!h~fl .)wcb~c.ro C.co~c.co~Mw
.J ~
1 V' lL ,, ......,., 1 v '!J b 1
uTCOfff?rpro 5ecn:scao ff~cro~5co5c<'~~ 'ffcoes ~cc ~ cco?f
hlboo~:CC~O
e~ ., eo:c.roc
, ft , c~@cc:c.ro
.) :ccc:b~ .)OCoC.@ II CCCC:CC~OeN
.) o
S.bcoR:re.s\>Pe~re dkPecc~ 0
.) .) ~. ~1.))
wC2cc4ro:l!rwt=~
.) .)
r<X!ccsl>ro:llrw
.) ~
w~~hl
0 .):_j
CCC~
.
oo:1Pwes
.......
oro (c) 0c flGh
.)
&beCJ.)CI) tuc.G:ol:>
..)
G~OCCJ.Jes
.)
:occes
.)
:Cbcot=~ rC2cc:&~blf)
rccoe~:cGe>GGlc.G cccmb~ w:3~~@rob rn!cnwes
.) ~
tc
o .:> o .:> e .J ...J ~ ...J.J o 'S'.J
s.L"BOdffii M.V1 vmoa OS

<OC.OCO WCO:Co t :cc~coh-,1'1 CCCCdCC~ 4boei!n h>o~eC'lCCJOO Cgoo:=CCJ CO~
.:> o o " .> o " .> o .> . .:> .:> o
..~~oco " w ".)coees ecc~c.occ
. .)
rbes :c.Pf)Cb:~bl :~cY;J~es l:Cwc.oc.oooes
.)~ .) ::::::1 . 0 '1. .)
,;o:'ccGt;l
c)
:((ro
.) ...J .)
n 16 'J 1~ n ,, r 1 1 ":":! ' 
~
.:>
:c.0:co ~ e~re :roes tcecocoe ccco
.>.>.> . .:> ".).:>.>.:>
cce~o:ero:e:c.u cocoflCC
.:> o
'
rcce~~:e>.&l:oo.>
.> .:>o .:> .:> 'S' w:lreweo
IGcro .:>~&weco
o .> o ~
:~esc[g
e o
11 C2cc:de~tuc.o~
.> .:>o .:>
<.ero
.) &:Mc.o:::>cce~
. .) .) r!Go[:Jcjg
'S'.) ~ ccceec.od~~~c
'1..) .)
o e> l:,ccoe>eoco
.) .)
twd~:hle
.) e'h
:::>rod~
.) .)
w:cPe&:Mc.o:~ccce>
0 . .) .)
~oco~e
.) .)
o~
.)
:ccro~fb:>~~=A~
. .) .)
IG~ w~rw
.) ::::::1 'S'~J 0 .)
r
:~ocon
.) .)
~e>es ree>es ~cjg
:y
II Pee,CQ~f)Wrees~cc::>~e<.ooJcO>::>o:::Jw
.) .) .) .)0 .) .) .)
coc
0
c~
ruPees
.)
-~cc~
.)
croe>ccG[:J
.) ~
co ccce>e:ccc:be>
'1.
roaKo~~es
.) . .)
w:5e>~blrob
. .) :..:~, 0
ICCCCCG (.() co~es eccewcc t~fb:>~c.ocro~ wroc.oPees IOC.OOJW .

.) " "" .) .) .) 00.) l...>
11 C2cce~cED;Re> a.:-Qe>4b:2 bob 4ce

.:> " ....... ~ ~ .:> e l.." .>
:::>Re-cf::cPe:cccc[g
,"'j
&c~ tEtees
.>l..
ccceGe>d~ to:::Jb t:::fb:>k
.)0 0 . ) .) 0
w2a:Wlro
.) :::::1
ro&:~rw:~ccce> r::>h]es ~cctta:oo c.ot1le>46:2 tnrol;e :C2rocco:oe>

o .> .:> .><-~ .:> o .> ...J .> e l.. o .>
C2e.dl>es
&
r~e
0
mtces .)wcees .)M:cPe&:Mw:::>ccce>
.) .) .)
ucccctec.o&:>
.) 0.)
~ecce
.)
IO:Oe> :ccrow:df)C2es
l.. .) 0 &
&es ~CC@
.)
oCo:::>eco
.) .)
rereesccce>cro
.>l..
:creoco
.)
b:i:Pes
0
uC2ccroC2&
.) l.. &
:ccrowooes
.) 0
~wc[g
0
nC2ccrooQ
.) l.. .)~
&~e>btooro
.)0 .)
roo
.)
:c;Cbe> cC,:ccc:~ C2cc:ece>blf) tcu::>oomw [:Je>46:2 uC2ccoe>ro ~bocc:ec

.:> o .> :..:! .:>o .> o ~ .:; e .> o .> .>
~:c0:C!o
'S' .) :&es :C2rot.uc.orees
.) O.) ccce>te
0
C2cce:oe>c0
.:> '1.
~b:oe> 0tc:tce>ble
.:> :_j
1 :crobcro~xee>
.) .)
tcc.owCbecro
.)
Cbcom&ro
.)
rC2cc:cPf)&:Mc.o::;~ccce>
.) .) .)
::>WW~WCO
.)0.) .)
WWCCOOC\:>CO('
.) .)
) IG~e
.)
b~~C
::J
::>teet; CCCe!CCO .)WC~e>~C0eJ
.) .)
Q , r o} rr1~o1 ,...,, 010 .
~gco cero5gro (");c.ooegto w5e~>:: g:;<(->~ 11 g;cc??F coLocco~
croe &ct;
0
rC2cc:de& :4rw::xcce>
. .) .) .)
rdnro
.)
0~
.)
r ~cce:coore
.) \
tcwCo
0'1.0
r::::cEOle>:croPe :C2ro:~wb r:~ch'Je>:ccoPe :::uCbe>cro ;~eG ccoe>f)oco !Go

.):::::1 .) .:>'-.:>:=::1 .) .) .) .) 'S'
c.o~eo~ r ec~ tXoCbtc
.j .) 0
r:~ch'Jd!cMewCbe>::>o
.).) :::::J :::::J,,
.) .) IC.OC0i;
.) 0 :de>ocob
.) '1.
Mccoee:oco
.) .) .)
:::teet;
.) .
c.o~e
.)
@~
.)
C ccce>e~b:>
\.)
oo:3e>~b1rob
0
0~][\~w c.o:~b
.) :..:~, 0 .) :..:~, .)
rC2cca:Q :Q& ct;k::>0 ~cc0~bPero 1CCcc . (b hlro) (;)le>46:2

.:> .>:::1 6.:1 o .:> .> .:>;j .:> .:> :..:lo ~ .:> e
.. , v
ucccccec.oco
.) 0 .)
b:cPM4~~w
0 .) :..:!.:>
:c@es
...J
tucG:~b rC2cc:tce>ble
0 .) .) :..:!
IS' S.LtiOdffii M.V1 VfN'llilH

S.D10d'3.1i M.Vl VW'Mlg
tt965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 353
c-c- r,:c- c- c- c- c- c- c- c-.
:>es~.
0 0 0
-qJ~U~ 0:>~ tJCOOC 0)2~CCOJCD ~G:D? O)bp:G9: 1Df1D~CI SJ'rf OObp:C)~
0 c- 0 c- 0 c- c- "('~ 0
'IDGCDCO?:~XDII C08;l(,).SO)ro:m GOOUG::D~I?ID? COffiG<.91 q I COO)m:
t:..:t .. J r -r t o u t. . L -t-
~~~'
oe- Q q;::c- c- c- c- .c: c- r,;:c- c- o
m<Xlc: ~:109ctjc:::ne;1 IDfiD::DID~ m~ID::D?9 t:'I1D::n2n~ooqnm91 C'
i<:
-~COI?CDCO?:::n
c- g
G::n:mGOI"('mec- c- c-
OOCOCCI?:
0
Go:>QCO?: c:::D:-111
c- c- g
C' 2~co?6o
lJ Jl A ~ Jl }I 6 Jl C.:. J f.:C' OC' '
c- c-
ooc- r,;:c- !;r,:c- c- c- o <:- c- 'l" ~f~~CC!f
'my::D2<Jt gc;q'tc::D[j~l 2JitJCOOC~GCijl?ro~?ot COO)~O)')f <pmGOI
c- . ] c- c-
Q)C m 8d(o),&C 00)0)0)0)(,)1 GO"XCO'):G::D') ID(o),&C
c- 0 c- c- ~1(,)0)
c- CO?:G:D? c- c-
10$(8)
~ C:J JlJ o JJ oo, Jl JLJ o UJ
0 0 c- c,!; . c- c- 0 c- c- 0 c- c-
<CQcq U0:><.9JCD9J o:>bp:G::D ~o:>GID9f mgt ~J'rm~ro::n211
::>.,~ e
.)0
Sl.~Odffil M V1 VW'dOS:
1965] BUR,MA LAW REPORTS 355
OJ
~ 11 qc:::n
(" e (:0 <" C" C"
ro,:;ro:et<~~~cro::n:
J\:.J
C" C'O \
~OJCc,KY.)CQG.S~::n
oUT
c r C'

0 C"OC" C"
4>ro<~c:ocro?
1J
m mOJ
1 \.
c:::J
~ \ 0
oeli~
~C" <"CC'C<" C" C" r;;:c- (" or,;:c~ C C: r;;:C' C'O
t:j'~>'ffiJ!llottJCij:l<!>OJ~(J)L q[O!Xjc,i~OJ?Cj00J~ II ~t:14>SJ G9:1?(1)~l<:"l ~lt:I<Xl~Jffi~
r,<;> C'
(' C" (' (' (' ,=-- (" r,: (' ~~IC
oc G~m<sm'l;>~GB?c:~dc 11 c-'
~c
C' J ~
0 C' Q C' C' C' ~GOO~

:33~~o:>~:~83~mll 112:G(J?CG'J?COlC II f'~-:>c!J
C' 'T'~ C' ( 0 )
:33~G00q'8G83~mll IIG81 Bo:>y:~ ::G~:')G~Gf II
o C' C' o 'T'f.<? C' 'T' C' r,: c- r,:ro

f!8GI.l?CGC:l?CII II::GC)(Qaxp:cq G81 eiG::GGUI cr~l GB?c:B~I OS(J
r,: C'
moo:cr,m:::oJm:rol
!i.. -T ltLJ
m!!o)O)OS(J
T t.
CG C' C'
~j
\ -
(
J) C'
mc::r.>miJ
~
:.:ocG::D') lJ
lh.

lO<!:'(J~cur.;(J>
Ji.J.:!l
C' C' C'
C' . C' C' C' C' 0 C' C' 0 C'

001) <X.'C::GO)Il:OCG::O? (.j({)(J~({)9U0J <TJIJl:lUS::D::D<J,GO:JI>jODI UC~ '<0101
\ ~ u u ll J L t,; I b. T c l ~ J cJ Jl
C' C' C" C' C' C' 0 C" 0 C' C' C'
f.DOXD m::XXDO:>XI.S:GOO?::;san~C 80::<D~CO)O)(.l) if;(J(JI?:8J<Y.JrJ)I SdUlO
~ . OJT J ... l. J . JL tJ .:. , 1.
C' (' C' C' C'Q (' 0 C' (' C' C' 0 ''I<'
.
(J:~CGCOJC 0(1jj
J t't
0\.
~<DQXPIQGOO.Sl
J lJ IT .
COGCO?COC1l\~4:>904:>C>;i:OJ
L J \. l
O)GOic:.
C' o (- OC' C' C'
m~:mJ~~~t<j.pro~~~J'tO?<Xmo:>211
'T'fRC' C' ., C' fR C' OC' 00('~ C' C' r::;C' C' OC''
G31 !Ji.C::O~ O!:Q(J)(;)[K~C Sd(Jo:>::q:CJtqC9JI G::G?OJOOUO:>tj(J:iff<X[C
OJ')I SdGO! o::oa,.c
"'' c C'
GS'd')()')O) G:OXDI
C' <' o o oo
OXD :.!i\C
c-
(J8';l:ClC~OJO)::r;l':):;
c o ,
J o L l. lL-1. J '-' l. Jl L rt,. l.
") (' C' r.: C' C' C' C' C' C' C'Q 0 ("
8d9 1:~JCO');~~II !DOlJC:i9{J.X,~G~tfOJOJI (J~:~co:>~ GS'd'JOJOO<.J(J~~C
C' ~ C'\[<3:G.s?ml
C'
OJo:>?:mc:ro:m:::n~
L Go
C' C' 0 OC' C' C' C' C'
OJGCD!C(.))(;)J?!ro 8J(J~C<.lro(J:G<T.',<,HGO:j?C::
T " L J<o) J u
C' . ~ (' ~ ~ .~ 'ilL:C' C' C' C'f~~C'~
C!f.C G')~:,:~ul:Go:::))e::; II o:>~:!De:l: ~JlOlJtr:1S<T.-I Gmpc:~?:9fX.~~tiC9)
OC' C' C' C' C' 0 .~ f,O C' OC'I7:C'O o C"
871(J~OJJf'J~::D~II OJGro:<.lp:~ G9:;,UL:GU:t:j:Gpro 8d<Jtlf~'JI <J~:~c
C' 0 ~ .'il r,: c C' 17:C' 'l c C' C' 0 C'
OJG~pc:~~?:SJ G9<;:ul:tlf:D~II tlfCD?G~Jro~l ~OJo:>'J:OJc:~:::ne:
G 0 'T' <:' 0 C' 0 ~ Q .'il 'iJL:C 0 'l'j;<? C' C'
<J:<.yGor q<><J5)1 ~JCX>?:::l:>~~G\',?9)' ~:Oldlouli:I~Oi.G(J~'P ' G!:lt Blcm me:
0 0 ~ C' C' 0 r,: C' 0 C' r,::::: C' r C' Q r;-:r :7 C'
rq:Oi.~ G::J.J:~OlJ00.?:~2rq r:1C9_~G~?C!/9~ ~:OJByGC:J?::D21l
' 'T'(O C'
GSt IYIC.li:C <.l8'd:Qc0)0':>1
C' C' 0 C'
G:xJC(JO)CCIG.Stmo:>::n ~4:>1:\
C"O r,::::: C'~~C'~ 0 0 c;' 0 0
roxmc:Sd:moc~
C9j
!.::1 J .. t. J1 ct.:, o o j! TLJ CW ,:1 1. L l L
C'' o C' C' <:: G . oo C' C' C'C J
.G~(Je::;ro?:;;qro? I (J~:5JC OJ <JC :~o:>G:~'timo:>~ II ::GOO-f ~?G~')8d~.f
1:mro?:.
~ &~
.C' C' 0 C' <: C' ('~C'Q C' . g 0 .
Q Q cGOJI?c:::ncom~)'J:QlJ
<.l::r.>:QcOJ o:>'):G<.l')C co:a,.<.: ~=~
o :.f f'j,. ~
L ,;, 0 .:.:!1 o(., J o ot,
. C' C'
~C:o:>O.s:ro.s'<OOO::DGU:OJ? I
C'Q C" C' c C"
. ()') ::D?:UX: :~CGOJ1:o:>;>:>
(''
II
123 0 0 C' p
~ ~::n<.~:CO)()')
0
T .T (.!, . Jo u.l "-* (.ol L
C' C' C' . C' C'f,"; C" g ~ f,~
ro~: <.l~:~cm CO'dc:~..GU:::02?,11 G(J?C ~~e:m m<.lp:~:~?=9J r <.lt:JI:ro
C' C' 0 C' C' . C' C'f,~ C'
o:>c:;sx-~oroxtm') m.p2?,:coo:xoa:o:::ne:: 11 o:>G~:Gp:4:>'):G:x>')mti:G.p?m~
C' C' o PC' o ~ C' o . C' C'
mr.sa:xx;:(JL?:m
tit- ;J L
OO(JG<:lo:>::n'J:
G.:il rt,. b
GQ:OJGro:mGOJ?CrrJGror:<cJ
6 . . l AJ l
c;c:~:oxn
, 4 C:...
ro r,::::: <.~ C' ") C' r,: c g g c- ~ c: c: C'rC'r,'? C'
4:>'J:jg:(Je:J 'Y~oc i o!:OO'J:3dt:21o0p:m101!la;!:x>9J moo~cccc [91Qtj:Gf??J GO>
d>?::xJ::nll
C' C'rc-o C'
G(;)?C!~C~:~
[ .o
(JlOI:o:>o:>o:> (Jj'):G
C' G. g
')~OC
c- 0)0)
. C'OJc-Cl OOQ')O.SE'
.u C..:. """"' vu J ~ t:.ll ~!. :........., "' J o L T
SLt!Odtrn Jv.\V1 VWtlOH 9Sf:
LS' S~1!0dffil M V1 VmDS:
358 BURMA LAW. REPORTS
6St S.DIOdffii 1\AV1 VJArnflH
09
:362 BURMA LAW REPORT S .[1965
5etSj 0? 1 .S00~~C
ee o
e G<.>:>::::ere<O> ' cc r
!C-.lC2:G~OO:~::~ c:t G~:{:l i"J:G:x>OO:~-Ql~C:.I <.>tul:
' '
()I L lJ "
L ... 0>..,
TT A t.l :. ;8 lJ
oc ere o e c c- e ~,o o rc-oc-
f)? c 3droo::DC!;";lC:ro:x>=nt
c. s;)CI)')mc <J::t~.j)CC:Yt GCOO U:~l?: QG.SYYI?; !~CD.'ftC
Jl T ;1. u - l
..
.p l. -L- .. Jl Jl T-. L il
w~lc
C"
:;c X-Gro?:J:l::D;l)
C' :D.."I,.S? roro;x;:t 0 C" "'C"
G8f:J.JO)?
C"
Gi:f?C G~:>CroO).'ftC
C"OC'c- ~
G10"'~~8
d. ~ r I. - J.. "
~oo,'l C" 0
Of~gn:
~ eA;
t:(t.OOC~G~:r:lf:~::D2?,11
~C"' C' ') C"
GSimO)?
C" C" 0 C'
GG?~G~DC<T.>0)(1)1 rr.l0?
r;:c- oc
of~?iCCD ~ e
~::O~OC:
c:1
(' GIDOIO:Yp: Oc'c:o-;G
(' (J:l?CI('
')0 0 0 0
CC-!:n~?IT./0'):GX? o:x.l(J:~:n l
e
cetJI l: L ;... ...._ .. l l ll c C.:,
e-re- o.;- ere ~ . cc-oc-'l c o c- e c- cc-
rr.ll>?GO)?:J.l\3C.:t !)')OO:>:x>qsc:YJL: t:J01COI::U2?,11 ~'Pqc I ~O?~J2;Gj9CD
' q;::c J:::C' r,;:c '!':'") C' ( ) OC'
G:x>:OJI Grr.l~!)')ftjc: G03f>':lO>CD:>:G0tjC: i90G0! O:<df:;ll \Endrm 3?nco
c-r c o~~ c- c "l c - c- c ~ "'o
OJC!;";lC:Y?Ym?:t 0 ' .SOO.SCD':> GO!J~')QQOI:x>;l) II rr.i0?Y::D'i!~C:~tiGC">(} IO f
..a ., L l T To -~ "--" . . J, ~ -r t.
r,::;:
c- r,;: c r r. .Cil c- "l c' c- c-,-. c- e ( ) "e "l c o
Yp:Gtj:>~ tJID9!_9c:YJL:f:1~"eroo~~x-n:x>o~et=-1Jc Endrm moooGrro~
(' C' ~ -~ (" C' (' ~ e G0")CC'C"Q C' <;:
GO?:::!Y:"l.1~())0JO,()) CX:C C-lCQI0JGl)g~:nll (J)tfQ:J;;? C:1~CG;;):YI?gll
Ob. I C.:, L \ .:J U C 6J1 Jl~ cC. J o 0 1.J
roco::o;:n
c- o c o <' o o
sJo mcoromoc:mm
El c c c- r . ~c:. Q c c- ..-- c-
C00G~:ma-JCc;c:l Gru1:e1: ro:li!C())c:lmc:
1~ \-!. l L &. -r 0 , '-J J u L......O
c c o c c- c ( ) oc-
mc:mJtYJJ:rq OOGOO:Gpqcc;c: Chlormated Hydrocarbon 8Jroo
'l (' '1
-GIO)OI~2CJ{
(' 0 'l
GIOfGti30ym
C' :>r,~ 1: c C'
G9S)t:J:(9CD:x>t<j~l
r.: ('
::X:?Yf3?CO':> ~:x>~~C:'J.>
(' (' "
')0 -~ ~ (" 0 (" (' (' (' C'.

.Gq)()!O:YCDC
L l
~coqG~'J
t
O'.X'Y:.J)O)::D;:DY:>
Q,) ~ ~ J
OOCC:)::x;:no:,~:>
Jf C.:.. L
roro:XoGO
-~
('
-0~11
') (" (' ~(' C' C"~C' _C:. -~(" C' ("
. Ql~ti~Ofo:>roc:t G3 roo:>? GY?CGY?COJCD~ . CCCt::jC~JmYp:;q
(I o r,::;: c ~ o c '~'L~ c- c:. o ~ c-
roo:x:;n?ro2=9~Gtj?c: GtJ':>~~t??,ll Gnt e3!Ce'' Of:;~G~Gfe:J: GY?C
C"C" (' ')C" C" C"OC"O C'C' '1 eo C"C'
G(:I':>COIC:x>~l G~tmro? GY?CGY?CO)O)ntG:x>?<J<?:I Gl~l'$3vfrq<>::C:><jC:
c- c- c c- o 'C c o'
.o:gro:;cc
1l .; AT IJ T OJO>C!JdGQ:rot
GY:~..s:~JI::GCJ:9s 0. -, l
s;;~:QIQJ<>!C:YO:X:OII
l tJ <oL....! -}] .
'~"IR c c c- ' c- o r,::;: c o A; r,;: r c-
GOt ~(Cffi Ot:rof~O".-G:ntl Ge1?COf:~roJm?~-?::x>t:Jql ffiJfG~-:>
("
())C;YI?:ro
0 (" (" 0 ("
::n.sooroo::qo;~x(J') G ?OO~G:x>:>ro:n:l COG
("
?C~?GG:x>l rr.l:l:>('7)
0' (' C' 0 6 C' ('
c l c
c-
IJ
cO
L ~T
-ccrolmQG:x>:O)~-xr;t cc:G
C
\. I
C"
L
C' ~ "l C' 0
':lCet'Grroom
C"
L
C C'
:::omGOJ~!rautl~4:>
J
C' 6
C"
roc:xc:oo:>:
J1
o:-:nm
C
t.:
c o
L
J. C-..._
. c- .
G0':'-"::0~11 G
s~ -~ C.:.
I
c- c- c-
?cm::nrogcrorrooc
J 0
l l
c- c o
cc;;::>:>:G
]J
c- o
:>c:m
L
o
o c- oc
mrocroc
L Jl
6
-(~ ri) roq6:t !)')?:~G:n~p:roc;~: ~oS~~2u G~:Yp:<o::>x;6:
0 C'
ffi~':liCOro:x>mg
4>J
C' C'~
1 ~QQ ') C'
.!s~DUiillY
lT J
roooo~m1:~
OC"
OJ
~ e C" C'
cc;roc:
Jl
C'
c:~(J)roG
L
6 ?c:m ~ 0
L
c- c ~ c
:oo'Pcr~~ro~. mt::~:>:xroG:x>GJ-:>:m ~ro~tj:Den
c- or,:;: c .
1 .~J
"i:i
6
=
0 e . 'I'~ C" 0 C' OC' OC" C 0 C 0 \ 0 C' C'

:>ct GS t ICOOWO?C m::coQ ~'J.I.?:ro roc:::r.;:oo~ GCD':lC:!'Xn)

OOG
L l L 1 w ... L . t -~L --a
c o c- G c- o C' C' C C' c ~0
O)')G~:x>:l:>('))
A C..:. L
I CCl::l:>O);>:roGOO':>('pY
-1 ll ._,
I 0QG
JJ Jl
:x>?ro:n:l
C
ffi iqCDSJCJ.IO)!Jd'):ro:ro
.~ U l L
"'=~A; c e . 'l'roc c c c- o , .o or: C'\ ~ e
GO'C::cr._9J02:~?:rop G8 1 t:JIC::D~~m::OJC ())C:~:OCO?L SJ~OO~Gt.~:('C:I
-o ' c
=~oo::u:nu:>:uc:oc~e
' 'r~'
ro:n~~0~(9ii.'G:x>?::oc:' G3' ' ' '""rR '
t11cm o~ c-
rn:,:(\1:('1t::Jc:
.qm:nCII
C' '
!Ll~Jc:elt>~2t
C' c.c C' 8<"
S'.>OJfG::O?mm qc~S~O(c
C' C' C' 0
5JGr:x>~;.;_qG~? 1
' 0
c o c c o c o c c c
G c~ ~ o
0)(1)GO) j 2:otroe:;: ro:::tlo:>~ll q(q>q::: Of::DroG::D j 2:ro1 ~~;~:;0:>2:: oe~j
c ~<: G o c o r.::c- c c c~ o c 1m c 1m c
<l:::~o:>~:ot' ill::::~:<J.i:tj:::rsomo:>ro91 'iJroGe:1:>:::: e:1:>~9o:>2::<Jto:>:> tt> C'
~~[C
c c ooc6 c "~"foe<: c c o c c c G o c o
o:>?~.sroro;;o~:;
T .) t. t
0)~}11 G81 ~CellnJQ.S&~C ~nd&Q:;()):;;Q)!mco ~:OQ~&ro
c Jt T J 0 l jJ -L- l I ~l (J--- &8
{;: CJ C'
C C" c~ cr,;: C' C C G G 0 C'
~')(\)~:1 nd~WOO~ 0:;9J9::D~tlq:>'f>J CJC:o:>roG::D j e:~ro-:>~1 ~<.JtO) fj~(X)'JC~
~C' 0('
0 0 C C' 'l"f,<? C" C" C' A; OC' C ~ ~ OC' l:Jf~':>~CC II
1)Gy~rooz:::J G81 t::JlC::D~ GQm~-:>:Gq>ro9J ro;;ou~QU0(?9J ~Gti')~CGOII
(' '"l 6 C"
nd(l)O)()J nJG -:>:;&8:,lQ10)8:,l')g(\);O) GOO?:'))QIC(\)JCI G81 jCcrdGOI me
tJ L L ;J o JJ .. Q
(' 0 0 (' (' (' "~"'@ C" "(" C'
r.c c o c C' c oc c
lUq:>~OOCQ?; GO)Q(l)')g c;O)~')J O)O)GO:>Q::;(\)0)
c c '1 c
:; ~.SO).SOI::D:-D())J o
0:-D')CI
lJ JL Jl t.JI C L t. c. JT T ~ L ~ ]
0 ~ "("~ C" . ('~ ('
m~9G~Gft:j; G81 t::J:-Df:~ro ro:::t1::D2:; II
C"~C' (' 0 C"O c (' ~ 0 (' C" Sl .<il(;:C"
~Jrot::Jc::DroG::nJ qro11ro o:>roGo:>o;;>9J ~~G::n-:>roe:;:J QdlQtlll:J~rol
G8"~"'@
t lc::n~') (' (' 0 0 0('~
~roo~o:>: m:::m:roro:::a
(' (' G~G.s:::n::nroGo:>
c 0 ''
c 0 C' 0
~c:1 (l)()):;;ro:~
l:..:t L U. L tt:"l .AT C.:,t.t. L LJ
C" 0 1m (' C" C' 1m
()):;;gp;rq 0-:>&t:jGO)'J roGro:<Jp:rs G~:gp;o:>~l (\)O)O)G(\)'J G::DGe:i
C"G r.::C' C o r.::c- 'l"f,<? C" C' o C.<: C C C' 0
OJro~:l:j:::l m~cpono8pQo-:>:9tj::::l G81. t::Jlc::n2:: ~rr.t=~::~ m::::o.y:ro.y<J:{
c cc c c o c ccc G oc ' c o o o '"l '~
x.su~ Q;;&l o.s:ro.sroro::ovJqc:J g;;og;;oco:>~::: GQ:ro o:rom:>oJilloca
6T T l l .A 0 t:J L J 0 6 l l ;'J
C' ~r.::c '"l C" m
r.::c C' 0 C' C" <:~C 0
11:::t1tj::::1 Cl'f-:>:t!<Jt22:2::1ll:j:::: 0o:>~~o:>2:;1 cy:;:~tlo~ot rooo:::ro'il-:>:
C"
J.
"~"' c rc- C" c c C' C' C' c

G<JI GO)? ::nmto::DQ<Jj-:>&i~IOGOOXDII O)Q.;O) ~nJ;QC~:;ro:n:J <,>O):;<JO)C
~ W C:. LJJJo C.:. o o
o 'lm r,;:c o c r,;:c c c o coc c 'l"f,<? c c !:; ' o
~Gf~t:jo:>r:J~I cxp<lQJC:l:J~::DGGt<JtC Oro'i):;;o:;ro-:>1 GSI r:JLC::D2:; 2JJCJ?q(
~c cr.::c r,;:c c ~ C'r,;:c- c o
t1o~roJ !l:~.yl:jc: tlo::ne:;<>jt9J::D? ~~~~tloGoo:>e:;u <>2-:>'il ro~:
mco:::n
T IL 3:::n::n! C";r '
t:...:. c:::mGo
l
C" 0 ('
o~GQ")QCO:;)J
Ji.. oJI_L_e.J
C"
m:::m:
!L
6 ow AI
C"C" 0
c:<JoG::n-:>
Jl
('
roo:>oo
1L
0
Gro::n-:>
(' C'
ro'll:ro.so:>~')~J
C'
o:>ro::nrom:>:n:>
(' C" 0
q:>~;o'):oq:
mQGo::n:n
C"\
u
(' 0
rot.
J\. l U ~T C t U Cl. t:, l o c..:,
r.: C' C" 0 C' C" (' (' (' 1m C' ~C"
~:eroQJO)~ 0CG'f'~OY.jo_:>9r nJGt:j? ~;~!:!:::GO II.
o
ro;;
'~L
6 -:>.::Ic crdW;;>O)ro;ro
o G:JI
iL T l
"~"'@!CndGOI
C'
"
c
"'"ffiCI
.u
c c o c
IO<J~I[)~ro O)ljl:ro.sG
Jt.J JL .. l U. oT
6 :>c;
. <:'
C"
co::;Q:>:G<r.Qro?: c:~-::
G
0 C" . C"
q::
(' ..
('
10'=?~1-:>:romro
C' C"
QU<J())O)?;G::n?
('. ('
:!Ks(])~l?:
6 J1 u
Jl J
6 lJ
0 .Jt.. 6 J

0 . '
0 C" (' C" ' (' C" 0 C" 0 (' 0 (' C"
cq"'
.~ro.:G :>c:C\Xl.s
. -- ~~ T
ro~ :>.:::::~o.:o:> c1 mO?c,;ro
Ji o. h. L
orooccroo:>:nn
. l l:.:,
364. BURMA LAW REPORTS
cr,: c c
'Pe-o ooC1croc~
t ~e'~ G(:}')c';;w?;~c' (t~t 9 fGcD~ ')<JSCX)')~Ojl)

('
~c
e~co J\> J 0
c-
'ICDII
(Private person) ~Gf{.
r.::c c-
~:t~OO:;lJmll
0 <: J:::<: ~
1194~:9m c:cqpmc.o-:>:0c:<:~01_G:-:>a:>2:1
<: c' c- <> (
.949o:-:>:co2:
Pr1vate
person) 84Gf~~~ C.O'J?I~84Gol C.O'J?:~:m "'J~crlro-:>:c:::u-:> Sacii~ ~:(i~c:o:'lt
, C' OC' C'
G"1]xr.>c.o-:>:~c::ur:n
roeoo5mr6c:O:
~r IJ e L
:JOGSO~<:~
C,- L
c:Ja
I\" v
cod
_,
lt\c-:>E:c.o-:>:G:?
T U~
" or which otherwise-
. 0 "'...f t: C'~C' C'
comes to 1ts knowledge" Of~G:-:>om-:>::c 84":?fo:>JmtJt::D211
C' c cr::;;:: C' C' C" r<" OC' Q C" o C' ('
G<:I':>COL ljq G<:I':>Ct:;ICGI.>?C oe~~ ~~4> I ~f<:I')~C<O'jC<:q:l <T.>'J?I'20JGo:>?. JO?II
(' c (' (' C" (' C' C' C' 0 0
~tm"'l~'lof tq 'P~.>"mla<'?,: c;o 'J?C'Oc.o2ooaoJ?fm 1 4>':><:1Jmt-:> 'le-? ~CT.t
C' c ('"
92i?lf:::ueu
0 (' oc
nmo:;ooc
l L
n
.'
S66 BURMA LAW REP.ORTS
<Jt *:::o:>~ro:>:o:>~l ro~fXJoS~:::o~' gJl3d:;t~~:u1o~o:>~U[ ~~g

c
GOO~ II
GCJ'Jg~ ,{ G~:>a~G:J'Jg _s(0) ~9 8c4:Di8-

" rnere iS nothing in the Criminal Procedure Code which
either expressly or impliedly prevents the High Court from
enhancing a sentence at the instance of a private person."
~ r,: c r,:-c r,: c oc c c o c

01(~ ~!t:JCX>CO')!:::OJ9<:;1 tjf~')~CC GCX>'J9fG'j!8d~!9(1)1 GCO~:>rocm:~~
roGoT, QI~:J3m:>:G:u:>mkl~8~~~
iJJ L:J L
o3:r,:t~GO:(;''r~
L. l:5Jo~
Grol:>chcm:f~8:~r,:
f JJ t;j Dt
c c c c cr,<? c c c r,: c c
G:::O:>roc::~l <ftlf'J~ G~')~QJt>IJLC\1)1 ro900J')g())GtD:>mroGft:JSI G'X>_J:>m
oc c . c
(X)')!~C:::O~<.J? ~009G0~2:! II
. c ~ 0 . ~ . ~ . c c ~ - c
. G::OJJ:DOO:>:~ o~:>1JG~Gfe.:l:ro_l g)j'JJ~~~ 8CU)'P99J f~fJ~~:>I
c c cr,ocr,: c c c c o c c c o
GCOJ-:>:1.):::0')!~ G~:>::;QJ~l'itCt:J~GOJ')C\)C!I CjC!Sd')! ~()),()):::022<Jt9G:::0')
oG CO co COC(,'~r,:c~ - ~ c C
ill'P!Q e:~G~')'11 G8d:>ro1)!()) oxp:Go:>~CX>~:Ut:J!tl~9JI g)j8d~~C G~')C
oc c o c c h c r,: o c r;:;::: c c ' cr,: c
~!G~:>:;<"q())~'): GC\J~XDOO'J:tjc:~D(~CGt~j':>C!J Groproa:>O"JCt:JX~II
.(" (" (" (" c . (" ( ) t.) c 0 c

~;sm:>'l1t~tlf t<:; <ipeJ:>msoa: j . ~c<X?:qc-
" In most cases the High Court should refuse to entertain

an application for enhancement of sentence from a private
complainant where Government has not seen fit to move.
But there is no absolute rule, and in a case where there is
manifestly a ground for interference beyond all reasonable
doubt, it matters not whether the case comes before the High
Court of its own motion or at the instance. of a private
prosecutor or through any other channel whatever, and the
High Court will interfere. The High Court does n6t regard
. the question of enhancement only from the point of view of
public interest but from the circumstances of the particular
case before it.'' .
toQcct;~:ot:la.:cO::~lu
.?;:j 0 ;;:::1;;
ox~::>~

tc.l-,CCcc:oooRro
.)
to~:lkec.w~
.)~
:cedcbe:coococ.fro~
t.)o~a;lf7.
.)
tba.:c.r~ .
coPeecce>a.:cc
.) ..) .),L o.) 'S'-' teooG::x-Xi-<2~
.) .:J .) 0 .)
11 CCcc.::>~:::a:tc2cc:c.~ IC.CCW
.) .)...J.) .) 0
G::>c.ooe>
.) .)
eQCCfle.G tcc:o~~
.)::3.) '\
h:<Jihle.(;wcocoo~
0 .)~ .) .)
c.cc~:ro~~ tlbeQtt
. 0'~ ~.);:j
.)~oo:llrcd~ehl flc:;Jwfl5o .)C2cc&-be:cooa.:crcc~

.)~ .)cr.:::J .) t:~occo:ikoc.e.c~
.) . .) tohloo
.)~0
11 C2cco~~.dcooc:J:ot:lcci,Pe~fle.c t:hl:ce:2e::::&:~ooco:~a.;ce.n~ 1oc.e.c~
.) .) .) ::1 .) :::b .) o ej .) .) .) .) .)

eooQ:ot:l~coXc: tcc<PooQ~~cc~~ccfl
;;;:j;;:::b ;; '\ ;;;:j;; ;;
&woo
o '\ o
~a.:cca:re :2co~~:2co
~;; ;; e ;; e
&:ob t~ooxx:owd~ ~~11J:oc.~oo:: h:cccc~~t;:x.c~~ccfl :2--...o~~2co
o ;; ;; ;; ;; :5 ~;; ~ o ;; o;; .) e ;; e
oocooeco
.) .)
C2cc&ocfl~:~oc.fl~
.) 0 .) .)0 .)
o~tcbe:c.roa.;c.Fro~
.) .)
tccco&
.) 0
ucccc
.)
b&:,~ 0w@cc<PQ:ot:lco~co&
.) .) ::1 ;;:::b .) 0 tiba.:Cb~:ctc
~.)
tcCbRcto:OtO~
0 00 (., ,)I,.
~~::>Ct;~;OCC
.) .) .)0
oc.~~
.)
cccc&be:coowc.Froe>tbw:c.PflCbro:oc.~~w
.) .) .) ~
wrow(i)S:ed~e.clf7.
.) .)....J 'S'-'
II 2floe>bce&
.)
encccc:~t;:;ccca.:cc~b:ro
.) .) .) .)
tc?:,cccccoMe~oe.G
.) .) .)0
t~bee>occee>
.) .)
:o~ oPco
.)
oC bewc
.)
Moococco~::>toco:o~:~
.) .) .) .)0 .)
1 toe>e.ckbe:cccwc.Fcv~
..I.. .)
w:~coc.ece>
. .) .) .) c.cc~wc.roelfllln
ta.:tcro:cPC'lcbwc .) s ll C2oo~bb::
.) 0
enC2cc:c~
.)
ocoo~ to~c.~:oc.we> t:oc~ooc:J:ci'flcbwcc.cce~oo:ohl t~blcc:1ito:~ro

.) .) ""' .) .) ~ .)::3 .) .) .)~ .)...J ~ 0
@cc&
.) 0
G.)o~c coE:,e.ccbwct~~wPe
.) .) ~0.:>
C :otoe>Cbwc
.;>(., .:>
o:c~wco~~~c<Xct
.;> ..> o;;,_,.)
:Xo
.;>
Joe>cnto~c.<=~e>H~ccocfle>
..I.. .) 0 .) .) 0 .)
bwcoPeeooro
.) .)
(tJ.hlro)
~0
oeco~c.~e>
.) .)
~odxe
.)
If re~cccl:e~cccc:o&i:c~
0 ..) .)
tc?:,<i!cc:o~ehlw
..) .) ._)
Ibee crc
flch:~cocc.o>cb
.) ~.)
t:c.ro:obw:&coc.we>
;; o .J
~ .3~Qcc~o?rXl0
;:j ~;;o~
:oEltea.:oo
.) ...Jo .J
t::>c.roe>
.)
coc.roe>::>~ceib
.) .)() :oc.c:;:Je>J.Cle~:ol:l
..) ~ ~ ;;:::bw~w~~5l<:d.ottc.ro'.)c.fle>:~:;.c.~e>
.) 0.)::3;; .) .) 0.)
C2cc:ob
.) .)
co&cc~cocc
(J ..)
c.cc~:ce~hl .) ~.)
oco:ob.)
tohl~ccb::oe>tWCCcclk@wc.C'.Je>N
.)~.) 0 ..) 0 .)
coPe
.)
ecce>eocc
o .J
c.cce>ecoo:n~
.)
:oc..Wl e>eo.fco&p~coto
.) ~ .:> .:> o.... .:>
:c.~ (1-hlh;)
:.Jo
::::c.~e:t'll~
.) .)0
-:::J ,. '- - rr n or '" v 11.
oc.fl~ a:;ccc'coo:croa.:c.l~~~ uecr:a:;ccc.C\)(XieJt)cocc CO(C(?(r,:,;)a: cw~
..) .) . .) (., .) .) 0'\ .)
Hcc!-:chlxoroa;(.Fcc~ i:::>c.~~ocuP.-::ec.:.~cc
..) :.:1;; '\ .) .) :::::1 0 .) .>
c.ccex.oc.cc~ro
;;
t4b:ooohl.:;:;
;; ;;~
tbe.B. crcf>~ocoo2:EOlcocc.o>cbJ:ced<.be:c..co
;; e:J.3
c.oc.Fro~
.) w:~~~\5~\kC?.oli!l:~b
e:::J 0 :> .)
t:oroen~cc!;~e:c.ooa.:dS.~~
.)0 .) 0..) .)
I'G:21ttoe
~.) .)
i:>~corecoc:J:Ce:c.l~ooo ~@hlc.cce>:c.oocoMe tJn~w:ob cr!ccoecrw~oc.fle>

.) .) .) :.1 . .) .J:.:I .) ""' .) .) .) .) .>
( ...1..1e ~) .)omcbAw
e
&be:c.oococlto~,lGwcccooo-kc.uPehl:oc.
.:> 'S.3 .) .:>;; :..:1.) ~ h.l~wcocoh
o
CCf>O~bre~
11. .) CnCCCC~~:w:2eewro
.) .)0 .) ~.)
Ibro tJdb f>Gt.COOC
.j.
:ro~ra.:coo.&>Cb
0 .) .)
~ lf'X
tco:;'S'-' to\)lcc:coococ..Froe>~co<:b~c.ro
.) ..J ..) ~.)
1coo1!Jefeocee>
.) oh .>
c.cc~~bd,....vc
0 .)
l9 S~'tlOdffil M V1 VW'tl09
oro:furocoe.cro~
rdcoec.a:co ~Pe:ro~e.c 1o00 0 :~ccec.to~:~[!; 1Xc
b .:>!:>
.:> .:> .;). 0 .:>
0 .:> .:>Q '.:> .:> .:>
:6Jcocoesro~
.:> o .:>
~~~
o
w:6J
o !
C coe.cro~
.:> o .:>
oro~lrePeQ~
.:> .;,IS ::::1
l5e~cod!:'>:c.w~Po
.:> . .:>
'
tero&iccl>~c.[!; lb~coobw:c.w~rod:ee.c rw~:lPfflm c.cc!:'>~~H:::okoc.<P~
L .:> 'S' o o.:> .:> ' !IJ' .:> 'S' L .:> '.:>0 .:>
be.c:::>cocc rolbJwcb!:'>O::xb~!:'>c.cc!:'>ceo:oe> ;ec.Pw!:'>ol:, oc ~~]gfc.roffl~d,....~
.:> .:> .:> o . . .:> .:> .:>.o oJ o o
~oc.ree~ocor&~:oc.coe~:*owcPw~~~croe~w ::,f oo~rfcoro4:cco<PPootid:>
'S'.:> .:> o O'J .:> .:> .:> oJ .:> .:> 1.. .:> .:> c .:>
IWtoocooc~e>
0 0 .:> .:>
Mco~oc~b rDreoooc~e>
.:> .:> .:> .:> .:>
e:cbco(ccc!:'>iC'I~:::>Q:C.rococibJ!:'>)
~ .:>::::1 .:> .
C2cc~~:4b::>oc~etc:crowclbJe~oroi='wlillu
.:> .:>o .:> .:> .:> .:> '.:>
u:4cccccc~:a
.:>o
:t:::!&:dsc:O
.e O,:j .
t ,
u~fl:o~ c~woow:ooooocnc.os
, , f .
ucccccswoow:ooo
,
ao:>t'l
'""] 1 , , , b ,.
.)OO.)eo .> .>OO.>e
r~:tr2~b k0to
~.., .., 0 tlC c.fwrflc.G
.)
c.co~cog,:chco
.:> .)
ukobGoo~c.fl~tl
.,) G e .)O .)~
IG~e
.>
cCtlc
110~
.,
bdd c.~c:.orflc.G
.>
CCO~co&:chco
.> .>
t:~obGOO~C.fl~Q
:J o .> o .l!.l 1oCtJc
11 flccJccc:.r:coo:jc.5 :sc.J~~ uo!i~JOS!?
~b:o~~Q
:J
cc:@os:flccfl
.>~'\.) .>o
WOCCfl4b:os:fiCC
.> .> 0 .JO
.~:ttce:flCC
~.> .)O
<oocc46:@o:::flcc
.) .:> .)
Ghfwc.coe
.JO .>:J .>
c.~cc wb:~es
o
.JW:cw<:i?cccoo
o .>
oc.ce~.,oco:c rfl:.>o
.>
II cd:ol'l: 1Pflwre:4c.'~hl &:!ccct'I:Oco
4cc ., B' ., .) J ..> :J
ecce~ p~~rosguo:> aq Hl:qs r~Cb:c.oo:jc3 ~l!o uo!l80sguo:> Ol <~Jql:!J t~cc

:cw&:!cccroocce~oco
.) .) .)
:dfl:4cc o&, (cc) t'IGO
.)0 .) .)
c~o2c:.oes:4ccll
.) .)0
11 .)alecor;J:k
. .) ::..
n
ncntr.eem=o
b: c.c:.omc.cc~co
,, uotls:>smroo Ol ~yq11t{
, ., t
cc fH>oc~ocweo:!l'cc
~ "'0 ~:) . -;,- . ~
.) .)0
.. (~be~:)Q~cooc.ocrro~46:)ce:)hl) :):)i-cf)4bl~8coo~@hl
..,. o .:>~ .:> .:> .:> .:>~ o.JO .:>~ .J .:> ~
~f.
69 S..DIOdffil M V1 VW~Hlg
coe.cco&> h>:dt'l:<!-cc Jco:cP~cccd;~ toe>:cco 1ol6e:c~ IGo~:oct'le>cc
.,) 0~ 0 .,)0 0~ .L ~ " ~~ ~ "
~c.oobe
~ ~
J:C2roccce>:ce:cc.o:C2cc:cc.u<DPo
., ~ e . ..> ~
IGcowe.c
~~
uC2ccoe>:2coe
~
~b@I=AI~
~ "~ .>- :=3.
.
-cf,@cckt.oe2ce:C.~o~:ocee> cc~c.oobt'l uee.c~cccrowcb~:cc.ooPo tfi:0hl
~ 0 .,) . . ~ ~ " ~ .,) l, ,) .,) ,) ~~~
@t'loro'JIJ W2<bes.~eG CCC:::>OeGOO t*bflb:ce:ecc:ec.oC.OCot'l t~hlcc~bfi:de
~ ~ ~ o " e " o ~ o e " ~ ~ ~ :3 ~ ~o .
~c0~:Xo:ero ,be.moc.occ C2cc~es~cbes:1PC'loco ,cb(bQoce:C.<b:C' ~ ' ~ ::::~~ ~
d ecce> .~Pero~cchlo.
0 ,) ..) -~,
c orowcl6e>I[Z
" ~ ~
11 @cco~~coecoo cceflwro
,) ..> '1.,) " ~
uhl:w:Cl<bor;;toce
e'J ~ ,::::~~
twtn:!k&eswcese>
0
o~:\!,rokc.x:.roe>
~ ~ 0. wwPee.ciC8
0 ~ ~ .) . .
11 C2ccfikx:orowcFroe>
,) ~.) " ~
IG&>
~
:och-loohl
~ ~~ ,)
C2ooo~<bo~
..> '1.~0~ :>
to:dt'l:*cc
o :>o
<.cce>:cc:o&!ro
"
:Xo:cPec.oe.cco&
~ ~ o .:>
t:Xocb*~S.&a
.J
:ero:be cccocw:oe>ob oc orcoe*fl:~:c.~ lf.!o~:oct'l~ tccobe w:c.co
.J e ~o " "~ o ~~ " " ~ o
1coPro10hl4-:t'l a.X!c:c.rococ.lfx>e> ICCC~COCOW II :och-le>Xct'l.}b@h-lffi
~ l.. ~e e " ~~ .) ~ :> " .J ~.
1ohlcco~coCot'l c~cchl t6>::>kalo :och-l~btoc\; ;c.oob w:cco If.!~
~~ ,)0,) .J ~.L o :> .J ~ ~ .J o ~e
orocbS.~
.,)
cccocw:oocPcoe>~
, ,o
oc f,~c.~
o1 o o tCb:c~H::~:oct'l~:oc.oro
'S'~ .J ~
1ccob~:c.w C2cc&:ccococ.lb:>~ tcoProto:cc.o H::hlb~ C2cciks~
" , o .J .J :> l.. 'S':.le e " ' o
:lroom w:h-l~d5~cC2o ~s-0:S.rooc.oo &::c.rowclb:>~ tc.~:C!:~e>
!!>' .J e.J o :> ~o ~ :> " e
II C2cc:c.rococ.Fco~ t4b:oocoP~oturnG<lihle.c o~coPeob<b:C.~oco'JW:J
" ..> ..:> ~ :> o " .J~ " :J ..> e ~ '':5'~
<.cc~Me:ll>coc.es~
.J 0~
to~e:s:ob
.L :>
t:hlo~oceohl
e'J.J .J
&:i!,I[Z JIG*hloMw~occcco
~~0 .~ 'S'.J~~
coc.m~c.o 4-<ll:*rooct'le> &:c.cocodroe> tohlccobloc.ro:::>t'l t:C2roc.cc~h-loo
~ :>0 ~ :> :> "~ ,)~~ :> ~ ~~
e&es oi:b~:~&.
. o e.J
:Cbc.ool!;co0
~ ~
t~c.rofflt'l
o1 o o !l'boMcoe>t'l
'S' ~
h.>~t'lroc.cc~co~Pe
o ~o ,
1oe>esto:ob
..;., 0 ..)
tc:dbcoc.cn:?>.
0 ,)
b l,o:ooe>es .JM4<ll:4rooc.t'l:">
,)0 ,)
i.bc.rococ.lb:>~
~l, ,) ~
II @cccob:>co~Pe*t'les*b<lid!o:t'lcc 0hlescc.o~c.c'Bccb:~e.c w:ccoCbro

:> ~ 0 ,) ,) ,)0
,)0 ~~ ,) 0 0 .J
oH~edco <bCO b crococro~o~:~"rrJoroe.c 1~:ooohles 1bes (r)~ t'lGb
..> " e " " " "~~ 'S' ":..:1 :>
cooCcoes:~cc
,) .JO
I:Cestn
0
C.O~OC.t'l~
,) ,)
tOce6)~0Cft~
,) .J
e:Cbc.o
o
oH<li:4rooC.t'l~
,) 0 ,) ,)
&; ~
:c.cococ.ib:>:?>
.)
*b<b:">ePCO<b~
,) ,)
c rnsoc.ro~M:t'lh-lob.Jro
:> ,) ~ ,) ~~
t!G:ooohle.c
'S' ~~ ,ba; (co)
(c) 2l t'lGbsooClcoadcc
,) ,) .)O
r:ces ,)<liCOOCt'l~
~
e:cbc.o
o
lco:h-l~:Cbc.oc.oooeb
6.j ,)
wcccbmcoco
.,) 0
t~c.~t'l
o1 0 0 tofi!cck(;:cbc.oO<O:l5
.,) .... 0 " .J
lb:ce:ecc r:c.e.ctococ.me>
~ e ,) 0 ,)
b
10:010~ ,)o~4<li:4rooce~
.t; ,)l, .JO,),)
&:crococ.lb:>~,)
:hi:C2ce:t'lce
e'J,) .)0
~!;&>d.o&
~0 00
c.cdo
0
dcCc .)04Pec.roto
o
1c.a:co
o
oc 4Pe:ro~ro::)to~
.JO jl..
t:c.cceoPco
'1..>
0 ~re:ro~:t>~
.)0 :>o
:4cc:t'l~ ,:Xo:b:>c.o~:c.Qes dco~c.a:co c ~Pe:ro~ mOO
~0 ,) ,) ,) 0 ,) :::1 ,) " 0 ,)0 ~
:~cc
~0
c
ec.b:>~:~~
\. ,) ,)
,:Xo:b:>c.occescoro
,) ~0 ,)
,;eca:co
,) 0
c.)0
~Pe:ro~ loCo
.)
C :4ccec.b:>~:~ ,)0 '1.~ :>
IOCo:roc.oc.oesmro
,) .JO,)
dcooca:co
,) 0
r 4Pe:ro~es
~0
loCo
,) b :4ccec.b:J~:t'l~
.)0 \. ~,)
S.DIOdtni MV1 VJ!'ruflH OL.

BURMA LAW REPORTS 371.
* ( &:be~cmcuclh>e>) :>em~~
0 .) .) .)
r
~!li'
.)
S~1IOdH1I MV1 VY'rnOH tLf:

~~ c c c ~ c 0 (' (' 0 Q ( ) Q C' C'

g}ll,jO))t')'<? WCOJf;:9J G~:>c~:<nf '<? <,~~:'] Cf 4)9C~:~c-
., It is not correct that as between a husband and wife .there

is no cause of action for partition of the joint property save
on divorce."
<>[~ :;q:~oo'J:~t 11
o c
qrG~') ~G~: 's
C CQ
c.~cnce:
(
:)
) G C'
4)9c~:~c-
C'
" During the subsistence of the marriage neither of the

spouses can obtain a partition of his or her share as against
the other spouse . . It should be noted, however,
that though the above-mentioned interests of either spouse
may be attache<.! or sold, there can be no right of partition
of the joint properties except on the death or divorce of the
other spouse."
u.)cccc<hl~berw:cc:cced:ooo
.>:J.> e e
Wc.ob<:rw~w ~:~cocece> :,~:&~
CiOOO.>O
o .) .) .> o~ o.)
cccc&cccc~ec
.) 0 .)
'G~wccoe>
~ .)
w:cPecb:oQ:::>cQe>ec~e.c
0 .>:::1.) ~
~cceb]l?-el
.) ,.....,-J.;,
.....,
ucc:ccccro '
.) .) 0
rn lL
~ ' , ' .., ~ ~ ~ ,, If o r !L n ~
coeJe,.eec
.) .>0
s-ooroo
.) .)
wex:sccce><:e@
0 0 '
Joe>ecec:ccococlro~
..L .)
::>lgs-C>WJOO"JO
.) .) .) .)
w~ees ccce>co~re:@xocw~ ~cQ:'):cPmocQe>ec IOhl16le><:oaJec
0 .) 0 .) 0.) .) ::::1 .) ~ l- :::l..L .)
. .)
cccccetnobloco:oc
.) tl.>
t:;"J~
.) ::::1
:,cc .>~bwccwoo>C:b~oo
.> .> .> .> .>
::>to~oce..JJ
.> .> 3':_j
w:I!,!G3
o~
~hlcc"].CI:oCJobCP:cee>0CP
.>:1 :_j.,::::b e .>
I! o 1 I_ _ ~ il~.. 1 T 1 -~
tcccoccs.x:ec
' o
oe~::>oo:ce~ b(()OJwcew:owcese> weecccc~::>lg , e
.> .>O.> e .> .> .> .> o .>o
:::> ceCPccco ~.)co:cececn
1 Vlo 1
.) 0 ' 0 0
1 11
:::>c )~::>lg
1 ~
.)0
e :::>
0
ce<: 10weec
1 '7
.) 0 ' .)
1r ~!'=>
w r:ceccoco
1 11
0
:ccowc!toe> cccc&be:ccowclto~tbro:toobCP (c) :(bco(') M :&e(')
.> .> o .> o .> e e.> .>
uccccoreoox.ocltoe> :oct:;"J~o~wccw~cbe>oo
.) ~ \ .)
w:MTI
.)
~hlcc"].Ci
~ .>:I :_j
.)0.) .) .) .)
.o, '--
1r 1-.r ~ n
.> ~ .> e
L _ il
:::> ::>OG:ce~tcccocooce.c oeoo::>D@:ce~<nG ween
.> ' o .> .>O.> e .> o
w:ococec~ I O~JCC
.> ,.....,
::>lg, ~ ft :o1ceCP:wco
v J~ -- IO~escc:ccowclro~
11 If bec:co::>
1 b(j) 10~ 16l~ Wfles
~ ; ~= w
.>o .> o \ ..L .> .> e L ..L o
ccccoecnft(')
.) .) .)
&be:ccowcltoe~
.)
w:Q~~~~
e_j
n:>&:ccowclto~
::> .)
fGhloco
~:_j.)
II ::>eCOI'll')
, :J
t
:)~
rococlto~
\ .>
:ocQ~~ft4be(()OJ
.> :::::1 .> .> .>
tu~::>ce:iiJI(i3
o .> .>.:..J~
rbeC:~obo
.> e
(r) ::>1e4co
.>oo.>
:J
S L0 M .>ob:~ccft
.> .>
w:t:;J~~~~
e:J IX.@o
o
~:>::xo:~&>ocft~
Y.> .> .>
&:ccowdEo~
.>
: :J::>ro::J~&,.)OCI')~
ucccco~eph! ~bc~a.X:o ,:,b1cc(l)hl:ooob< ccc~
.> .>:1 .> .> o .>.:..J .>~ o .> e
C~t>c :ccoob:>"].CI fGo~:~ WCP:::>CW~CCC~oto"].CI:CCG~ :toobCP~tu4b c~:OO:::>bCP
.> :_j ~.>::::le:l e.> .> :_j, ' .>e.> .> .> e
ll SDiOdffii M.V1 VmDH [5961

378 BURMA LAW REPORTS [!965
C' 0
roeooomooGY
-t: IL Jl
go C"C' BQ <:-
B: ::>
('0 ('
rom:: :4lG\,l?C~C rom:: : ::>:G~?C G~?C OOGQO)C
T II. C, Jo "1,.- li. C.. Lcj(4
t :>e~:J G<:ntll ( 8d<.lj[~oxp~o1)

('
~roco
(' a..8
J 0
jO 'jmll
~ C'
tj~GCO:>CO( l':rf~')~CC
C' [;'"; (' 0 C' 0 (SJ<.lj[<;>O)'P~<;)
.0 0) *
.roc;;co::).)roG:).)-~e:x>~:<Igooroaq,a>Goo:oo<:~:~c:loocor,:~~oo~~
" " (' "'" ". " "1:::" " ~ " 0 1:1~<71~:tloospg
0 0 r:: c c.
C' C' ~ r: C' C' , . r.:: C' c C'
G>e:4l?I')~~(J)QJCT.l~J?: II tjG>$C11)-0~G>?:GaJI:JC 10000 oe?GOI')fOJGO')? II
.oo:. O)QIO)
c c
II
c o
IIO)GCO!:x>roG=
e . c
4l4lGOOICOO)Ol
8I$,COOO::DO)<:l
c c c~ c
~ro:x>?:ru>~?l
c
&. U L . . J :IJ . -fTJ
c-
.
t!J~OO:x>~~?
A
0
.. c.:.~
c
ro~~Cro~ 8dG
.n.J Jt
6:>c:" -r C(' I
c c:mt~J?:
.
c c . 'Y'
OO()OOCOO~iGOI COO)
u. JJ ll'
c c
:x>::>1~u:>o:>ll
c:. t
"6
o c r;:::Q c o o c occ gj
~
c ' c c
m t!J~~ <PGCO!OJO)G:J.)O) d)q,GQOIO>G:x>? ooro::x>i<T.liO) CC :en I .O:X.OOJc CGOO :CI)IC I
c::::J Jl~ L o -r tlL.J -~ t. L L c. JJ
c o c c c c c . r.;:c oc c
G~~~f ~~J?I~\,1;0)')1 <JCIO)GCO:mp:co~:x>e:; I GG)G~coc;coc;GCSJ~?I-tc:x>c;~
C' C' C' c C' 0
C' 0
C' r..:::.... (' 0 C' 0 r:::: C'
':/ro~:IDCCO')::x>c;~G9,?5)'jo:l211~Gt:J"C, sc:::J:l')l CO:T.>Ol~I!>GOOIL:JC:o.ie:; ro'f>:~oo
c c .
roe:U1oaOO'J~C! II
C C' C" C' C' C' C' CQ (' o
. :?~oo ~-~ :~J?: tq ~ 9cero6pel oe9o <ttq)l 'lrllir4l'lc~: oo 9 u
<'17! C' c 17! C' C' 17!<' OC' C r:- C r,:c oc Q c o
G~?Ct::!Gt?C fC, tjeGCO?C~ t:Jf~?~CCGOO? oe\30 ~14:>1 t:jflol')1CC4l')C~:
c c C' C' 0 C' C' C'
4>')\,lJmp jOI ro'P:~roGOO')O>JL<> 0192:eit=o.:>t: ''
coo~ao:
c- oos1ro
c- c
11 um] t~J~rocc- c
oocro: . c
hiOO~Il~C
r c- ::x>ooc-c- c
c:u:>o:> ~ooro
c- G:::>:t!l?:
c
l ij C:J Jt. 6 ll OJ Jt'-' o L I. C
c c ~ c ~~' c c:;:: <: r:::c c c c r,: r;;:c <:
'f>~ I IDCO(.lt:j~00~~0-:>2';1? t!J~t:j')CltDi9CI'f>rq 00')0-:>0)G:xl') tjo:>:>f?r::Jfl::D~II
c- c o 6 c
hiOOiolhiG c c o o c r o o c o co c
oocro: ')C:J age;; o::oc:::ldO>trororo 3doocl3da'):lq:x>cooxnu oooo"'m
ll 61 AJt Q Ol L jJ LJ ol,. t. C.:, l ]
c-
=GOJ(J)GOO')mt!JOO')l~Q<>
. c o~
I t!JG ffi?CI::ldOllroroO'dGOI (,)
c c o "~"' c
GCD')O)OOOC,If(~O)Q(;:X>QOCQ"C
r c ,. o c
jJ:'I . .IJ <0l J . ll. L ._; -1 C l jJ
co~: I
c
t!JG
c
')C:tD~fO)OOO)
c 0 <f <: c
tlJCO.SCOCQ')!:xl ~C
c r;::
OOCCDiiO::::.t:lOJ~IO)Q:xl~(J.) GOOQOCOIC
c co c . . c
C:, 1.: L 4T Jl IL L.:JE! iJ Jl f.:..:;.. L U, . J1
r;;:coc '1 c-r;;:c <:
\,lt:J'l>~CGOJ')t!JOlllj Ujl.OO~f t:J4:>G00)2:11 .
r,:c <: o c <: Q <: <:: c c o <:: <: r,:c- c c
tj4l3~e:'l>')l'f>51 OO'f>l4l')CG'jl~l[':/rl3'd'J<JC!Il3'd~l'je"4'il_crd')CjC:I tji!>SCIOGOI~C
, c <'h.
c- ~c <:-
~4l.,:GO>J ::D{:2==:x:oro 1 ti4l3CIOO>J'1o:> cr-=.,'loaoto 1 oo4l1'Sc ())q)Dlticm')l
6 ~~c
oe:')Go:'lt
c
rc c 0 c r,:c c ., . c or,~ c c .
. J90::D211 moaOlOO'f>:~O:>~ tiDimJJl:~fGo:>')t!JO>I 0'2 - 1'4l:l:>~tj:l :x>qGoo')G~
r:- c c cr:-
Ot:!\3"1-
* t;.J
~~4)
&.J
I Cl?eQO)tlJ(l.):;JI,IOO~OO
"""- ILJl J
jt311
c c . c~ c ( ) c . r< c
tc
' '1
~(!13<f ~f'1>1 'f>OOIDe:!:<tD~OO
c BIC
0
r:<>.::Uadi.I:.'T->tDOJOll,llf
c~ I ()C\,JtlJCOIOOro:O:>ICT.l: <:: oc o
~
<: ')Q
~OlJ'iiDG:xl')l 0(!13~ ,_f4:>1 epOI'JCO

O::> ClO)GMlOII G~')CO .
{ "1 lt A l L. CJ . "' -r u.~ t- t. n. A
c. c c ) ( ) . r,:c c Q cr;::c 0
'{>C':x>OO'{Siol. rOj 0 Ol tD'll 'itiq,ooc~p:'l>'JCOC:mL oooaO>~ II
l80 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
oe~~ roG
0 ?0c: GG?C
c:M ro0
ll. L
o:lG!OO:ro?l
c: 9
-aJ

Cl!<DCG:IIOGOO:
c: c: f: OOC:\
GQ.liiCQ:D
Jl 1..
c:
Cl
!G<SCOOOO<D<DC:l
eL. o o o
<;;~?8&,
'c-c:: ;rc: C: C:C CC:C:C
cc:~S?GO <DCI mc:-oo:>roiCCO:OSG 4'l:::lj 8?91 m'P:QG
:.c
(." ' l
c: '
A
c-
-[ U o f. L
0
J
c: c:~ ., c:r,;:
Ji.O o
c-
J J
c: c:
rocco-:>:~::n~u CQG.p-:>m o ro<;>~u?G::D?S?<illl GG-:>cllil::n~J ro9c~q;;
a~:l& .
~
c: c: r,; ..;:. c: 0 c: 0 c c- '19 c c: c:
OC' t
<.lJ-:l:CD<Y.><:f ~roGtJ:CD?9JI 9C:<'qo:lG:Gro?l ::l@13<f ~~101 ep01900 13 9roG~5
1;:JT'Ioi?~CCII
c- ~
cc:enroGo roc GG?OO c
;r c: c: ~c:~
IOCC:lroro:rom:::n
@3:a:::>l
c: oa139
c ~~101
c: meoro
c:
--. o 'l L d tl -r it -~ ~ c t.J -r
~!GS?G<D
C: ( ) 0 C C: C: OC:\C: C: C:
:::> G 0) <SCOOIOm? IOIOG:;o:~CQ c: IO:D:D II
Jl J L .o,o J 1,. o W
c: 0 c: c: c:r,;: c c- c- 0 c-
8?<[~ S?Gro:DmGOXX>~I <'qCD?:G~~I:JG:l:D~ II CjC=<'qiOIOGOO!GO)')
'1 c: c- . c: c: 0(9 c: 0 c: 0 r,::;::: c: c- r,;: c: .,
Sd<il15 9c:::n~ :::>0 ~11>111:1~ ~WOl:(::D~ II CQGu?~ S?QJC!I:JID<ii!G:D?
sec C C 0'\ OC" C' 0 C' 0 0 ~ C'
Sd<ild-ji5 @~IO<ii~:D~~GO~G~ II <XfS?QJWrq 02:;?1) S?Ofl!OXJ?!~t.::J:::n~
roro::D<DQIOQ
0 c: '~ cmQm::n
c- c: c: c- c: ., c: c: 0
cc:::nroG::nro?: IDIOG:;o:G::n?ro<iii:-JI cc:ro
IL U o a ~ l ~ ~ L
' c: c: c: c: c: r,; oc: 00 c:~ c: 0 c:
SdO)QOO)?J CJC!:D2:;G9G9CD~CD~ GtJ?~C~~C~ GG:tf:C:Jp:rq.p:roe:;~
c: c:
10o:>:n()) . '
m:;oQ::n:n u ro::nmroG
c: 0 0 [ ?c:ro:n:
c- c: c:
t~o:>rog:oJCCl
c: c:~
ro?:Q:n:n 11
' c:
c:. l tl 0 c l. l ll c.:. .J ;"' 0 c
. c: '1 c: o c:c: c~ c:~
<r.>OO?!G:D.SO) GQIO).SOO:DS??: <;110) C!o:>?:Gc::nmCl GO"JS.,imo GG?C
l ~To 6 T L ll ll 6 L-; ;, tl L lt.
'1 c: 0 c: r,; ~ c: c- 0 r,;:c: ., c c: c: ~
Q I!~~<Xf::D~ur_ GtJ-:>Ge;j?C:~mOl:(:Dtj~l GQ I~,:::D~CO~: 8?G9:u:G:D?
c: 9 c: c: ' c: ., c: 0 9 0 1'
O)O)G:Do:>O: IOGCD:D:'DII
C.. C
S?G<D<DCI
JL A A
GQ JOO.SOO:D
AT L IL
j e:ro
L
ClgO)GQI ill
iJ IL
c: ' c: o c: '1 c: o c: ( ) r,;: c-
IDIOGOO:~::n~rq G990::l~ll OSG GQlqf<:f? CD'P!~:DmG:D :::>9 [jiO
c: c: c:r,;:c: c:c: c:o,;:. r,; or,::;:::
:::D~II CJC:ro S?QJC![jiOG:::D? ffm~ ~"?qC'i)9JI p-;lGJ?:G[j?IOro?:rq e;j?:9
. c: ., ' c: 0 c: 0 c:r,::;::: c: c: 0 c: c: c:
0)~11 GOjlSICOGf:D~Gf'PCJtCD~! ~O)U~::D2~ ~G:D?CD~: 9c:ro?:
mro?:G:n.sro G ?:;Qo:>Co:>G:
c: ooc:c:c:o o c: oc:o
C!GQ()):;Q:D:'DII <XlG ?C8000)
')C: 'o
GQI<D.SO)
l LA 10 t L Jl l l C oL o l 6 T 1..
'Y' c: '!:::; c: r,;: c: c: c: c: c: 0 c: ( )
"i):m GQI O[IOIOG:;o:~elc:[j10())fD2:D~II CJC!::O~I <D'[J:~:DO)G:D :::lj
r;;:c:
t::JIO::D~II
c:
GQ J~f
., c:
j
9 0 c c: c:
e:CQ:D~I . C:0~?002:;!Gft:j:D~S?t:JC I
c: ~c:
ro::nmro~m
c: c:
r,;:c- .c:or,::;:::,;:. c: c: r,;:c:r,::;::: c: r,;c: c: c:
. 'Sd?!lj~ jO ~IO~U9J I ~O)Oj1<Df:D21:JIDt:J:D2:; II tlfG?\i000C~J?:OO~:
r,;:c:r,::;::: r,;:c: c: o 9 o ' "r;:;::: c: c ., c: ( or,; )
tjiOe;j:Di:J~I 9c:CQ j .e:rq C~~p:~U())f0j1:D211 G~ lq<f Cl.{[j-Jj rol
c: r,;: c: c: 9 c: c: c: I;' ~ c:o c: . c-
:Sd<iiJC:[jiOG:D?Gt r;;ro ~ f='9<ilt~c qc:::n~ ~ptlc~ G9qc:<:f? room
c: c: c: .. c- c: . r,; r,~ . ., 0 c:r,;: ., <:
-GC13j?. G9<i10Gf1021 or.ro?:G~~:D~ G[j!OO?[j!l GOjlSICJt GG?CI)i(. Gl!~~
0
m:ro()) G
0 ? ?:m:>l C:
GS??G :m:n()) rororo::n:n 11
C C: 0 C:
GQ<DC:~c .
C: C:
ros::;o:_
9 o
L OL L C L A L C I A J o T L
oc:
~<DCG.SGO)')
c: 9 o c- ~
.S')Q(D(\)10 <Xl<Y.>OO? : :D?:
:1."lcOJ:D:D(J)C\):"D:
'1 c: c: OOCD:;o
c: o
ll T TJI~II.Lll o U C.:.LC:, 6 L
m:-nu
c-
roro?:~:1."l.s
c:
rorooo::nro::n1
c- O ' 0 .,
G~Jrosro
c:
.s-:>o
G
ro?:<:DG:C\
. c: 9) c: .IY
c. I; a~ 1). l o oL AT T . Jl J :a Gm?Gu?
::t
c: ~ c:. oc o
:())::DtY>O 0)')! OOCT:>OO c: GQIGO II
cf"'il:' 6 L J.
G ( or,; ) '1 c: c: c: c-,.;:. '1 o c: r,;: '1 c:
f?~. C\ft:J-J <Y.>I GQlqf:::D~I 9C:ro?:9S??SJG~81q GG')C!)il Gl:~~
o c:o c: ~ . c: r,;r,::;:::c: or,::;:::c: c: c-
oexz:rom~ qro?:GG;~ Glj?:D~~GtJ?GU?C: II ~Gej?~ CjC::D~
-
BJ]R.MA LAW REPORTS
19~5] BURMA LAW REPORTS 383
S~t!Odffil M V1 Vl"ruOS:
. ..
n v 1 1 n1 v
11 .:>'=~ ,'L J. g1 ~ ~ 1
cccco~roco~coerocco~ cc.oro1ee.G ccc~ ees oc.ocrocc tc.c.>COCLllecerooo
.:> 0.) .)0.) . .)0.) 0 0 . ) . 0..)
1
ll:)COCOa'l b:c~ oo~G r b :ccoceroco
ccc tro:8 1 v , 1 ':':1
c.ococcccai :oc ee:o ~a.:oo v
:fO.) v .;).) . .) 0.) 00.:> .) . '1. .:>
0100:
I( ~b 1
es-e> rocro&O oc ro ':'1
~
v
:x.orowros-occ
11 11
11 :oc 1
~o:c:e.G cc
1
t:oc
_, e { .:> " "" " .:> o .:>O.)
n
11 11 L ...
rororo:ci~S'OCCOIXU rocs-ero 1 10
~:ce:ecc roccccm b18~ ~~<l
1 r b
ccc
,~ ".:> " o .:> e" o.:> t., "-'
ro:ob tcweooes
1
. o .) .
~J- _
.) .:>
o r
o~:~1ro
.) .:>
n " 1
oco:o .)0
.:>
ocomro
1 1~
i!.
.:> 0
. 11
~cB~ . tec.a.:0eee:a.:ro
.) .:>
e:roo1!':1e
0
1 n.
roOC>1ees TI 1 ':':1 1
-cccccecccces-o :oc 1 r l _ 11 b ~
ro1GCC~ ro:o ro :::ce~
0.) .) 0.:> .:>o.) O.:>l..ot., .) .:>
IICCCC0hl
.)
corees
.) ;:j .:>
ecce~~
.,oo
mo t:ccrodX2ccoo
.:> .)0.)0.)
cccclD ~b:o~occ~~
.).)
:ces:oo '*bl:eroC:o .) .) 0.)
ttoo
0 0
J~lee.G
L,
CCC~C.~ :::J c.rroe0~CO
,. .:>
tcorroid~
.:> t., 0
oees cc~rocc
roes .)0 .) :oc t=;J~
.) :::J
0
S8 S.DIOdmi M.V1 VmD.H

:as6 BURMA LAW . REPORTS l196s
.:,~&:>
C" ~ ~ C" (;:: C" 0 C" C"
sx:co<J:nSj;;>DtG~., oo~,~e=
OOGepc: ro~Jmo;t~Proc:' !ldCOCOO'i)":
;"....._.
o c- c&i c- 'l o 'l c- o c c o c- c-
-~~~~ ClG.SO) C I G'=I?C ::n:::n ld::PSiro QI~~C co:::oro::n:::n:;;oGO)? !r.l;;>lro~C
Jl T C.:. 1L I. J l C. L U J
. e c C"~ 0 0 c (;:;:: C" ~C"'l C"' C" c C"
o.c Oo:>O)O)::il ~~'Jf SX:eJ?C;Yr:ICOI<.Jt GC\)j?CD<UO)CII !r.lctXYXf?.C
~.u
e <'
"':lei) c
G(){'J.S
c-
~:::n:.> ;::n:::n
e-rg
oc
Sj::PC:I
cc o
ro1~0ro
c c
n'JG.S~Ccu:::n:l
c-ji c-
GY?C ::n:::n
--T l U l t. L L TJ ~ C.:,. C
'l 0 'l C" 0 c, c 0 c c 0 0
Y::P91ro QI~C co:::no:>~O):::n Q:)O):::n OO;;>Irorot ~uxoc:ocq:>?C\)(1);;)0)
c c C" C"
:::n

tL l J l C:. L U tJ L A A - -l. C:.
cr.:
C" C I
9Yctlq)0)2"
Glc:l?~~ Sj');l 'P~O)~g: tf~Y ?Oj ( 0)

( ~) !:JJ'JI ro8~:~
cr,:c o
c'r;::c r.;:c .
'l o c ~ c- c c~
~rot:l~ ld~mot ::nro~0c: tlq)OJGro? ~:n~ tl:::mp'~ Oo:>O)ro9J
CC" _0 C C" C (;:;:: C C" 0 C
C[ro?:t ~~0~ OOG<f;~ 02;q:>');9f ~t:j ?C: OO~J(l)lc:)J?; ~0)2Ui
IL
c- n
moo::n:::n
C
oo~ro
Jl. L
c
o ooG:;o: o '"'
q:>oc~GO)? o:n?Q
-, o
o
C:, Jl
roa:nmm:~
1L - - -r
r3
1l
.
m:rot GY?c c~
L
C" o (' C" ') ~ 'C" OC"~
O):x> ~llroO)()")C GI3G ')~roce~ I G~?~G.SQ::D::D()) G())ClOJ ::nO) C
C \ C" 0 C" C" "
C IJ 6 b L ~I T C:. '- 6 Jl t. C~ o 0
(' ~ c C" C" C" ('

roc~:e~~o:>OlJro::n2 coc~?:::ncor ~=t:~ro~t:lc: t:lq)0)2" 0;1'P~'
c r.: '" ' (;::
C" C" 0 r.: c
C"C 0 ~C" C" 0 C" C 0 C"" C" C" C"

CPI~Oo:> n'J crocYro?:t COcr:lQiroO):x> S(J)(l')C~Q.::;;GO)? OOQIO)Y())O?GO II
61 ... 6 ll l 0 c.:. 6 . Jl 0
' c c- c- c- c~ c oc c c cr,;: c
y<fCUGq)'J~q}?~C roy:~ O>Jlqm~ G~?~G<f~C'Jy !r.l~rot GY?CffiO)C
'l 0 C" 0 0 !;lC" c . 0 ~ (' C" C"
Y~st~o:Y.d:ot cqro;;>~.yro?Yc<.Jt O)G<fGc.:ec: O)O)GO)!J.lGco?m roco?:
o o c o o ~c 'l ~ c 'l
ldCIGOlt coro~:ro CX)SjQ .SOOQIY :'ll Y::P810):-D Y.S~.S 0)');0)0')0)~())~
c- c c- c- c- 9)
J1 l l l T ::'1 IL ~ Jl JT 6 C.:. ll
c c (" 0 0 (;:;:: C' c-r,;: C" c
roC: OX'I)G:'\) OOGCO?:D~CO?: Y'i)lt ~Gel?~ W?CI)a OOG<f~~ 0[-l:'\f
o g o o c- 'l c- @j.ro c r c c o c cc 'l
Cl~O)')Q<::~~ro O)?:G.SQ rot Y::P81~C lffi()):"l)l{gC to.:>Xm :;>0)'-l.S 1001:
J1 , l A T l ll J . lDl 0 L, IT 6
'...
QO):~:O?G
oro
u

c-1:G$10)
'l C"
?~I
C"
~I Ya:>8IOO~:
Q.
') "l C" Gl:~c
OICD?O):x>
G
'l ('
J
19 0
co:
L
c c c- h.oc- c c ( or,;__,..) c o ch o
O)CUil qOO'Jf>CDc: ~~C0)2lf O'J'XjiD 9C:f'1 rot CjC:~ fGY?Cf.lf<'ll
o c~ c 'l c- ch c-r,;: c o c 'l ~ r,:;::: c
cqro~a:>lc:l:GO)')OOQI51 GY?C(}iro '\ftl~C';{ C~f>O??OI <.Jt Gtl?Ge_j?C:
c 0 c0 c ('h c 9 c~ 0 C" c 'I c
~:-o:;:q;;>Jm~:x>cn GY?::or..ro roJic:l:roJf~ 'i):qc oooo~O)? 00011~1
c
cc:ro?:
'" c- c- c-" '
. '1 c c- o o c- c-
.S'.X).S Gy;;;>.s;yl?: Gld: ('f.)Wo:>C '=1:)?81cD CPISGO)') ()')I Q:!>.SO~C
-, T JT 6T 0 .,. :r ll tl .6JT l l T J
0 C" ("
~roroo:>oqoo? lc:l<Jt::POI
0 C" ' I , r,;: c r.:c::::
c 0 C" g 'l
IDO)t}~ Gtlei?~~JCD 1!X~_II e:otG~:
( ~
;;JtlJ)
o c- c c- c 'l c- c~ c o c- o
roro~: t ooro?:ro
sro.sw:::n c t ldo:>m~c GY?C Cl.Sq)ClO')o.:>:;oro.,
I. . c T JT 0 ll lL J 0 l . ~IT Jt L
c c o 'l r,;:r,:;::: c- o c o or,;_ c- c- c o c-
~<fGO?')Ic:lO)Oiot Gt:~t:P=:;>Jro 110)2" ~Y:~;>:Ic:lp:CI.( Go:>?rocx:r>;ltirO?t
c- 'l c- : ~ o c- o-c- cc 'l c-
GO)? Y:J.>81~C Gld?C 0) O)QCro O>ro'-';> q)OJ::;> mo:>:O):"l.XD {.l)Q:)Cl.Sa:>:n:
c e- '
. u. J o L L l I , 6 o It C ~l It - IT C
0 c- 0 0 C" 0 C" c
1!0)cll' 0{0;1, 'Jt~~O)Ij~l f>yCUG~?Gq)')
.. r.:
C" 'l' .. C"
roy~GOI ~C
~("
YG\l?COq::n
C" '
GO):J
4 J1
0
ro?l Gld?C C"~ ro Y::PSiro
L )L
'l
l
'I ("
Ql:~cco:O> QC:
J 1.. o
C" C" ~ ...0
()O)~())C\ I o.:x;orotc
G ll::-1 ll -JJ
C'0 '"'
c r,;:coc- c- c- .~ c- .. c , o c r,::;:: c c- c-
roC: tl()~c::n2n O?C:o;tv~<DQJro ~::n(E';l?t !r.IG~x=~Jc:'P~q
(' C" ~ r,;: C" C" 0 0 c . ~ C" (" 0
oro::nroGO)') tl::X:O<f? tl.q):xl211 cxt0;1 O?CO?.: ei~O:>O>Jro S,Gt:j')C:<"q
c 0 c::::
:BURMA LAW REPORTS 387
u2ccecooofb:~C2@bh.> llU.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
UC~CO

OSldC
::J
tbc.es
.;,
1*1
.;,o a;
~ IWgWCOCCOOOI~t'IIO~WO,coco,oowccccc.~
e .) .) 1...) .) .) oe .) .)
H'Sacc?hsoooco:~ :~~~ (panodwi) ~~o bee (c) dd
~obceo2coec
.) .l
4gccoeoooco
.:> .:J .)0
ookfl~Q
.:JO .:>~
ueo::lacc:oCc:ocooC.O,~:cb::o
t,.; ~ .) .:> .)
lb~cfl~Q
O.>O .J:.:J
toC<CO~:CGCOct, Ccce:croO<:e<Y..O ;Oie~ccoeoceco OOtCO~C:C II II corecot:l:(e
0 .) .;J 0 .) .) .) l, .) .:JO .)Q 00 .) .) :J
u : .J::J.)O
ol:lo~ecooo
.)
co:&etew~cc@,_c<~~ccc91ofl:c.r,:ole~c.co~ooeco
,)t, :J .) 1,. .)f., .) .)0
c.co~oo?tc.t~~~I:J-c.<~~cn~:c.ccnl:u
.) .)0 .>:.3 .) .) 0
r
~~
.J
(:cP~&:ccosocFcoe>) b Lo !;'e>:~5c~~
Sl.1IOdffii M.V1 VW)IDH 88

C' C' C' 0
G~J(J)gro:;;;:g,c GSJ?mmm<;)Q:mro 8d<oll
C' C(C')
SJm 11> o:>roo::l):n m&o:>
0 C C' 00
oeti3
ll U J o II. 1S - ~1 L C.:, :l
OC o OC C' ')C '\0 C' OC Al r,: 0 C' C ')C ')0
~ 0
~CC O)QJ()GO')?GQIC:::x>-:> 0!5)91 t:Jf"'?~CC O'):;'()OGO)')G<;)IC: b'OI'i)G::x/? Gl.l?C~IG~
o c c c _<: o c c r,;:cc ] o ol <i
ffi(l)Q)?:COillQ)')[JdOI GC\)i?ffiC0?:<;)9::l)ell (1)(l)Q)?:rotn8di~V <l!C m 8dlolm
--1. J
\ ore r,:oc
-.
c
)J ll
.. r,:: cr,;: c
l J t.:J 0 C:J Jl l ...
liC
oxp:~:;qsc: DL~c::l)~~ ~=t~ro~::l)2?11
(1)')01~~~
('
GCD,I?('J)CO:;: 0)0')(1) 0
m] C.::Y>
0 <:Cro<:G
c ~ OOOGO:O.SI
c c c
Q c 0 c
a<l~O~CII
JJ ll~l. C:J1! of. Jl L l -n GCOI?ffiCO?:
JJ
r;::;:: c c oc o ~ cr,:~ r,:c c
~'P~I c.c:~ell 02?"9JG;)Gf~: . OX:t:r::l:>? tjCCCC1t
mG?6:<;)Jo$blp:~?-
c c c c c.
(~)
C' 0 (' 00 0
n:~rc~c roc~:co?:Go:>? orc..n~~>?:C)lm ~~>?:x>~l n:~;.o:>~cc
OC C '1C' C Al ~C OC o OC" C C
o:>OOOGO')-:>GQ IC:::x>? moro?:~ I eJfG?~CC o:>OOOOO:>?~f
c
n:~m2oos ~8(,)
c
::x> :T.l'jl
mrooGo:>?:Q:;J!c: moco?:
r,:c
t=~f(,l?~cc
oc o c c '\<: c
c o c o c c c c
B c: '='<JG:x>?C
rc
JJ
c
CT.l-:>CI
0
c(c) o c
mco:ocG:x>?
-- -[
c ~,;
(D(l)Q)?:CO(l)Q)?
I.
o
J
c
(,){))0)
l.
J::
o:>(9~ !Jd~l !Jd(J) 0 O?COO::D~I g)I:D~~GO]?CDOJ?gQ')~IOll
o c c cc
mOOV?:CD(J)fld
L J
' oc
II> C mm:11>00
-- \.- ~ L
c: G[?.oc
~CG
ll
-:>c:l
c
c c <:(<:) 0 c 0 C'
(J) Gc:qpmo:>?:Q'jq(O) ~GI 8;1(1) II> ~0~?: GO:G::x>? ~<D
c c ] 0 \0 c c oc c
4:>J:cmn CD?o:>o:> m ~Gm l!>roo.s8dmm m~?:CO:..D'D?
C:J r.. -IT eo
Gmcno:>
J
C\
G
C.:,
mGme:n:~oo:>mrom
C
.;L
C
L 6
C .
OOGCOGOO ro(l)Q)?:CO<D
L
OC
'
<:
t -T- A . 6 d L J
~r,::cA; c . c (C\ o c c c _c
11>?0) -tj~~>;j~' mGI mm , co) ~coo:x>eiGO]?roco:>:<;)90;(ell
o c
L J
c cc
mmv:>:roc..nm Q> c
0
g}jmGmo mm:Q>:;o
T
' oc
Jl
c:
l -- 6 I.
G(Y.oc
&c G
ll
:>c:
c
~~ ~:lu
c _<: o ~ c ' r,;: c
GcqjJ(J)CO?:Q'J~c:ll 02?~G~Gf~: Ga:~pmro GQjOG_.:D? 8dGe;j':>C;
QJnSgp<p-
r,:c c 0 (' (' c cooc c ) 9 (' (' r,;: c C'
( ::>) tlcroc~or <.>:f:'lc~~ o:>f:;~~c o ~<Xl:~c ~:tlo:>QJm
('. c (' r,::;::: ('
0091 coro~;;go:>SG~?C:I
c~ c .. r;;: c c - c c c- c ~G'S c
(j ) 8;1(1)(.));jf COm:;>~;tJC1)9f'~GCijj')g~CJt<>ilOO<Xl!CI ffilt:J"(;OC1t
o c c c c cr,~ c c ~-:.r.:c c c r,::c
CJt Q>e;:mG:::Oo:> G<T.lJ?~ytJ:'j o:>e~:""'tj~ Oroo'Jf' tj)
G:>~:l
'T'C': "l 0 C C C ~<: OC o OC' C ")C '}
( \)) . G<SI 1:101 ()'_t(.l)Q)'):C)Jo:>ll>?qc t:JfG?~CC o:>~GO:>-:>GQIC: GUI
:)) Cl (' mm:~G::l:>?

--T
<: . 0 C' .
L
C
-J
C
.
c-
())(l)Q)?:m(l)Q)') g{))CJ.)()) (J)OOCOIC
1. l. iL )J
(:>) (:>e:P) 1~~~ fE~.,t.8cfain (oolf?~oo5) G>"~J~~., oS:>u

39Q ,BURMA LAW REPORTS
,.--...
c 0
Q~')C~: Gj)
u1 9
~8
J
())'XIj~c;coot
0 (' 0 ("
~~rocu
10~1~ ~I
-
li965T' BURMA LAW~ORTS 39f
'"~"'
G~l ~::D~
c rDG
?C:QI'J:O)
c o c c
GOO'J(T.)CIC\)ICI
g coc c
Q>QCOC~C8';J?OO?~C
c
:x>ro
c
:>~G~
.
0 ~ u l . .ru :.u -1 .. t.\0 J . ,., ...
oc c o c ~r,: c c o ~ c c cr,;: c r:::;:: c
~Co:>Jro 1jGf':D~I g)jBCOOC~~ g)j~:rororoG IP2:0?:1.lftl0Ge1?c: .c 0 .
'1" . c c c Glol':lc~:Gj
GO I o:>C:D:TIQ) <DC:OCIGO::l:TI II
. 6 C:.L IL -1 C. o1 .9
o c r,;: c c c ~r,:c c o c c c c
.
1oom
c c~
02:0?:oq:tlro9;>
c c '1
ro~Jro~?
~c c
g)jjjcroc'i~
c
0~:roQ:::DOX]ro
oc c <moj~~
'~
Gffii?CO.S ':Q O)CO)C:OI::DCO?: Q)~ Q>e\1 II GrD?ffi~C\:Xil: S;JGS~I<:lo:>G::D?
lJ 61 J 4 IL 'L ~ lO tJ J tfSUJO::J5ro8
L
D
G~ld?
c Gt
::Jr.?l'Sj o
~O:J.>?CO
r
jll O(I.)GS
c '~
0~ I
c
GS;J?(T.)S;J(J)~Q ::x> 84<D~OCGO)'J
o c I>
ro J V L L { -~ 10 U. L!1 1. ll
c
Gf.~? ::>~l'S? ~~ epct9ro o
c C c '1" C
')G
":e r,;:c r,;:c
190::ntl<? 0~:cw:::nOX]roro~c~ ro~G
C Cci
c c
0
.c

c
C
c
OC O):TIG? GO??C:IP? GO I o:>CGO:D:TI II 0)~.5 c.:o:> S;J(J)~OCG::D? GS<:l?

C J ll 6 C.:. T 1! t. 11. l) J
c r,;: c r,;: c cc c .c c c r-::: c r,;: c
::>~l'Sr 'tl GQCO jO G;!tl0::Di9<? Q>~g(I.)Qg::DOX)rorD~: rDo;l~EJC: (jQ>::D~~?
c . ~ c c c 0 c c c c oc
ep:::ng GOt o:>COOCO?:::D:::n II ::DG::D?o:>:TI:i GS;J?(T.)Qn"\Cig QIGQ)G:D? 84<:l.S
~ C. Jl C Ol C, IL--] UJ l)
G? rom~cc~cGo.:>?
coc oc
ro<:lsGmro::n c Grol ')(T.)OO?:
c c c o:>roro
o c
Gro ?roro(.l)o:>

J n. L Ttt. . JJ ILL Jt '
o o G?gQ
c:o:> ~ cc
S;J(J)GOC c
c: 0o:>:TIQ) o
C:OCIGOG:TI. c II
c.:.
' . c
GCOI?ffiOO?:
:u
CXl:D<X>O)::D
o C'
11 L J I
GSd?(T.)<:lCOQ:
:t
,
c, L

.. -1
,
QIQO)G::D? rDGS(T.)
oc o coc
S;J(J)QCCtC:D:TIQ)
c
c.:,
<DC:O
r1 :1
ll.)t
G8d?())
("
IL l.l UJ
rom~c:o:>
0 0 C'l o:>:nroo:>"'l11P Gro')(T.)rome>o:mco:::n:
romGcc
0 (' C'c
1
l lt. l
0 0
l:,:. l H.
romooc~cG :::o?
0 coc
IL ....a.J L Jl [.!, ll ll C.:. il L
ocr,;: c c C'? o o c A; ~ ~~ r,;: c c c c
Sdl:lttlO::D~~ <fcOO[j: 8do;lO>CX{o:>mG9J el?:p[j:~:tlo:>~JffiGJ'jOXD211
c~
romm~ 1 GrD?mcr;lm~c:m
c rom~oc~c::n:::nm
coc c ro:
Bc c
roGtm~J<:lo:>rotc
c
J1
c
c
GCOI?(T.)OO?:
:.u
6 ::nrorocm
o c ~ c:::n
o
-d
il. OL ~
ILU
C::J Ol
S;JQ~cg
.S<:l
T J
~c
IL
c ~ o:>OGO:cs
COOCG
.iL l ..
c
L
c Go:>l?ffiCO?:
., I jJ
c
C:.L L U UJ
~ cr,;: c c c o c A; r:::;:: r,~ oc

elg~tl<DGU:D~II m~ Gcr;l')(T.)SJO[~:m 840[~~coro::>9J el?:f'?t:l: m<:l;:
Gl~:>ro::D
tJ J
c [9'c
.:.
c o
cc:romco:nrom~
, "L
o o
L "'l. It,,
o c:Bc
oc o
c:Q? c:G
J 1J
?CGm?
c
"'
::DG:J.>? cc J9
o
rom~
It,
coc c
OC.tC::D:TIQ)
l. t:.:.L
rocc~c .
C<DOO
U.
c: ' ' c o c oc
0::D~Q)OOOGOO:TI II ::D Q>GOJ?G
, C:.t.t.-1 C:. ot
?Cc 00:::0
o o
o Lot.
c r;;:c c c o c c c c c
ro~~OC::Di9~~tG:::O? 'JffiGJ?:~ O~:cw::nro Sdffif:OGS<tSG?9 ::r'~p
~2:ctx$:o.:>c&;mJ3~tj)~~~G:D-:XjoSGql8:~~o5oc.B~::neO{ O[ro::n~
m
C:!J ~~
c- o c
roc~m Go:>l?mco?:
JL . 1. JJ .
6 o
::DroXJ:::n
'IL OL C
c
- o:u:cw:o:>ro
c:, omroroc:rocmc:
I . ll' . cl
c c c c c c- c
~c r,;:c c r,;: c c
~c:tl0W~<J? oq:tlro9G<;>Q~ II
. G~~~~?:r:::::o.:>o3clil
:tJ ~ ~ 1 ~~ . Tt:J
o:::n~ GoG.s~: ro<5r.:~~
. 1.:::1 U
r'Srofg
11.r::f" .
ol J Jl.
uc~
cJ-
r.:;;:: c- r,: CCC CA;C C C" OC C "('
l3'3Gt;~ :>c:Cj~JC01'? IDOCOJ2:9J ~:g. 9X~:C??~G::D? ~<.OO?:O?(X?ID? GO!
c oo oc oc c ')c c c c . ~c . oc c o o
<X>CI Sd~(.))~CC ' O)OOQGO)?GO>tc: moCO?:G::D?o:>~:l .S~?tCC<X>C 000)
"' s L . c. T L"' L ~
oc c ')c o .. r,: r,;:c c c(c) o c ~c oc
. G::D? O)OOOGO)?G~ tc:~ rD::lf:~!Jt~tJ~ SJGI S;J(T.) 0 ~room ot<=l?~CC
oc . c c c c . . o 'i o c .c o c oc
O)c;QQG<X>?~f Sdm20GS qs~ ?O.rJd918d~l ~<DO?:a;>tb4>-:x-q o.:>m~c'P
o c~A; ~c OC' oc c ')C r,;:c cr,~ c c ~ o
qr c:o_::~9JI ot"'?~cc . roc:o~ro?G~JC:tl~ mot!: .'~?'J?~?CGS?:X IJL~<:
oc i'o c ~ c\r:;:c o ~ c. '1"~ 'l o c c . c
~COIC?Jm Di.~~elc: ...~51G::D?G~5.e'? ~<!I I t:l6l CY.(~?:~~:::O~
GO
:ccocoroc.o
<>rq-e:mdd-e praq S! sx ~o!l:::>as .

.P. U:>Aa <>:>n:>p!Aa ti! p:>!UIP-e ~q prnoqs ptre . <>Ic_lt!punodmJ
Sf :J~ttm:>Op e lf.>ns-o{q!SS!UIP"eUJ :tu<>mroop ..:~ql a~m
:JOU S:>op SI UO!:}:>:>s ..IdAO<>low~uop-e:>ndde ou seq sx uo~s
~1>U:>P!A<> tq :>{qJSS!UIP'e SJ UOJUfl U"eJPUJ <>tp UJ p:>:Jn::>~X:>
lnq sdtimlS U'elSP{ed lp!Jit\ p:>dtm:tS puoq UO!l"e:>:>tpocL<H , .
-:::>eo:eo:::>b@
.:> .:> e
(c) cocoftrogh.Jcoccro
.J oe e .:>
O~ftl de.c Mcocofta:>CIJJCCCC c 4&!cc:ccocohl:ee fb1IJ:ccoed:.oro w:eo:::>bOJ
.:> t.. .:> .:> .:> oe .:> .:> .:> .:> :1 ~~ o o .:> e
[ bG .Jb~uc<!
.J
J"h Cdvc (b)
.J
cw !:>h.
.JO
IW:;)] wc.urere&:..>Q::J<X.)I(B
0 .J .)~.) ~
S.DIOdffi:I M V1 vwM9.
CO?:~~
(' 0 ('
ffiU)IO?!OO(.l)IO?
(' (' (' (' ('
10~~~ CliO~~~ O:>Go:>Go:>
0 ('
ffi(.l)l:>?!o:>:.DID?
('
0(!~~
l3L J C.. C.:. Go l J
r,;:c c r,;:c c o o c
c(c) o c C' c c c C' 0
tlo~~~tliD~~~ 9C'J1tDID?:otmiD?~~ O:>(J I rom 10 ~rooro?:l Gcqpm G<.I?C~:C::jl
CO?:
o
QQo.:x:JI
~ ~ ~C 0 C' C'
ffi(..\)10')!(\)~
('10 m
~
O:>:xr.>
0 \ OOC' C'
IO:;()~C~~
0 C
ffitDl>?!o:>tDD?
C' ol9
-~ ll l J C:J JL l A l. L ~ l J C'
r,;:c c r,;:c c c o r,;: c c o c c i<: ..
t}ID~~t}ID~~ 10~~ G~QJ'X>f~? ~:(jO'Xjf ~O:>OG~:.?J~
cr,:c r,;:c ~o c c c o '1 o c c c c c ~ c o
o:>~~COOf
coc~:~c:x>tl<? ~ID9CQ)Jro~ ro~1 qm10:>:~?'<? WCDJ2!9J (J~q{~ ~~II
6 l
GO"t G"T8: (J&~~o II

C''l"0'1II S4G('
!lXX)())G"I ?C!(JI')!G
6C'
?C
C'
GO:>?ffi(;XI)~!~C
o(' C'
Gro?ffiO:>U)Q)
o
1J U.lJJ IL
o oc oc o cr,: c r,;:coc r,;:c ~ c r.;:c
'J!~ QJ~o:>G~? Sj(J~gp:q O:>o:>~Dt9f (J(jiO~C~tl'? ro~o:>Ge:i?C:l:)C!'f>
o c or,;:c c cr.~ o ~o c c c 'l"r,: c
gJ:>:ro9 ~~!:j~ o~Jmtj: ro~q ~109c~m~ GOI [jo:>?::x>~
OC' C C'~ 0 C' C C C' OC C' 0 C C'
mqc: :;oo)COO')~arot?G:;Q?~~t rogi!Q)J~~~~ a
ri ~ebto:
0
of:l ob():c~:x:oQihl~
.,)~.) 0 .;) .)~ .
abescocc"'Cb r"boc aob u~e&eck~aes~:t=;;i&:cbco:&es

.) 0 .:>0
.,) ~- ~ 0
r .)0
oik&~b
.) .,)
uo~~;
\,; \.
. ~6 c cogobJ 'g'~~ b~tJc rccc~Me~ cc sakc~:~~9-' tg'~e c.3tlc ~ .
II
11 @cccotoco~re
..:> .,) 0..)
Sfles~b()oerco<J>~
.>O.J .J
0 :c<J>W<J>~
.:J
oc .:>.>
we occoo u.,)@cccob:JooQ:l:e :ocj:;"J~4&:11h.>
.>O.>:f .:> ~.:>
~.)(J>Q
~
c
bes ::J~:~I cccdoA6ec
\.>
boc Aabcocc"cb.).:>
r:cesoo:cbooe"&?ro
0
och.loll,
.>~0
, , , ':-1 , n, Q 1 18~flc.oscccn<J>eJCCeJiefl j>C:::::Jeloosrocccc og l!SCC:Cg'
<bco&o~ce&
.J .JO
1:o@flbcbcccs
.>
flPecocces
..) ..)
ol6ee:~f:lcceoCOflCOfl--h:l
.) \. 3''::J .:> .J
()Q
.)~.b;::::J
ooo~zceo
.J
ct!cc&ceo II @ccl;lo~o~cceJfl. I!G!;fl:OCj:;"JeJ<:Gcb<J>@co@hld,Cbwcrol6cceoHrcorco

.> .J ot,; .:>o S"o .:> ::::3 :J .> ~ .::> .>
1et..> . .) o ..)
hlcocbeJcocc"lX:~:ceeJC2d!ccceJr o~coPeoblooo~:j:;"J
..) ,J .) ~.) ~- &.j.) ~ocbce~:ceou

n.,coPecotJ:k
.) :.J.
nccccro~coAPe~bC>oePco
.) \.) .,) . .
c~ oc .,)aoco:>eJ
:I .,)
6es boc flab :Qcocc..,cb
et:J.>
..)
:ce.ab:>:cbcoelnes
0
cr!cc:bcoceso
,) .)
. u@ccroeJelbeCCeJ
..) \.
OOO~eJCOb
.) .) .
f COCCCOO~
..) 0
re c~:~tJc
;:)
u~:~bwcol',:ceo
y .>
<J>hlesc~&:ob
.,) :I ,:, .>
o&bcob
.,
roccctococroeJ
o .>
oc
1"b c\~:~tlc
;:)
r:hlecck
OJ,
()Qesc~&ohles
~ :3 "~
ccocchl
~ o
. tocbaocobQ~:ceeJ
., .) ~.
:hl<J>hl\bwb
e:~.)~ .) cJ. roccctococe.aeJ
6-.)
.
1~ c~:~tlc
~
cfl;o:Occ<J>hl:oPees
3""' .) ~ .) u@ccroeJe:kcceJooo:tecocb:hl6cbaoc
.,) \. .) ... .) . e'j .) .)d&:oeeJ
. .,) t.; .>@cc
1
~CC$ .>:,j
ohlccco~co~
.,) ..) 0 S"
li::cPA:ccoc ereesccc$~$<l>CO:il,o~&cc$
.) t.J ;,) .)
r@ccto:cbcoelbes
.,) 0
uoob
::.
bf
r cohl~ ;
~>:? . ~j .
,)
($pgcbco~~eB) ~C.f>el~Cf>e>
~~eoCA$0CA$:C :!=;;llb:cbco
~ ;, ;, (> o:::J .
1r 11 -.1
f)eCOeGC.OO.:;>OO
0 .:> . .
t6
L.Z
l:zcax.ocooe> tookc:cooOOcoCo ohl@cc~ @ccrcXb~ hJ:c.Pe~es !;le>es
~ .) 0 .) 0 .:> .:>:::1.:> .) \. 0 ~
c.cc~~e>@cohl 0&, r o~cocb:2 u @ccroo~chlerul', ~~f,l5~ rahl:1:cac.ra
.:> O'J .:> .J, .:> e .:> I, .:>o.:>=:i ;) 0 S' el
:c.Peccoe~es
;)
:ces . oRcdoo:,.,Q
.:> :::1 . ;) 5~ .:>
ccoe~i.B @ccCbwa
.:> .:>
ro~ rbescoP
. .:>
elecoro
0 ;)
DmCOOC.fle>OCft~:2
:i j - o .:> .:> e
C.COcOISe>
.:> 1,
jf6COCCC.OO
S' .:> .:>
o~CJ.xma
.:> :>
II @ecroo~:OCCX.O S
.:> 1., .:> .:> o
~cocccoo M:cPecoPees :oc~e>es rcoc~:2 :~~!So b:hes l;c.@o
S'.:> .:> .:> .:> .:> ~ .:> e e:l . o -o
~ .: ,_:;
~'' '. :."~>?
u@cd:eoo@ccroOcce:o~chlesccco~
..) 0 .) l,.) ..,!j 0 .)
Jce><nhl.:>;:j
bes ::r ....r .c rce>chl .:>;:j
bes Cl'c ash .:>
c.occ~cb
.:>
:c.es:ob .)
rd:oes&!cc
.:>0 .:>
:c.oom:eo ~ . .:>
oro~es (our.ir:cPe:eoobcoo~ .:> eo,:,o
c.a~b1 .)~ .:>
o~~ obtlc) . a.~oc~&
.:> .;)
Moo~Gf)~bl~occoa@hl roro<hcohl:te :cee>GG h.>f!iro :,C.~e>&>1ntoo~
.:> .:> 0 .:>:.:1 .) .) :.:J .) .:> ;:j. - .:> 0 .:> ::::1 0 . 1, .:>0
c.Otoe
.:>
cbooa
.:>
c.cce>o~
.) 0 .
ce>cce> ,:,Rccchl :oQbe:~c:Ce~
.:> ;:j .) ;:j .:>:::! \.
rl6bee
S'
to:oQcd:o
0 .:> :::J
c.cce>oesto Fec~*coes :otoe>eob l<.C:>de>:hlcliibPees u@ccl()chl fSbe .
.:> 0 ::::1, ;)!, .) .:> e'J.:>:::J.:> ' .:> t,,:,;:j S' \.
ee :of:l:oe>ccto c.oecofl o~o~ chlesd~:otoes' ~to~:cee> j@cc:...Q
.:>:::! .:> ;) .:>::::1.:>:::::1 .:>:.:1 .;) - ,:> .:> ~
be. . :tecce> toto
0 {.,0
rc~@cchloco
..) ~.)
&:~!ffi
0 ~ 0
rfb:c.cowero
~ 0 .
rcoto:cbc.oo&es
0 0
. II @cc:c.tt:tecce>
.:>
toto oro~e>cob
1, 0 .:> .:>
r roccco~ 3 0 .:>
IG~~ c~tlc lbcccwccfl c.~wa u@ccb:c.ec') te~M~l tc~:cee>
.::J s .) .:> .:> ..L .:>:..3 0
w:~Q';~:ob tototo roro;e>cob oe roccc1:ococese> ro~~ c~tlc roFco:hle
e Y .:> o l.o .:> .:> o .:> .:> .::J .:> e'h
ccw ,:>;:j chles d~' .:>~ ohles .:>code>:hl:cee>ccr:;~
6j ,)
~ l.ucbooa oto:~~:cee>
.:> ::::1 0 .) .:> &:j.
rf6cR:oPees
S'.:>;:j .:>
oro;e>cob
.:> .)
cr roccc1:owcese>
0 .)
w~
.)
c~tlc
.::J
u@ccb~
.:>
ofo~
\. .:> 0 .:> .:>
tocoPeoto
0 .:> .:>o
:oe>:oc.occ.:>
e5o rroc~e>&!cc:hlbcbooa
.:> .:> e'J .:>
oro:::>tee>:2
.:> .:>t..
o1:ocoto
e .:>O .:> o
roto
\; 0
IIOel~ft
0
:@ro~b:tb:oQro:&es
.:> .) l, .:> "'J
rfbwcccoo
S' .:> .:>
o~Pee.a'~
.:> .:>
:oc.~e>es
-' ,) ::::1 .
?Rccchl
v:.:l ,;:j ej\.
:hle:cee>cc .>
i;C'Oe> l:o:cPfle:cbco
0 0
reuco .:>o~tow l, 0
&bcbcros .:>
JCW
:flcc:~oo wcbe>c.ro ~'5rob r:ol:l(j)R off:ochlcccc cobcob. n@cce~ :@co

.:>o .:>o .:> \. \ .,;::;b;:j .:> .:>:.:!\. " .:> .:> .:>. \.o .:>
ac.rflcce>cocc .:>
oblwPe
.:>:.3.:>
rtoh~chl:oPero
0 ::::J.:>;:j .:> . -
:: n Pee>wco~
.:>
wacce> r ~wcccoo
~ .:> .:>
o~Pees
.:> .:>
:oc~e>roo:Lbchl
.:> ::::1 0 ,;:j .:>
otocboodbro
.)
CDOCfleJOC.fle>to
.:> .:> 0
ecn
ncccce
.:> " .:>
col,Pe ;flro .:>o
~bcooPw
,
:2rwes
,
:oce:~
.:> .:>
wco:b .:>
ro!Eo:8wrewro
e:J, ,
:o'&;&1oo
.:> .>
hxuc.w
o
~Peer;
.:~S
&Jccb~e>
.:>
o~olrees
.:> .:>
:o~rof!iesi:c.roeo:pb
.:> o .:>
~~~
S'o
'liJe> :c~OCO~@hl
.:> .:>:..3
cccbes cr C flab
.:>
c6cc~cb r:c.coibto tOeleB :2 C :cf:les
.:> .:> ..L e :::1
n@cce coMe ;ero 4bce>erw ~ oc oosoccoe:J b~fl~otoes lofro:hl
.:> "" .:>o,., .:>.:> ,,::::~, .:> ej
!;'the> :c~ocof!iohl rbro'_i.boc flGOcocc~cb r:c.rooc.ee>ocfle>1:o rw:~&
0 .:> .:>:..3 .) .) .:> .:> 0 e=l
:cb::o:&ro .>0 o&e~w~b rwroes &!ccbe:tecce> ofbu:hlb cbws oto:~Jee>:2
4 .) .:> .:> \. .:> e1 .) .:> .:> (., e
cccctob ,:,Rcc~w~c.Of, cw~:cre:c.w@ :,~&tetoto roff:o:hl~cocn:~
.:> l, 0 .:> ;:j ::::1.:> .) 0
v
::::1 ;) 0 l, 0 .
.) 61::::1.>
S6 S.UIOdffii M V1 VW"HflH
396 BURMA LAW REPORTS [r965
~ ~ ~. r,::c- (" (" (" "\ (" ("
=>etij oo~'F'o:>O? q9~ ?09 ~9' rotf"c;;o:co-:>:e~c:o:>2 'rf>Cl'--fOlo:>~ Gropm
.;w~:;l,l?~
'
C\)0)211
("
[<'
~
"\ (" 0 (" (" 0 - (" _c;: C"J:'... (" (" (" ("
G91ro0?? 2:G~?CG~?CO?~ COCr:J"~JO')~I ~:~:>c: GO')?C:
~?CG (" L'? C"OC" "\ (" 0 (" C'f,'? (" 0
or '
':I~CCU ~cqcqjC t10?2~COI::De?ll G:x>:~~ O?mG'f>OOt1: O)JffiJff 0{~2 ~
c L'? c r,;: c o " o o rR c- c oc "
C\).JCI t1o:>e?f> ~epc: ~5JOIII cq~ C:joo:>~CI ~? OOo:>~COI<Jt
c o c c o c c-L~ <: r.: c
~co-:>:~Jmroe?: ~o:>e?' '?.Pro G:x>:~9?m(j:t ~c: ~;;.,me4>
~roroo:>
0 0
:;omtcl
("
mmo.sm
(" (" (" (" ("IO<Jto:>:no:>
.sroro~:n
'l (" (" 0
comooo:>:n n co
(" 0
'- l. L t.-'11 -~T~T T A C.:. ~ L 6 l t:.:. o\.
G [?CI("
. O')OI::D:l:>l
Go:>OO:o:>
t. tt.
o"
t.
c
C.:.
Goo:~::o
o
L! ot.
o:>?:Gcom
6 -r-
ce
T
c
:G.s?rot 6
c
roo:>c:OO.S?
1lT
r,;:c c o ' oc o ~c ' c c c c c
mtj4> ~::D9f :;o~~5jo:> WY:>:,1 t1f~-:>:~o:>~? OO:f>2:~0)GO)?C:Go:>?
c c cr,;:c c c c-r,::;::cr,;:c c c r,::c
<p:~c:~Jffi 0?90 t!IOGO::De?IICjC:o:>? GQ:l:~~c eJOeJOIJO?IJO? O{OJtjC:
"' C" . C' C" C" OC" C" 0 C" 0 C'
~~9JCI 000)0') ~JY:OJ?'P9Y2<Jt O;(OOiC~ ~0)211 9~Go:>? 9C9Xf>
c o<: <: oo<:
G [?C I o
~~uGOOGO~COOOOO':IU;;~C:CG~t
l t. ~ L LL U
II
or,;:c o co GC""\
~Gep~t :D~~oxp:cqro?:t CjC:q:m?:Go:>? ID9C<X{:Ot <ft~J.?:m'J
c c c ' (' c c r,;:c c
'f>~::DO? <-l9Y \'09 :D')I Y<JtO?o:> r jiS 0091 G::m(j4>G4>0)())Go:>? Cl:lillf>ffi
rc- ~. c c o c' c r,;: c o c c
19~1 mtl": roco;; f>?OOJCG4>~0{ mJil:o.~;;~::n~ ~:tlo:> "tffi::Oe?U
0
~O:>C
-.-.._ T ta.
("
l3dC' (" (" OO?o:>
IO!l~C
J
<: ~
<Jro?:l
lL I
(" ("
cc:::n:n
C.
W?W0~t
(' ("
oroc:
L
C
O'l _C:.O "\C"OO<:r,:c OC"o ~.!:'... <: C"
qot~ e :G4>tc:q ~mo:>tl~ W"~'\0(00?: ~:tl"': CX>.fCOf Wf? crn;j
r,;:cc o o c r c c r,;:<: c o.....r.:;:: c
Bnoo~2~' ::D9~~o:>? ~=190?9Y2 tlooo::n2n ~"eP~ ool
cr;~ (;""~ c- o '1 c- 1~ c- f,~~ c-
~J'to:>t1:Go:>? Wt1....9(t)C'J11 YJ?:4l? G~~GO!'jf WGei?c:~r:J" II W<tGCO?C
c c c c ~c c o cr,::;::c c c c
sm oo ;4> ffiJ4>G~f 4>J<fO?CO':>:Go:>-:> rot110s~t ro"lo~~=;~ GCO?c:;m
C' C" A. C" C" C" "' c C" OC" <:
~ ;() O')J:X:~IJ2 ~~o:>?l GO?')~ o:>GCI:l'JO') GOjj~GO~ ~0:> O{ffi0)211
_ ,,,.- . n11:~g>~~~:cl;g<x>~.~ ~~ec (f) f.o~ fl_f~~
. .
. II~~' tc,;~-
. . . . p .)0
~:Ci&:<bcoo~COC)
:,- .e.:! -~ ~
::>~~W~b :;~COOCCCCO
.)0 .> _ .) , ,) 0
IIO~hcob
li '\ .)
r
~~ok~~~~ bst>c 1ccce~Pe io (Jb) c s'>~~=~sro~<h i~~~ bsvc +
. ,~,6oe~~~ksOO~cb ~~~~ b3vc *
. .
uw~~e:c1coe&>es
.)
11 w~esk:cbcoe'&w
. . ;) 0 0
u@ccco6
.) .) 0
coP6lCOO
.:> .)
w@cc:ccecohl:k
0 ..) .) _
:_j
:oct:;;!e&ehlec
.> ~ O.)~
1bec (f) JoC f!Cbco:l',cocece
.) o.)
II @ebcdn
.)
tc>@ccl3chlec
.) O.)~
bee (co) boc flcb:Cicocc..,d,
.) (;W.l
ecbe:kccelbcot:;;t&,:olee
.) '\ ~.) Q.:j'\ ..> l.. ,
1:hlcePw
8'J
tc:flro:coob:fl
0 .) 0
12GCimQ ~b :c.ec'&:cce .)@cctu:d,c.oeJ.!oecu
.) ~.)~.) 0 0
It corecoh1:1:Jefl0oo
.,) .) :.:1 0.)
u@cc:ccc:1:olb:~<:2@b
.) 0 !:)'.) .)
'AI.ooso:w: 'asnoH l!furqs!fqnd a8vn8U1l'J.
U8!<l.IO.i[ 'AoSn.IqJ:, 'V f.:q <13Ua'p!{}.:fl jo iCt0<1f{.L <11{1 01 UOJt:mpo.ttUJ Ufl'
u@ccoe@cow
.) e.) o
:@ro'of:beobm:~~coo..,d,
.) .) .) e.) ..>
m~maro~k @cc~I(Z
.) o:J .) o .> S:
"""l Q 'b 1 cb ~ r 2' ,., rc.o1 ~ hl 1 1 , _ ,_. _ _,_ _, _
u~ccoe~;:Js l6leg.>: co., eec 1cco., co:j>~3'~~cooccccc 1;pc e:e'J~~:fKX>~e
Occ:to
.)
ICCC.Otoealebcnoo:k
\. .) .) .)
1:occecocc<:2cc@e
0 .) .;) .)
lb'coo:k
!)"~
1:o'
0
&@fl
.)
1cbmhl@ebcol.>
.)~.) .) 0
rod> to:d,co~~ec~:cPecoPeeccecocc
.) 0 .) .) .)
I.)ecb:ooeam
.)0
'co:cfe}'iooO.;:>cbu
.)
II corecotJ:k
.) ,::~
. r
0\g
.)
1
~:
. cbco~mes
11 )
8bl:5;~CeB~::>C~~
(
.:>~ .:> .:>
Sl)IOdtni M.v1 vmna:

~URMA LAW, REPORTS
66 SD:IOdffif M.V1 VV\llifUI
400
:1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS l 401
"(>
GOI OJC
C'
00)0)0'X]UGS::l.XDffi
C'
Go:lG'
C'
?C: II
C C o
!:ldS!:ld:>l .SG(I)?ffiO)C
[
001\
C' \G ~C C C
oe&~
b , T C t o T A
c c 'l<' 'l'
roGm?mm ororoG<.stc:Gur 0J :ncv0:Go :n
c o c o c
roc:roro:x>:>1(J)
co r.:c
I~CG
c
?c:r
;r c: c:
ol L c-L 0 G~')CG~')C
0 ') 0 OC 0 C C '"\ ~ ~ C (' ')C 0 C ')C
9!3dQI C'f./.0:>~0:01 COffi'JUOJO{ Glj')Gt?3?C:1 cDmG~Jc:rq ']OG:x>')!:JdQI5 GS:{
o
COCOm
L
('
o
ll
0)l
~ GUIC
c@:1:1
coc
g
'~"
c <:::
c o GO)C!G [ :>c:
. O)::lJ?::x>:nm
c
c 0
;"I
(' 0 0
c CO:)):D
c c
"[<;.c
lJ.
c o\
ClC CO()')~Q
c.:-
~g
t. 0~ ~I
c 0
c.:. !.,..J 0 .: l. 0 r;: c:
..
:.
tj~C9)')C~
c
:n:o 11 G0:>cco.sG<J?c<:~1 com:;oQtmm u:n:>'!l comCJcmro:x ro:m C\XT.>(JQ
'
C.:.
c
T
c ~c
A t. ll
o c oc
L C Jr Jl ~- -..- 1!.
c c c c o c c
~,\~on
QGOII
:.
G0?CG~?CGC:: ItJC mmrocm G:D:D G0?C9C:D:0 C00:mr,~o-)O)Qro
.:J ~ l l IL C L...~ - ~- -1
rl~roro:
c ~ c ')c co co c c r:''
C0(}.)GQIC:~C(])ffi0ID? GO)rog:n::n()) COGQI c: 0t<,l:::>G:x>:::>GICT.l?C
-~ c
t:J il J ., l l L L t. 1J '-'" o ~ o
C'OC' C <::: C0 C' 0 0 \ 0 [sC' C\C C C'
G<J?CO.SG0?Cc:ll CO(}.)<';CQtmro co:n:n c:O())<;I c: t! COGO:))::D II
c.:.
.
o:>1')C)
o
C:.- Jl
T
(' c
oroQcmc:o:::n
Jl -- 1.- ll
:::n:o
C.
6 LlJ
B ('
::nroG::n comQtmrom
&l tl
l.l.~Ol
c o o
"l l
mco:oocom
If.
(' o ('~
t: L
0
('
(' ~ c ' (' 0 (' c (' c (' 0 ( ' c.,
::n:::no~I.S:;QQ:J:):':l.X'Q G(])Q:J:):x> II :J:)()')G:))QI?::x>::n COffiQICC\:~ SdOOQQ
L t.!T o C:. " o -l C.:. ll C.:.. J -1! ~ e
cc c c
Q:)):'l"l c.gcorot coroQccoro:::n
o o o c
:m c:c:O'Jm 3\ cr;
CGO)!:JdQQro c 0:-n:v
cl:CI).tC c ro o
-,c..::;..::J-r JJ ~L~ 1L 1 ...l . l o. "'1;J c.a.L
m:nc
c
:x>:O!
c c
<J:O:x>
o c
ro 0m:ncm
. 'c
ro: ro
c o o ]
... CO?: c:roro

m Q:roro:o:
c
G::-o:co:>:
L v G C.:.. il l i. o L 1 o;. L d !.1 C .
C CC' C 0 .C C"~ C'O C'O o C o
co:> CO;) :co:>:o0:11
-1 c.
coGu::n:n 11 :nromc 0::n.s:o c:n comro~1mm CQ:orom<J~

6
c c
w
c c~
c.:, .. ~ l.- A
. o
c~c om:nm~ ~m:>:; o:n?Q ~mocroro:x :::n:'l} 0:-n:x>~rr.lroro
c.:- Jl
c c
.11
T 1 . d
T . lt.
l ...
c
C.:.
B
...
c
C.:. ~
L
c c
J o
r::;:::: (' [sc c
IL
c 0 ~ (' ~r,:: c
G~:>q CC:Oill:x>~~ SdG~-:>c:tjtjC: 0~~QJ II 0~~oc:;qG~I Sd<IJillSJ
0\ c 0 c 0
L\
c~
0 ('
rol :))())Go:> G0"Jcoo.s:Go~c
c (' ~ . c c .0
G0-:>crocGm:ro~t comro~)lmrom ro:ro:
c 0 cc 0 0 0
oT J o oL 6 l lJ l- l L l
c. c o c J::A>C C'\r;~ cr,~ c ' ~r,~
rop:rop: (\)(J)Q02~COJC 090 Sd~l:> 9r~tl<Dtj:G.pm1 C\t~ot?:~lj:
C' G C' :-)~ C C C ~C' C , "(> G C C _0
ro~c 0:~CO?: OCOI'f:l~ G~?CGSd?CG9:1::1q~q SdG;.;I roe.:m Q~?C')C<q
'lG
Olal':<l.>')OI.'l:U'JC, L
8
CO . :nm:x>
C () "(>
~:.
C'
GOII :x>?:::n::nm::o:x>:Oli
~
0
t:.:r \.-1 ~
C 0 '),
COrr.lQtG0?CQCm
L
C C 0 C
t
rom
L
'I ~ ;r
c c c "'c ' c
~'J:QJ >u GO ~(; 9UGf:x>~l G~ tc:~ocro:>~ lf~qc G{:)?CG!:ld?CGS:i::lS
c 'c"'G c ~c
m G0:>cocro
C' C' 0 G
0:oro:>:
o C'
:x>ro<J:Gol ~
"(> 0 C' 0 C
ro.sQtrom:n::n
C' 0 C0
llcoccmro::ltmmm
C0
:o
C' 0
1 . l I ., T U l C. l ~ l ~ l l C.
~ c c (' c ~c c . (' _<;:: "(> <:\ c
~ 9:0COIDQCO.JC GG?CG!:Jd')CGs:~~ :x>2:x>')<:JC'f.) 9C:c:t!:ldG<S I (Jp:ol GG';C
c o
OC(J)G:x>:Gs;>:G.Sd:~c (J)Cffi:
C' c c :
'Q(.l)(}.)'):))O)Q c'c c::x>D c IOOGOG:OIIOXm: ;. c
~, l A J ~ IL ~' fJ . - l c H.
R c c o ~ o c c ~c e c ~c c
b~U)QJID '=l]~SJ0~:x>?li G0?CG~?CGS:I::1S roe:ro~:m t11!Y:ict>J!l:Oif
c
:)):1)())1:1 ro:n:
~ c oc ~O)(]):))GO)')O)
o c c c QU)ffi?
c cr c,
c:, ll:l c.:. 0G ?~CI
L. 11. 1\.
~ C rocm:
ll ll
:))(])IClO)Q
. Ll 0 0
r,::c r,;:c c r,;: c c o c o o o c c ~

tlc:tlco:n2ot :;q:tlm9t::n-:>5j:x>2 11 9::l;1m?: 02?~ ~m~cro'P:Oif~:m
GOO: ~ O?QGO
c' II rocro:
c c c GQoG:x>? 0,):))0)00)
Q(.DQI('J) '
c o G(J')CG!:ld?CGC:
c c c
C
L o 11, 6f 0 J1 n. ,.~ L L ' " o
G c c c r;.: c' c .
me:m~:ro:n? :OJil=~t~Ui' ~:tl0)~:))2.1' '
C
C . C C C 0 ~ C OC' . 0 C' C' C
GG?CC"2f:GO~c.
G0?COJCG8d:q{ Gtj?::l:>~a.l9_C:~"3JCI G0?CG!:ld?C
~(' . C' c r,;: c c ') c: ~ c ~ ('
GS:I::lq:n2 OOGJc=e~:n~ . !:JdQI('J)l :!:ld')ID'[:SJGf::D~ ~I os(,)O)QJC\)2:
0 c c 0 c cr;:: c"' r,c:> c c (' \ 0 c c
9!3d~O?'jt:~;~ . ~m9ttl~~l:lj:':f?ml . G'=l~C9'? rJ?~"G:x>? O)()'=lG~-:xr
& to~:ooxc . :ccob:ft
0 J , . .;) e
~0 uo~?o~~hlft
?to~
0 v~
~bcdb. :cwW!.Dcccecc
.:> v ':5'' .;) . 0 v
WCCCCCOO~
O .:> .:>
:~e~WC!':crob:ft
.:>C .:> e
?,hlcc-~G~
.:>::.3 ~~~brox:::;b:&:,
::~::b~ . .:> ..:> .:> .:> . o
II CCCC
.:>
.0hl:hl:c~~oo
;) ~ ej .;) ~cbC2cce:cwiftb
.;) , .:>. . .C:ltv~io~
..,
cc.O~axc~bl:5~::>cro~~ce.~
.;) .:>.~ .;) .;) .
t:cccoccc~
.;) .;) .;) .
:~k:le<.b:>!IJ
.:>~h.:> ~
~hlc4coe~. cce~too~~
.;)~ . 0
fG~R:obcot,
':5'.:>~.;) .;) .
(DCC
.:> .
c~ccl'e!G:to:~co
.:> 'S'o.:>
cc 1o~:ftro :coob:ft
o..L
to::>b::>cft~
eo.:>.:>
.:>
IICCccroa;cJb.)~
.:> \.:>

~cc,oC!'hl . 4bd~@ :cl;::>oo~C!'hl . cccbes (w) bed ftc!lnEOI(()CCQCb
.:> v.:>::l .:> .:> 6 .:> . .:>~ . . .:> e'::.b . ..
::>fcv~&J to@ccbGhle.G -:Xn IO~e.G ~Q;!)~::>Ce.G~:JCft~ a.;:~~Q:a
.:> .:> o.:>~ .:> J... .::~ .:> .:> o.:>~ 6
II C2cccohl:eeo~IW ~C2cc06'!Cbco cec~:be<.w:~e.c 0~

.;) .;)~o.J.;) .;), .<)~. o.;) G.;)
:chco4~e.c
.:>
cbwi'ees&':cdn
.:> .:>
@cc:CCcftCOf,"J
.:>
ohlcccro::>o
o.:> o.:l .:> ~ .:>
:~le~CL@
.:> t.. .:>
W~a:;bJ
.:> o o .
IICCCC:clc!W
.:>
: IO~:ftCDCC icrob:ft
o J... .:> e
@cc::>bOCft~ o6Jcc:b:4>(o
.:> . .:> .:> .:> ...1 o. .:>
iob~
.:> .:::::J
cOOcoCC ft~eBCOCOb woQ:5~::>'ce.c~::>cft~ :cw::>b~cft;;, ~c.Q~tocdew .
.J .:> .:>Q.j. 0 .;)~ .) .:> .;) .;) .;) ::::; 0 .;)
:::>chJ~
.;) ~
jOCt.;a:>e.G
v.;)
otocb
.;)
lidi:&:>
J., 0 0
II CCCCO~@Gl~b
.:> .:> ~.:> J.,
16)~ w:cbco4em
0 .;)
cco2cmo .:>
~'f~~OCCCCC
.JO .:> 0
IWd~:hlcc~cobJ
.:> ~'}.:> .)
Wtocb<b~cctn
0 0 .:> o
CCC.Otoft!f;'
\ .:> '5 &>
C2ftbcooo:b:>
.:> .:> 0
h>cc~cc~ccC2ft
0 .J .:> .:>
IG~o:b:> 0~&ccft
':5' 0 .;) 0
~hl@ftbr
.:> :1.:>
..dectoh.J
.:> .;) 0
:Chco~~e.c ~:d~wreea::~wcch> 11C2ocetea:oo ~bcottfl(Jihleso:'b fteto

.:> .:> .:>
0 0 .:> \0 .:> .:> .:> .;)~ 00().
COWftft tecbxcd':o ~~:ftrw :C2row~tccoto ~Q~s~o(.cr;~~ce~ uCCccMe

.:> 0 00 .:> 0 .:> .:> .:> .:> .:>O .:> 0 .:>~ .:> .:> .:> :::J'i.
tewoo'low :C2row:dOO:~wcc~blwrft c~:c.Pftwroe.cC!'S,eB ~e.c!QJ

0 .:> ' ' .:> .:> .;) ~.:> .:> .:> ...... '5
II C2cchl
.:>
::>eoa::wc.Fro~ coroco"'co"cc"'co
:.:f.;> '\ .:> .:> .:>
~toC2cc,ooccmo
o o .':5' .:> L .:> .:>
f,wcm~lu
.:> o
:::>chJ~e.c
.:> ~
~~C2ftcoo
.J 0 .;) .:>
cceftwro
' .:>
h.J'I:Owrd::ea:&
0 0 .;) 0 .:>
1d:O:~b
:> c .:>
11C2ccEOle
.;) ::::3\.
tewC:o
0 .:>
to4cow~~e.G
0 .:> .;)
:C2roccce~ahl
.:> .;)
::>mc.Pft:~reco~&
~.;)~ .J .:> .:>
~::>b::>ce~
'Y .:> .:>
ecce.
.;)
:20~ co~i.U cc~hltv:cbco tal2: 1&:2 :Q~d5~b:~w ~cC2n
6.:> .:> .;) ~0 0 .;) 6 Et:J 0 0
II .;)cccc::>Pw~-ce
.:> .:>
:@ro
.:> .
Mwrew ~cc0hl:8:c~~ro ffi@ccQc.ch:&:> 0hl~b nh"Jesa:<.ch :C2cceoW.
.:>.;) .;) .:>~eJ .) .J :::J.:> o .:>::.h .:>o.:J o .:> , ,
o~wrd::ewC:o
,J.:> 0 .:>
u::,b:~cce
::>~ 6 .:>
ll re~~
0
<:bco&~~ewro
.:> .JO .:>
~wwre~
0 .:>
e2cdh.~ce:
.:> .J
:c&rw .:>~b~ce~ .;)
~hlccco'bod~~~ee.coo JCCcc~b:, h>:ob'G~hl~ w::>boce~
.;)~ .) 0.;) t.. 0 .;) 0 0 .:> ':5' ..J .;) .:>
otcwcw~e.c
.J .;)
fb:4>wwl,wro
':5' .:> .;) .;)
co:~b .;)
Jcceccci'eeood~
c '
w:;bl:s~~ce.r.;~oc~~
.:>~
0 .;) .;)
ucccc~m&~~ea;m
.:> o.:> .:>0.:>
~~co'b
o 0 . .:>
:C2meoC2ccb0hl .:> .:>~
~Prwlb:&:>:*to
i,j ::> o .:>
:~ba:o
.:> .:>
cocc w~bl:S~::>ce.G~~c~~ c~C2cc:cecfto & 10~:ftrocc ob~cft~ 1eod~
,J .:>~ .:> .:> .;) 0 J, .;) .:> 0 .:>
.;)
:hlc;Jcob:oo
e:J::::J.:> o o o .:> tctn UCCCC:ci;ooo .:>
:~bbe.cwrea:ro
.:> .:> .:>
~b:4ccft
Ye .:>
CC~WCC .:>
CCC~
WCCCOOft f,8~wcc CEccccft l:~bbe.ch~~ ccc~e~ib~ be.cwre:cQ~t(!.
.J .:> .:> .:> .:> .J .:> .:_j '\ .) ::::1.:>
~:dhcc~wcc
';)- .:>
'b~Cbco
0
cl,@cch-lcotlicccccoh:oo
.;) :::::l.:>::J.:> .:> 0
fbAoro
':5' .:> ~Qe.r.;cnco'b
.Jet.:! 0
tOt S~"tlOdffit M.V1 VW'dfl9:

~ .~ c 0 c c c c c c~ Q r.: co
g)J8d'[GJt:3 cqmf'XDJ~~:']f 2UGS'JtGj:>!~~ UQ)::l.-""1('7)9) e:~~~:m
o c c: e c c c c r,;:c c
~1)U:>CD0 ro'P:0CJCG9: 4:-f1:>Gp:qc y'Jtf.XXi9:J8dB0 G~::DXD~G::D.?
OQ C 3 (' o C tc C' o C C C' Co ,,.
:;q(jUXD 0Xp!I!XJCG9;0f1:>~ ::D.:T.>G::D.Q2UGS'S UQ)XffiG:D'JSdGt)Q~Gp:
(An Introduction to the Theory of Evidence bY A. Thrusov,
Foreign ~anguages Publishing House Moscow) ~ f11t:::D.2t ~
c c c c o c co 1m c .c c
CJ:l:G:roc CO(;'OO)GGI'J:;;?, roro:Q::D;D !:r.l 0QIG!ffi'JC: SJOOCS:lQ?: ::D:T.>G::Do;>
u o ~r JL u c;..; -[ ._. J L.J Jl l
C 0 .\ C J;: C ~ C' 0 O
9f':t'J Q)'P!U{~ Q)?Of::D."JeJDG(~j'JC:I roq>:~ :Gp:ts;;~~:9G~Gf1 rocp:cq
0 c
oxp:QG~G'fGJ?::x>c:; ~:Gv iC:9J s;J~yroq>:a-/ Gt9. ~CX>9f ~:ID?tt:j~G~:
')C ~ (' 0 ::r c c ~ ~ c
c c r,:;::: c c c c c
. 0 0 r,; c 0 c c J!,;
[91)Gt:j'JC:- 0::D2f9S G9::x>?:. G:S t:icx:m;x>~GJ:>:o:r 2:~~~:</) ']~~f:
c 0 ' 0 c c ~ Q 09< coco c . c
0.:>~11 D:fOp~c:D? <(.(;~J?COi>2 11D~e:J?r;~).W.>m ~tliD:T.>tCC~C c;p<'N'.m
C C C C r:' 0 C . C[ G C
mJS<X(!rS ()Q)::D:T.>G::D.'J ~G!_9Q XG::mroq>~~p:o:r . O)Q)~e::Gpm
<: ' . r,;:.:- C 0 C OQ COC'oC' 9 C
mJs~:ro?~G::D?'I{Gp: tJIDGo::n~u 9'i~!:>:::Dc oqt::cpm~cc~ ro'P:09c.
CO ~~ QC OCC CC' OCO C'
G9:1Df0~ QX:(~o:>o:>ID C?CoG:;mc~s ~m~G8d?c
SdGdl:GJl: mot:;m:>
' C c c '
tlCOOCG ')S!0}GU:QC~C c C' C' C' "l' c
::D::l)COQ)()0)(\)~0)') GUI COO:>CO':>GO.)'J GGI'J:
.
1l , J o -r c .u IL tJ
r,;:.c . c o '1 c c c c '1 . ' o 'T'J,; C'
tJDGO::DR II 34UfUIO)JG: CO?<CIJCD_. p ::JO~; Grr.:l?myr~~ G~ l tjOO'):::D~ II $
u A number of guarantees- of 'the correcttiess of. a court's:
findings given in Article 43 of Fundamentals of Criminal Pro-
cedure operate in the same direction, This article also.
provides more difficult conditions for the prosecution than,
for the defence. F9r the court to find an accused guilty
absolute proof of his guilt must be, give;, in court and it
must be based on facts and not on aSsumptions.
For an acq.1.sed to be found not guilty and. acquitted the
law (to facilitate his defence against an unfounded chargeY.
provides less rigid conditions. It is not necessary that the:
acc:used's innocence be proved, it is on.ly necessary that his-
p~cipation in the commiss~on .of the crime is not pro1{ed!. .
'fJtese ppints in _the law mean that ~y d~ubt, ..substantiated'
.by the facts of a case; must be interpreted in favour .ot the
accus~d. If the evidence is contradictory, incomplete or fof:
any reason subject to doubt and does not give the court tlie
.right to consider ~e . charge. .
proved
. beyond all reasonabl&
}
BURMA LAW REPORTS 40$
doubt in its entirety or in any of its parts, the court's findings

must be in favour of the accused. The same applies to a
case of a fact that permits or different interpretations.
Naturally this does not include doub~ that are not well-
founded, but those that are substantiated by the material of
the case, by its concrete circumstances, doub.ts that could
not be removed during the preliminary investigation or the
court examination although all possibilities in that field have
been exhausted."
uco6 :Jc~bcob:,;d,~
..>
ti1:x:d~<oOk6~bl
:J O .)O ..>!_j
Je o6~c Job~
~ W
uie .)0~ .)ocae:>eoGf'e>
.) .)
u@eb~&
.. ..) .
hJ@ec<r;;~;oQ&oc.oc.oo~
y .>:t ,;,:::b .)
C!wc.occeeeo
0 .) . .
ca:~
&:~@~
\b .)och':le&
~ 0
ualcc:c.t;oo:>o&lto~:oc~ecr;;~
.) .) .) ...t.. .) ~ .>:::1
(3stmQ.td
Jo .tcnovnt:p ;q~ u!
;8mrqo tuqa~r.~sqns)
:oQwa:)(:o:oC.hleohl1Qcr,:crf'l
.,::J-> o , .> !j .>W~ oc.eoe'&f'IM:df'l:~eeo t->ob:cco:
.,) 5 ..>
~oeco Jcccome (am~'!'!U vt'~U~Qsqrisun .10 .&nJodmg~ u JO 3.8u11qo Jll:>tSAlJd
o.> " .> L.
Items) :oQ:cconl:o"J.Clco:oc.hle
.>~ .) ~' .:> ~
c.ccFC'Icoo:@~eowe~~
.) .)
"c.o:cre:~eeo ->l:aa::cc;o-
0 ,)
at'lb:LSw~ Jc.~b~:,~:~ew .c.cc~:c.cool:o1Q1i;b:, ohl& n@ccbloeh>@ccehl:ol:lnl:o1Ct
.:> .) .J ~o 6- ;, ~o- ..> o ., .)~ .>~., !j
0
ot:lc.oPecol;@b ~o?d:o~b:C!co&:cl:lea adeeo cccocco IOe>Gt:lti:h, uhlct:l:ol:l1Q
.,-~.> :J ., ., .lO.lo o ~ o ..> ~ ..>:.:Jo- o 01.>:l:J:::J.> ~
ot:lc.oPecoG@b
.,::~.) .) .)
~bcro.......
.)
IO~ct:l:~eco:~eeo
.)~.) .)
Jch:--'J:ccool;o1Q6t:l)lteeo"'Q:oreeo
~ .) !.:) .) .) :;"..j.)
@as
.)
b,:d,coe~ I ofbx.coro~Ceo:O~ CCCe:ccohla~:Xo:c.ra:h,obQ>
1
0 .) .)
c.o:Crf'IC.OCOWC.OPew
.)0 0 .) :J :..:JX .) .) 0
d,~c.occ
.)0 .)
o~:deeccec.cxc
.) . .)
c.ccooec.oroc.o:c.re:&coc.we
' .) . .)
~l?.n
.) !)"""'
uc.orec.ot:IC:e
.) .) :r.
--cb:o&ocoe&eococob
.) .) 0
coto:dx.oek.s
0
u:oblGt:ll!tea.~cc@aCJa:c.oc;ceoeo
~~.,):J.)t,. .) .) 0 .)
c.a:~8~co- ( uopp.tsdf uapooM) H~~:few:c.cc_1cc-(co) ooo fl_fh

G00CC.OW
~
:ol:l:oc.J::le~:@;~-(3J~O~S
~ ~ .) :.:1 " .) '
,=IU3U8Wllld) dWCOG000WCCCebl@c.o
0 .) \IJ~
Sl.1IOdffii M V1 Vlf'n~OH 90T

~~~~to:2n
.) e .) . .
nc.o&w:c.ree:c1coe&es
nr (.0 II :cf'LQ (3")~en I (~)soro ccoa~ll u.)c.o&esk:c1coe&es

. 0 0
1rOGMOJ,S~
M 11 a:!ccdcdu~:~tc!@b~t,
.) .,) 0.,..) .) 0 0
-~
cme ~~(r:JgtJc) o'0 rc~c.oo:>co 1.>bcec 1.>ohl
o
1ec~ ucs4coc.41J
\.. .>
M' bcoc.oxl,~Pero:&w
o ~ eo .,)
ceooocb-ese
O ol
11 boC 1cco~c.c&:cbco
., .,
~:k::>bc::>::>k~"'t:l
.) o .>o j~
r~ oCtlc a@r.doe rs~ ..>o~ "4Pcowoc.ros
;, :::::1, ,~.,: e ;,
( ~re~) :ceewoc.roe
e .>
.t.Ot SDIOdffii M V1 V.li\lliOH

C' ' ~ c r,:;.<- roroeoGS

c C' ( ) C'
O~~:~Glj:>C:t:Jc: <{8 000 0) ~C-
c
::.c
J
.ssTw~?OJf
" He must not, without the lessor's consent. erect on the
property any permanent structure, except for agricultural
o-1 J"
purposes.".
0 OC' C' 0 OC' ( ) G C' C'

. e::Y.>(})f: ;s_ '=I(,O?o;lOf ? o
G:>9ccq:~c-
" The removal of a mat walling which formed the

temporary partition wall between two ~ooms to conyert them
into one large room cannot be considered to be either an act
: causing deteriorating wast or a breacli of ~enancy."
03?(4H~831~?rS~8il:~~ oj~:o?o1:ro6?: (9) ~98a{:q8 cr3~(~}

c e e o c c(c) c 5 oc ( ) C' o C' ~ C' Q
mu OO?OOXJC3tl ~S ~lcr300 0 o:>o:>Od~c j ID9C<l1:~::oe t!Jjrr.l~7S GO'Hpu:x: ;;o
C" ..
0 C'O C' C' OC'C::C' 0 C:C' '"\"~ C' 0 C' C'

op~m:x>m~ct:lc: <.l~:x>[9~ G()J t19i' <:q<.l~<.lc.Jt~~J 11 QOJ?
c
C' OC'
oo;soo;s:~: 7S
C' C' OC' 0
~f~~c e=~c:cro?c:
C' C' (r::) Q
~ ID9ccq:~c-
C' C' f<;
GoT~-x>Jf
" In our view there is satisfactory evidence on record to o1 jll
show that there is local usage enabling tenants to erect lofts
inside the rooms tenanted by them without the express
consent cf the landlords concerned. Clauses .(o) and (p) oi
section 108 of the Transfer of l'rop~rty Act canno~ operate in
favour of the plaintiffs in the present case."
mj ~:[9c&:n::x>q roTo1 ~98<xi:::o~ g)m~;q xct~88:<;~q
0 ('
~9G002?11
(' 00 C' 0 (' 'l ( ) Q C' c
030?-:"'~J~'f><?oo9 ~~ ~f?O?fC31 '2 ID9ccq:~ -
" The word 'permanent in clause "(p) of section Io8

appears to have been used in contradistinction to what is
temporary. If a structure is intended to be there only
temporarily, the statute does not apply: but, if the intention
is to enjoy the structure permanently and the structure is
of a substantial nature, it must be regarded as a permanent
structure. In other words, if the work of conversion or
construction is substantial or brings about a substantial change
in the physical change premises and it is not merely a small
physical change of a temporary or unsubstantial nature, such
worJc of construction falls within the mischief of the clause.
The test of removability or demolition is not an invariable
test because even permanent strilctures like buildings or walls
can be demolished or removed. It is a mixed question of
fact . and law in each case whether the extent or degree of
construction or erection is such as to make it partake of the
characte! of permanent structure or not."
c-r,~ c ~ c c . r,;: c 1m c c c '1"~
~~($~
G
o:>2 ~G~")C l)tCI:[UCX>':>:G::D') 3dGQJ')(J)3de ~~Ge1':>C:J ~c:roc: G~J tl
C'
O))g::D2:3 il :.
c "'
c;:>.H;pu:>cro ::-('('.:: ~ ...
i<:
.
GOO:>
e
"'"!9C
!;; Q
(
C'
0
)

Q
09ccq~1
C'
2JI0'JC~:O~c' 1lc:roc:G~J tlOO':>: ::D~
C' C' o
C' (' '1"~
C' G
GOO'::>C~GOO: G9f
(
C'
'\") C' Q
GOO'::>CS'aOJJf ~S,
C'
eUG9<[ ::D2:3 G~?C~CG~?c~q
(" ('
C'
'\"
G91 9Ce:li:!
('
('~ C'
(' C'
GST~?OJt QC'oOC' C' C' C'OC'Q <: 0 C' '

J 09cro:o:>o:>c QI~O)OO':>:::D:n eoGS'=l~C mm::no.x:nm OO'JGU'=l::D II k:
o1 Jll () L ol ll
(' .
UJ
c0
U ILJ '
c
L C t:.:; l l C.:. :
m~ 3d'=lo:>C
C' 0 0 0 _C:. 0 C'
6J .11. 6
GGJ':>(TICI~~C
"-'ij J o -r l
G3d':>mmm::.a:o:>ml
(J)0)0')l: IL ...... -d oL
3d<..DQmm~Q~
II.
c ( "r)
o:rm C' Q C' ('
e:gc:~CI e:::nm
Q Q ( 0~ ) . c C' - ( Q~ )
C\{tJO I 3d~G~ro GQI G'=l':>COjOC: Oi.tJ"j I
c c ( o~ ) c c ( o~ ) c e c ( r,; ) o <;: c c
9'=le'f "-'l.Br I ~rom;; roltl"9 ~q e:~u0<t .Q tr? q;_~l g;; 0 Q)QQJO:'=lp:
'1" C' r.::: er,., (' r,;~ 0 ..... c (' (' r;;:c
3dGUI qc roGtjQ '1t1'=l:Dt9JI ::PUfCQaxp:ool /s-icqooo:>::n~- mQJC:tlo
c c c c cr,~ . c c ( ..
o:l0::D':>: 3dQf:~c. y9::D2:3 002:3~G:D':> S'.dQ'fg~ f9 permanent
r;;:c c G r,;: c c c c
structure) tl0::D2:3U( Ojt2:3~':> ~:tlo:>QJ'? O>J'fCDOO:>:::n2:3 11
o c:. o c c Q c c c c c c o
3d<..DQO:X:OgQ~J
IL -- T (J.)(.))Q)':>:rom
L J
e:gc:rocmt>
rr.;JQIC:
IJ
0 SdQ.S:~C.SQ(J)
T ?> T 1 l
oc-
3dQC3d'=l')
L
~ OJUOO':>:G
L L
c- c- '=lC\.)(J.).SQ
ffi':>C:I
IL T 1 JJ
o
'=JQG c &l CI)OOO':>:GO."l'J
':>C:
. l l
' ~0)
1s9~">
J IL

C' c 0 ') c c A;~ C' 1m c c ('
f9'=lJ ':>:iq ::D'=lO)O:lC:'=lJ':>:<J.tG~ Im~c:~DfCI:[UOO':>:Gel ')C:I G3d':>(J)0.::tJO)C\JC:
!.J
0
i.. G
C ') C
tJI':>:roC\.)::D:G<WDOOC:a
6
C ~~ C
OJUOO':>:G
.::"! l t
6 ':>C:I '=l(\JQQC:mo:>mc
C
IL
0
]-1
C'
L
C OC'j
L
0 C'
:@')groro:n:
tJ I. C.:.
') C' . C' ~
G<.wnooc:c Elrouro-:>:G
c ':>c:J
c 0 OEI
oo::o c
rouoo':>:GOJ') c 0 .
s;;Q.s:m c Q
O)Q()Q)p:
l> .:-1 L L L ot l L T L' 1J ._,
C' ocr:::;:: C CA; Q Q ~ cOf,;) C'r,;_'C
cr::l':>:l G9?C:QJotCDGe1"Jc: Sd00Q~I e::nm, _ 9_tj-o m f s;;QJC~~0 fi)'J':>
c oco C., r,; c r;;:c c c ce ~c-
8:fCDO{C111_ ~m9J DtC\(Om':>::'l1[jC:, ro;;~~cm <.~mctW< t=~':>Cfl r'J'P
L
c
3dG:DElt C\.)()(X)'):G ')C: 6
c org:13d0G'=lC\J
c oomro
&. co

c ( COoj
L
)
Sd(J)')Q')
J
0
CI'JOOl01::1~C
:n l UCJ o
, c
0 c r,;:c- . ~ c A; ~ C' c c r,::::: C'
cr::lG:D~mro':>::DtlS G~Gtl':>C:9J '=l'JGt=~':>C~I 'ftOJ::::DtJmroc:'t 0Jm~':>t:lm
0 ~ C l! OC' OC o o C' C C' ') C C' r:::;::: C
3d00 CD')OO'):Gt:J':>C:I10<r.tCOOUf99:?~(J)L3d::O')g(X)O'Jf G~IO:~C~'JG'G')C~t
0 . r;;: c C' c c C' Q 0 c (' r,::::: C' .
~r'Jt:I<; m':>ro':>:G:n') mQ.y:~cffi'I)umGm':>mm P9~c ~c;ro':>:GG?c:J
ooo~C' C' c c- ( o~ ) cr;;:c . oc cr;;:c-A;
OOLf')tlC:D~ ')Ge'f ottl? 1" rot 3dGJC:~0f9':P 3d~CSdO>f.B0SJI qS
rc,, r,:;:c o~ . cr,;c- ~ c r:::;::: c- c c c
G~~pc:9JG9Gt:~':>C:I f'J'f') .SdO>f:tJ~. I)LCI:[UOO'):GG')C:I S':lQy:~<; r9~t
C 0 OC' o .o C J;;: C' 0 ('. C' r,:;:::: C' C C o _<;: -C' C
o:>f:'=lp:rq 3d'=lf9~~ ::ntlq ~miCDOO':>:GG:>c:ISdQy:~c; y']c:JJ. 3d000?~C
o C' 0 '1 C., OC'O C' r:::;::: C' C 0,, C' C', ( o~ ) .
0-:X:lO)OJC:<J.t GOICD9J otC~(J)CjlOO':>:Ge1':>C:~m~9J ~CC<Y.>fj Oi.tJ"9 !/.)1
. . 0 C' c c C'. 0 c- . ,. C' . ,!;;
8?~oxp:tq:D2:3 GO)')CO)CDQf:<J.t m~OG O)G(.))')(J)3d'): Gcpc:0'):s,t .
. o c- o c . <: . <: oc c- o c ~ c- cic.
qromm~f:9_ QJtmc: ~C2J>~Cm o:>~U<J.t . Gcp<?:0'):Ge.:{>'::l OOGf')
w1~~, ~~':>:i~~t=<f.:.. f_ 99:C' . &ot8oo?:G:>8:I~OOQJ8~~-?9~P ::og: ~.

c o ..., c-9 oc- o erg . . c c o<: c- El C'
O)a)C: rol G~ICD mc~m :IC\.)CD:D'=l?: "'' G<..D':>m~c OOQC3dQS C\.)000:>:
.
l L .J .1 L ~ L L
r.:;:::: c c-c~ G C'c~ ) c r,;:c c- c-..
G~:j'X: s;lqj~~lj: e:OJqJCl Qtl"\' CD OOOJCl[jqJSJQt:~t'J~':> \>'l .?< j'
. ~ ~
G$3-~00
Gel:)?
.l
J
'c;sTa:x.I'XlJf
o1 jll
412 B~ LAW REPORTS
iq
-c;oT~~~OJf
Q1 jD
.
uS2cc
~r2@b~
.;) .:J 0
l..t1c
;..}
<koedo O
COCI:>)Q:Cc:ecoQt~~ccecoc.co~
"' :.3 .;,:l :> .J
lo: oi:J:c.core:L&e.ctoolrec.elokw
o .J::I o..) t..o
)Q: ..J:l do
I.>olke,.~~.>o
t~l'icooo:L&"'ec
o.> .>o
k&c
o.)0
lr.el;2c.C?.:SOCOCOco~
~'o.:J o o .>
:oc.~~:Lb~w
.> ~ ..>o
,:::;:lroccc~o~ecc~c:Occ
)"" .l ~ .>
OQt~(;ISil;IJ JTO ~:>!!.QUO"')
.):) tJ
olrec.e:IOF.W
.) l. .>O
@ccolrec.eeon
.> .> 0
ncorec.ot:lbeac:oo
.> .) :r. .)
u@cc:~C2@~
~ ~ ~
~ l..fc c.fsor(')c.< ~c.oo ~~ ~btb(~)c.e.c ~~~ IWt) ngoeci<.> j><t ~c.rofco:

r .... . ~ "
II S't StJC C.ll'~l~C.Cl>
1~C k.c, :c.~c.co ~:c.c.oc.oec.~cboroc.co

0
:,~
..)
c.oc.ccbc.core(l,~rdbc.co
0 .) ~ .
nC2cco?:1lil:c.cow:~ <oolrec.~ : @~:::c~~h.lc~:LoP.woi;P.ec

:> .lOU o o .) o .J o .> :::::::.1 ~.>:.:1 .>o .:t .>o
u@cco?:10:keri
.> .>o~
<o:c.rfth&cc:L&e.ec
o ' .., .) o
c.cc~:c.oob!
---
lfl~ o~olrec.ah>
.J .> o
oi-l:&>
1 ._c
n~C?.ccdcohJib:
~0~.)
sa!::;:lb
)"
to fbc
o
dcorl"'Co .~
.>
toea
'
obcl'l n&:c.tlwofrcm.:Cb o.r b,coA~boc.c.oc.coo~
.) :I "' t.. \.. .> .> l.;.) oe "'
u.)@cco?:hloco
.>0~.>
'co:df'lcoreecc~wcc:c.G]w
0 .) .)
1::c.w~:::to o~:oi:J:L&e.c.c
.>:::1 .)Q 1:2ooccce::o~
....J .)
.) .) .;)
.,) """
ecc~cocc 1~cct;a : o@:c.ooocoho ~ 1~cc~coo.llec.e:Lb'".ec u nc.oPec.ol:::be

.) 3':J o .>.:J .) .> s- .> ..>o "' .> :J.
u:oS
.:t
oil''~':ccw
.:to
..., Jh
cccoccA-o.rec.ec.cc~:c.oooc.oAoc.oA-
o \. .) ~ .)
'
.)
r o]"1ec.e:LofleG
.)
r
.>o

(:cPC?e:cbcoe&ro)
0 0
r
1
( ~:
cbCO~COeB
11 )
CWCW ( SO ) 11 0
GOeB
It
'10
ceo ( SO) coes
.S.DIOdElli M.V1 YW}IQH tlt

416 BURMA LAW REPORT-S
~~~(oo)m:>
..lfte
0)':)
~6
OC' C' Cop:roc:
C ()EIC C
? ~cc:q:qc-
3=::n~
"'UJO J
Ju "t~tro?ro ~~
" A rent deed .(not compulsorily registrable under the

Registratiop Act) e)tecuted by a tenant in !favour of a landlord,.
if not registered, can be. relied upon to establish the relation-
ship existing betWeen the parties. For, it contains an.
admission or an acknowledgment by the person attempted.
to be made liable and should be very best evidence that one .
can possibly haye as to the oral agreement of the lease and a.
Court is not prevented from looking int~ it for this purpose."
~ r;;: c r;;:c c c ( ) o c- 1 c c c c
~::!) oq:eaxo:>:o:>tJ~I o:>mG:x>Q ~(J) m :D~<f :o:>:>~JlO~e:? "f(J)'?_(J)C
~(' 0 r;;: c c c c c
0 0 c 0 0
OJ')~~c: ~~:ntlq :x>mG:x>~ ~OCG::O:>CO~:I S:J<.fl;;.;VJ"i.J~l~~Gt:j')Cg G<.91 t:j"jy ~0'1:{01 :D~gl:o:>')~JlO<J.i
L
o
8'XD:SXO:>: !Sloe- c
~C:))::D())
LL C.:. l IL-n
cc
(.l):;oQS c II
OOO:).)C.:.;))
.
o ceo c()oco
ii'}:Y.>OOCJ 9 IO')~c:q:qc-
:Y.>f?~a:>?ro 1-~
c .
" A compaiison of section 107, Transfer of Property Act,.

and section 17 (r) (d), Registration Act, would show that
leases of immovable property from year to year, or for any
term exceeding one year, or reserving a yearly rent are
compulsorily registrable according to both the Acts. Accord-
ing to the Registration Act, the registration of other leases
is optional as provided in section r8 (c). According .to the
second para~aph of . section 107, Transfer of Property Act-"
however, all other leases of .immovable property may be
made in two ways.; that is either by a registered instrument~
or by an _oral agreement accom~anied by delivery of posses-
sion.
An unregistered rent~note executed by .the tenant 'for a
period _of one year on]y is not compulsori].y registrable under.
section 17 {r) (d), Registration Act. It. does.not create..a.lease-.
under section 107 of the Transfer .of Property A~t and,
thertfore, it wou~.d not be admissible as .a lea?e deed, but if
---
there is an oral agreement accompanied by delivery ~
possession, then there is no reason why such a document
should not be admitted in evidence to corroborate the fact ~~:~r.(oS)m~
of such agreement and the terms thereof."
0
e=~~
..
<n?
~
c c
tc:z JU
.r ~~ t~a
~
t~~
I
~ .
f ew
cco(so)ll&n
c~~
S~'HOdffii M.V1 VJArn09. sr-v

<: o <:{<' o <: <: oo<: o<: <: o<: o <: <:
~:1x:ooc
c L
~DG0l SjU)o:>mm:~m:n:n cc:moc~:n:n~ro
ll - - T e>t J ... L L L c:. a GmJC;:ii:J:
o ~#~
c:c;~ o c ~ ~c: o rc- ~ c-.~ c: , o , o
OJCD~D: ~~C:Gf:!J C:1Cot0)19C: 9JG~?C~?: ::02t9JOll 9J~Ol(J)'f>;~q{ ~~{&i)an
C' r,;:c- oc: <: o<: o <: ( o~ ) C' <: 0 fsC' CCC'
. 9:l~JC:tj~D9JI:I~C Gf~C~O)') ~~J~ ottrJ :n~ 1:1~~
..
m~
c::;qBC;
~g
~
' c- "'l~ ' o c- c- oc:~ <: c- "'l c: '1~
'<.l :J.>I COCD~I GU:O)CD:)) (J)~Q)9J(J)C: G.SOOC ~Q:>CD.SG:1:>')8JOll COCDOll
c
l. .6 A :..T
1. A J o 0 ('
A T L J
"'l C' <: 0~ 0 C' <:r,;:<: OC' C' OC'~ 2:~t i~ Jll
~?:Otl:l~ot O<jiOlffi(J)C:Jt~O)') 9:l!.flooxp:ot::O~ 9:l~JC:tj~D9JI:I~ Gf<X{C:JJ
C' C' "'l C' "'l ~ C' C' C' . C'~ C' C' c:r,;: <:
~Q>~fG0)')9JOlll es~ro~I~02?:'Jf G9J?rof :::o<;~:j(J)O)~ot ~ro'Jytj{)GO
<:
'0)~11 .
C' 'T'~ "'l r,::;:: C' ~ C' <: C' g C'
8JCOCDG<91 tjOI 9JGtj::>~:~p:G~':>~ G9J')CD9J!.flOl'iJ: O>J~(J)GO)~C
c- c- "' ~;~ o c: <: c: c: c: oc: ~ c: o rc: ~
~JCD~~ SCD'J~ OCG'Pffi~('f.)OO)'Jf ~otGO)') 9JG~?c:~:Dj9~ ~
0 0 C' <: C' C' OC' C' 0 C' C'
mu:>~m f>Q(J)~C 0(\)0Q.S 9Jbl.S~I(:l(J)C\)OJ::0:1:> II
L-1
11.. J -IT T-CJJ t. C:.
~ <:r,;:c <: ~
. ~'J: G~Gye;,:Q~') ~0 CDJOtjCOG09~~11
S.UIOdffil MY1 YW'd[)g OZt
-nlre:~:dxo
. .>
~~:toco:*co~cc@~
0 (., .;) .;) .;)
beo:xrw~
. .;) 0 .;)
~Q:::>Pero
.;)~ .>
::)Sccc~*e~
.> .;) 0
.:::xx>:::>eoo(\)OC\:l
.> .:> .;) .;)
t:::hccc~et~~
.) .;) \0
:::>kJoa:;;te cocr::l~::>cowcw~:l;~
.:>:::b ..:> .> :_j .:> .>
c.coecbreb
.;) . . .
nC2cc~Q@obwccoe:lh ( .Iolg~!q.IV) :lococco~<bre~ ccce:::>cwe
.:> .;)~.;) .;) . "' .;) . . . .;)
co~:coeRCdh.J
'. ) ..J 0 .;) ~
tbe.G T c .)0 GbeG:2rf):@G
.) . . .;)
. :~:C24d:>
.> .;) .)
tebe:4c3hlee:b~
\ .;) :_j\
<0
eo (~m~q:>s) :2r~:C2G:fl(X):CC~ .).) .. ; ) . )
(c) .
co~...s eccewcc.
.;) .:>
ccc~ilJ:cwro
:_j.
:tow
0
hl:xo&>ccceJCC
:J.:> .
wcc<~:2<~
.;) .;) 6.;)
~co t::>oodxocitvebro
.;) .;)
f2) ~cb.;)
:eo~Pwa:d:Ko
.;)
to~em2c.ococ.4e
.J... . 6 .;)
~~~~a:2
.;) 06
(c) co~e:Cbco
.;)
Med::co
. '
ro&:2~\:ckJro
o 6.:> :::1 .:>
o~ccoccco:~ e
(c) co~lu:dxo
.:> o
Mro~co- ,4b:oeolPenes
. .:> .:> .:>
oo:t>,cc:*ro
.., 6 .:>o .:>o
tuweo:::>cPwe~bw:2
o .:> o .:> o
~ob:4co:::~
e o.:> .:>
t~4to4b
OJ.:> .J
<hbPew~co
.:>:J .:>
-:::to obb .:>co~ed~:h:l~:Cbco
.> e:J
~~~~ .bc~c t~c(.Cecotocotocoto r~4oAb
.:> . ::> .:> .:> .:> .:> 0 OJ.:> .J .
-1wcoe~xco
.:> .:>
tc~Cbro:::>ch.:l~w
.:> :::1
- ;:,
~~rou u:~bcrco~:2
eo.)
;h':l~c:chco
e ~
u@cco~ro:2coe~6ecoco
.> ~\..>.>
rbec 0!.\-Cl:'I-C!.l
;]J,:J.>
flGh c~o2wece~c.occ
.)o .>
~cl:sc0IR
o .> ~
u.J@ccbC'hl:i~.o@cc:coooc.oooookcO.Ui'>
o .> .> .> .> ::i
16:hl:ccc:b~ .>o~-c.o&ecc.o!kG
~ eJ .> .>
l!:flcoco~r,c.occ.o~:l;l:>
.:> .> \..>
1.>0-fe f'!.ltlc
;]
_,ohl&
~o
t~:>keoC'h~ec!;eco
Yo
16G9co&ecc.ol;cG
~.>~.> .>
l!' . r,e~Cocc~~cc
-
11
r
<:fl:rb"flecc~:b~floo
J:' @rocpeg.xo
1~e:_, r
!,=cc:coo:ccc:b"
11
~co:c.o ~~
--:1 , . @
-::;;croco_, cc:cco:ccc: beco:co
,, 11 e.G_,
"4co_,~rr
ee:gbnfl '
t~e:~ro:;
-:-1 b"fl r ,
ce~G:~a~
r~
. u@ccGQ:fl<X>CO~:o~:@Gec
.:> :>:.J.) .:> .)
C~
.
(c)
\'
COae.GeCC~C.OCCIJ
.) .)
ucorecoQ:kocococ4s
.:> .) :1 .) .)
nC2ccdcoh>I6:*~C2bkoo
.) .) 0 ':;{.) .) 0 0 6S 'N"M.":l 9t (zt6r-ti>-6r) 'wno
~ ..
p1u:1 zv:lua[[ fo ~:JU~Q.lC{ ~I{,L "A S.WI{ZQ puv JZDA!ffS JlJON paultJtfVJ1l !{VH
':l'd ozgtN.t\1\. ':l z

(gz6r-l,"Z6I) 'VlfS U'V ZVI{.tD[/ 'P~D!f.~J1l tUJV pJ.Cg "A SAalf10 puv IIJ_IIffJU' znpqv
11 a!ccc.oh>kwe
..") .) 0 0 :l
::,c.occ:cPeh>:cbco
.J o
bec:de:hdxP 1ohlt6l~
..> e \, ~..J.,
li::okc.occe
~.>o .>
:@ro~f
.:> .>
(~) co~...coeccccocc
.:> .:> :,
1
:b::cor,.,.~ .-, I' ocecocc
:.)oec.)xccoe:o l 1(1@ r~.
tA0cc .:J eo'l1: fl v) .:>V n
oeccccocc!>::>o c::c~:co::>
.,) 0 .) , 0 .:J .) .)
hl16l~~ r~ eGb:OOofcoe:cbco :xlcc~G~OeCCCCOCC CCC?.>!COOk::x.co~bcoc
~.J.., .:> J .> .> .:> ..> .:> o "' e e
IICCAO~b~&:!O.ccchx.a:ibeec 'coooooo:1Pc.oec o4 ltl flGh C2cc(;;ec uo~k~d:
:> .J ........; o o o .> .:> .J .> .:> .>oo .>o
be~A:cbco cc6Ac.or~C2&c<.cecct:::~olreh~~
o"'\. , .:> e :::> .>
'OQcc~fl:o@k:xco~c
.J ~ o .:>...Jo .:> e e
16c.occcco
~.> .>
of:creoecccc.occ
.:> .) ..>
ccce:ccohll6l~~
~.J.., .:>
ltJ flGh
.)
~l!ieclffiu
,J ~
ucoPecot:l:kaoco
.) .) ~. 0.)
11 @ccoi-k~:cbco COior.ecrocoPe:c.Q 4~
.) .JOO \ t; .l 0 .) ~.)
fb<Pe:o~s>lreSJl:c~~ c~sru.L) (~) rbco:,i> ~:~:cbco lbec~le~C!occc~
S.DIOdffif M Y1 VWliOH
k~:cboo to~roa..icoc.~ t:hlGt:a&_s c.cce>::>k~~:c.Qco cerow!"!~CS ccc~
e ' w. e'J.:> :1 . .:> o .:> ::::1 ' .:>
okcocc c.a::::Mcoc.me>co:cco oto~ro~ coe:Cbco ohles& ICCcc<III=J:oc:l:.
.:>o.:> .:>.:> e.:> ~ .:>~o .:> .:>:1.:>::::1
owro ccctu~w :ok:l(])~(k)(.Q~(])[:J c.ccob~e; hl:dxocco~:Cbco ICCCOW~
,:,:::1 .:> ~ -~~'J .
.:> ' 0 0
n
.:>0
]~:::>tees
n
' .:>
5)''
~
<:r ,., 1 t':":l .
:o owro
.:>.:>\.
t:c.w cocroe>co:c oeo.:>o.:>
cococo:oc.troe>
1
(])
.:>.:>
IC.tKCcc:croc:e:o
.:>
1
o.:>
oro
.:>
Gbroc.O)(')r~e>tt:~:ob
oc. .:>0 ' ;) .:>
coe:Cbco

16coccro0
~ .:> .:>
M~ceccocc
.:> .:> .:>
mcoh
0
,,@cc-
.:>
Lmcrohl ~~~ :oc.c:;;)~:crococ."~ocococcoe>:!;~ oeoeco (])[:JC(;C.CO~<bree
~..L .:> ::::1 .:> ~ .:> .:> .:>O .:>:J .:> o
bro:2re:C2(]):~ro:C2*
.:> .:> .:> .:>:
~oco~~hlro
- :> .:> ~
:orocccco~
.:> .:>
t(])fe Gc6c oto<"lbo:2
.:> e
ccoe>Cbc:eofu:xrco~getc
.:> .) .:>
tcow:oc.Pco~ccoe>cobcc(c)co~rocc~cchlto
.:> 0 .:> . .:> .:> .:> ~0 0
tl~
(])~ U .:>c.c.o~cucc
.:> .:>
ccce>;:cee>CPCP
\.
Clli=Jwo~<"lc.coe>
.:>.:>:! .:> .:>
~&>Cb4~c.coe>Cbc:ee~:C24o.
.:> .:> 0.)0.:>0'
.
c.cce>~e>r.ro(])ro
.:> .)
tcode~:hlftc.c.oe>~&>Po.
.:> eJ .) .:> c.oobe>:2e c.c.o~Cbc:e
.:>
tfGcoccc.oo
~.:> .:>
~~
.)
:ok:l~:occoe>
.:> :::Jo .:>
~eccccuccft5o
.:> .:>
toro
.:>
o .:>Ghe.GcbJoree>
o
(tt:>nb)
'Y .:>
tt:>e:cbco
~-
. , 11 oe>J~C?
~w:oRe.G
.:> '"'J
to:oc. h"Je)(DI=Jcococ. 4 oro~roeoootow
0 .:> ::::1 .:> ~ :l ' .1 .1 0
:be>olreoh:.
.1 .)
coeo:oc.Pcoe>
.:> Q .:>
Clli=J:oPee.G bes:2r~:2G:(")ro:@~
.:> ~ .:> .:> .:> .:> .:>
C2cce:<bco tbe.G 0 .:>0
.:>
Gbe.Gctotee.G
0 0
IICCCC
.:> . '
:c.ro~:oc.c.oe> ~eccccocccocoh 4b:oe>CPbt:c.co fG~c:ecoto:<"Jbc:c.c.o 2(])ocro
0 .:> .)' .:> 0 .:> .:>~ )' .:> .) ' .:> .:>
46<~~e>'!IJ<"l :oQoe.Gto tbhlcc~<"lo:to ~eoroti:> bro:2P<"~:C2<~~:00):C24 t<be
.:> ~ .:>:::!.) ' ' .:> :1 0 0 .:> .:> ' .:> .:> .:> .:> \.
Rj~"l~ ~-, C2e:cconroco:c.oo;WM ~bohcecoc.reoco!g ~:toe.o FAccoed:o.
~ J {( .:> .:> ' .:> 0 00 .) .) 0 .) .:> .:> 0 0 0
toff:o:hl(])e>~6>
.:> e'J _, ecocccob~ehl:d,ro
.:>o ~
cco~:<bco twrro:k:ococc
.:> o .:> e
&ro~f(")~
.:> oo
~om~o tbrocRc.r:;~h o c.obroecce>cocc t:c.e.G wc.roe>co:2 bc.~cob
~ .:> .:> " '"'j_, :::1 .:> .:> o e
c.ccdkcoidnb
..:> .:>o
:tc::::>COCC
.:>
00000hl
e .:>
<lii=Jro c~~lSnl,L) axod !t:>~a:>e:::>O
.:>~ .:>~ :>- \. -'
o'l:oen
.)0
:boolPeoh:.
.) .)
@cce:cbco
.)
tbro oc ehcs~~;;>ctob::ro
.)0 ;) 0
~~:>;d~:d:x:o
0
~-
11 C2cc<llt=J4bwc~e~ocohl t61e> C2<"Jes:rococcoe><hre

.) .) ~.:> .:> ~ .) ~""' .) '-' .:>
bb:cc*o
.)0" 0
c~core~:occ.oe>-
.:> 0 .)
~cccwcc<"So
.) .)
~cc:;;Je>& uC2cc~wC2cc4e>t;
.:> ::::1 0 .) 0 .) 0
oocoProoroCilro
.) .) .:> .)
~hlcc~"'>
.)~ 0
::::>Qwcr&le>oco
.,:::b ~ .:> .) wcco~:l;e :cemiOco:ck:lro
. l-
o'l.n
:::J .:>
d,~~R::l:ob fb:hl(.) ccoe>4eoro roco4occ oowcocro~e ~~ o c.cc-,Meo
::> .:> ~ ej _, .:> o .:> _, " _, _, '"
C~coobe>:C
'
Ccoe<bre .)c.oeo:odwe:4to~CC
e .) 0 .:> .) .)Q
ee>CCD 11!:14to1b
ob .) cccebe::::>Q
0 .:>:::1
ow~e
.) .:>
0hlroccoeCbree
.)~ .:> '
bb:C24o
0 .)0.) 0
tbro o coo:dD~ro
.)0 0
~:cPAro:Cbco
'5' 0
ll cccc~~b~~:oc.coe :c.rowcff:o~ 46
.:> 0.:> .) 00 .) .) .)
:oe3'-'~e5coJ_~e> S2Ae.G:t0co5coe>c:bre. c.cce>:5c.w~JO~:roe>~~l ~
SJ..'dOdmi M.V1 Vli'niDH

..
e:oe?O:n .
.
Ol J
~8
.. 0
n:oo:>:Jn:
1:0 LO
fs <: 1: 1:
c:~Jro!nlfOO r 11
~f_..C
llg)jljC:QJm
C"
!I;~(})
C"
? ~')I 20108;~
C" COCJ;~
:l)(i.)~Ctj:
~~
JL
roGr:;\Q~~~
-, ~
cu~3:oc~
C cJ
G!t;,~:Ut~~~~
t"; t. o C
ro~t:>:dS0
U ()
crJc3Cl
~LJ
d3:roc};
L ll
1: 0
::n~::n:>::n:>t q(~q(}) 10u:m~:
1: C'
O?lls'!'~:ac:D':lqro
~~<: (" (" ' 1: C' ("("
~:rrootroG0)2? copo
( Trust) ro~;Jd5
l. L l
G<91~ojG<.91~r:~
b t:::jT
o.!cfA)dY.}
y
r:a:x)c rom:l:lrottro:o&,~
~ Jt DL ~.. ~ -r uo l l
C 'T'r: C C"
eJ qc G~l t:jco:>:GO)'J ::nm::n:>~ 0 BJl:mf'<Dl ~ C 0 Q G
O)~tf1? sm990(c')y
C'
C' ("((") ( ) (" '1 c c oc 0 c c c ("Q

sc:co9u 4) Trust .r:Jt.COIOC O)(D~C t!)())QC(!)"):~ rote?=~= ~!Ce:ml
G~t:;,Jl0r:l. t"OJG:n:><Jt~:;,J~D':l'J rolf:~:~ Cj~gco98 (~) (Trust) q_ .
". c ~ c cr;:;:: c o c ~ ' ooc c
OO~OQJlUGO:GtD'J'\' i?lfe_j'J:QJCD C\:?D':lUO 001 oxp:~~~c::n2 u (.l)~s;;J~'f)
G<9Tul,.;;;.v~t>;,.:..lt: us~ '2 ~~;::x~~:>~~Bp:~~ ~:J0)6~t~:>t:a{

r,... c o c c c '" ( ) c c oc c .c::
:rot1c:B5jl Gf='CJ?~:::nm::n:>~ a:J!fro c- ~'? OJro~c::n~9 ro'P:Qc:~~
o r-n C' ' C 0 C 0 .C: 0 CJi1
02~ G~Gf~:OJ GcupmcoOJ~I ~10;.0) 0:>9?:<:\(GJ?:~ V~)5jG~G<ft.:j:
. !;, c c c- c c oc~ o ' o c c
Gp:m [}jOJro::n:>:~~~C02: ~::oro~:!!! m~rq oxp;~~'lf G~Gf>:;UlOCO!f
. "c co
OJG::D:><J?te;QJ0099f' '' c~ c- c
~C\(CJ{ Gcqj'JWCQOJ~ II l-!..HX>OOO)'J~~~'J osld '( ~Jl:
()Sl
' o c c
~ ~r~T~ ()~'))rD9J Cl.f8:lO:>:::!J:)
c~ o c b c
roc;:)gO)(})O)')~~rq Gro<:t c;co?c:~
c o e "' c 0
-~~:))~~ 20GSCD g').f:co:>::x>e?ll [(h) granting SUCh further or

-other relief as the nature of the case may require. J
!;;' c c (' (" c ~- (' C' c c ( ' 0 (" 0
ill!l5'=~1')Jm-!<? 00?0)(1)9J Gf?ro9: ~::P:>~C?s;l~ !!') fi!. 1 ~2q(
C C" 0 "} C'
o.IJ~l( rofOOSdG\?1<.0~~ Sd~:D\.'J~2q
~ r: C 0 GG
09::JGffi?Ct!>GQ
('Q '1' r,:_ <'
!::.ll:l~~: ~')~
C"
c c: .
:8:lo,(Q ro'P:~OOGO??ro Abdul Rahim and others v . Syed Abu
Mahomed Bar kat Ali Sha ( ::>) ro~~[, g)i~ ~;~oS co:>::x>t~
c
. '-"'?.?'~OJ~ 11
only suits claiming any of. ~e reliefs spe~ified

in sub-secti~n {I) shall be instituted in confonnity with the
provisions of section 92, sub-section (I},
The reliefs specified in sub-section (I) {a) to .(h) do no~
cove~ any of the reliefs claimed in this suit unless the words
further or other relief. in clause {b) can be held. to cover
them. It. is argued that the words ' such .further or other
relief as the nature of the case may require must be taken,
not in comiection with the previous clauses:. (a) to (g),. but in
connection with the nature of the suit, , viz., any relief other
than (a) to !B) that the case of. _alle,gid br~ach .of .an any
(::>) (x9i7-19Z8) 32. C.W.N. 48z. P.C.
express or constructive trust may require in the circumstances

of any particular case. Their Lordships are unable to accept g
this arguments. First, because the words ' further or other e:oc;-:Jo:::&
relief' must on general principles of construction be taken 01 J C'
to mean relief of the same nature as clauses (a) to (y). .l;C
gO
J
'Secondly, because such construction would cut down substan- :>:oo:>DI

t:. ...
tive rights which existed prior to the enactment oi the Code

of 19o8, and it is unlikely that in a Code regulating procedure
the Legislature intended Without express words to abolish or
eXtinguish substantive rights of any important nature which
admittedly existed at that time."
"The resulting uncertainty could only be removed by

legislative enactment and sub-section (2) of section 9 2 was
enacted to put an end to this difference of opinion. It
accepted and enacted the view which had been taken by
Bombay High Court, as opposed to the view taken by the
other High Courts generally, viz., that a suit which prayed
for any of the reliefs mentioned in section 92 could only be
instituted in ~ccordanc~ with the provisions of that ~ecti~n."
.~ <:: 1 C' C' C' C'') OC' C"

-gjSd1tel Gel .c:~eo~:: G$';l')CD()I:Dot:: <0~'):))2 II
" The words ' further or other relief ' in clause '(h), sub-
section (1), section 92, mean relief of the same nature as
provided for in Oauses (a) to (g) ; they do not mean any
relief other than those indicated in clauses (a) to (g) whi~
the circumstances of a particular case may require."
426' BURMA LAW REPORTS
~')~~')G<.l~~~~ Haji Mahamed Nabi Shira~ and others v.

'l;'he Province of Bengal and others (J) a?/-- 1 !
" Whether a suit conies within rules of procedure which
.. prescribe the conditions for the valid institution of suits oil
: a particular kind depends on the form of the suit as -.revealed
by' the plaint."
0 0 C . ~G C" o C" 'l'J:": GQ C" 0 Q C" o 0 <."'
q~~2jll g)f<D 9 CCX(:tl:>~ ()s~G<.\ll t::::JO:)'):G~? <.l'J~GO)')C0 <D'JC<:q:CY.{ 'J~
(" (" 0 c (" (" (" <:: ')C" (" (" ~ 0 ("
~f:gl;;q;~o:>::x:mOJ~ 11 sc:~ll GQIC:02~C g)j~G'J:~'):O:)'):~~ II
. . .
" 'Further or other relief' mentioned in $Ub-clause ~h) o]
clause (I) of section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code must be
EJUSDEM GENERIS, that is to say, an analogous to the
reliefs mentioned in the previous sub-clauses ~a) to: (B)."
~Q c CCG ~ 0 0 _<;.
("
0!~9c~:Olc oxp:o;;~: MITTER, J. ro1 0!~~1:1111
" As the suit was decided in the' Court below on preliminary
issues pleaded in Bar we must proceed on the basis of the
plaint only, assuming all averments made therein to be
correct.
. . I do not consider it ~o be a sound argument at all
that clause ,(h) contemplates a general prayer in addition to
one or some of the prayers mentioned in clauses (a) to (gl
that must be made in the plaint. This contention is against
~he construction put upon clause (h) by the Judicial Committee
of the Privy Council in Abdur Rahim's case. As I understand
the j~dgment in that case, even if no such relief as is
D.J.entioned in any o{ the clauses ,(a) to (g) is claime~ in the
suit but another relief analogous to any of the. reliefs men-
tioned in thos~ clauses is claimed, the suit would be one
under section 92 .(I) . . . the Privy Council considered
.t he phrase ,reliefs specified in sub-s~on {r)' occurring in
sub-section '{2) to . cover no't only the reliefs described in
clauses .(a)' to '{g) or sub-section (I), but ~o any other relid
which, by the application of ~e rule of ejusdem genetis could
be brought within clatise :(h) of ~at sub-section."
6Z
<.o~:cbco,_ u~:c.~~eo&>e~ c.k~o:~ ~~=~:~ro~ ur,o::p&>_gco co
(c) .>co~es&:cbco
o.
co::~~
..> o
11 @d:;IT,;l~t:J lbc.C2o:Cl (6) ~~ bc.~c.~tl:C! (d)
. .> . ~b~. o e .> e
1~ccc:g (1) 1( c-~) o::~~4:~ (c).. {<:>es~Q.x.o cixod) c~:~:co~
~o~ese~:)toes
:; \ .:> .)00
:Jo'Co~~e.;,
0C~c beswrekcoto .;, 0 ..)
~e:cbco
:y 0
ucc~o~&:2coe .) ..) \
-4becoro 1bes 0~
.) .,) ::J
1C~ ::J
1d~ t=mh G~oC!ccro
::J .,) .,)
eo::~o.;o::
.,)
b :c:hcalill
0 .,) ~
u.O?o::
..,)
1.." 1 ":"J v ~~ ~
o~ cocc:o:::ccooco ocooroc.~ w: :c.o:::: ~ ~ecce a:: a: a. cc.~ c.e:e:ccccft
1 b v v 1<7 r r
o .> .> .> ..> e ..> .:> " .:> "
bwC.Wf>:~~ ~~~e J ~~C ohlesto II cco::kto~to~ftC.(; eco Ji;:a~C.Ctt~c.dk~
'.:> .:> ::J ..> :.J o .:> o . o ~ .> ..._,.:> .:> .
c.~:::>bill co::~:b~ <'>So IIOft:CCcoco&vco ~"IX;:c.cc:bd~r.:&>
.,) \. .,) ,) .;J :y
l~ftCOPe
0 .,)
<J/coo::~wo:::
.,) ,)
:ccroto@cc:c.co
,) ,)
:c.ec:be&:&>

c.Mcc~~
.:> .:>
[,::bill
,)
1c.c
...)
toe:ro .:>
~::>bA cfo,ob:;c.~:e~coco[o,IQ3
.,) .;J .:> .:> ~
nCCo::<llt::l
'.,) .:> ;:j ,) ,)
H'.c.cc.ofo,:oe>~:C2aes ,)
1c.fo,(c) cd.ro
.:> .
-ecc~coo::
,)
ncco::~t::l
,) ,) ;:j ,)
:oc.ro~cc~ 0
coProc:ccaco
.;J ,) ,)
cb~f)~Cc.ced:cee
;:)" .,)
IGI:i:::~e
s-0 .)-...J'

w&JcoPo ~bxc.~~::>co a.;c.roe>:~e> :loccc.co~<:bcee c.cce:::c.o.;eccbl:cc~

,) ,) ,) ,) :.J _, .;J !.- .,) .;J ,:.J
~@~
0 ,) ::::::1
bro:2Pe~:CC<ll
,) ,) :eco:@~
,) ,) c.f,wPe::-~117-u
,) ,) "j~ uc ,)co~eswPe:::>hl
.) .>:::I
II cccccob.;~t:Jf) h:wre::.5ll[Zl toCCCCC:f)Qt:J
.:> , o o ;:j o , .:. JS , , ;:j
-:oQoes3.:> coto:c.<Pcob.>
.>:::1.> , . .> ..> o
c.cca./&Jes
.>
4bdxdxes ccc.r:bP.e
.> .> .> .>o
nC2ccC2cv[c.4
.> .>
~cc 0w:oc.hJe>::>~oesK,<'>
00 ,) ::::::1 ..)0.) '
:@ro'W:c.Pft:Cb~odxes
,) 0 .:>
c.ccr.e-4 b:s:2re::C2<ll .;J ,)
';(')C\):@4 n@cc@co:d :a'kuw:::c.~e>']IJfl =~Q&:::c.hl~ c:~:o~ ucccc~

,) .:> . ,) .:> ,) 0 ,) ::::JI :.J .:>.:::1' .:> :_j .) .:> 0
CeWCoO:::~~ :oroescoes w:::;c.h-le>bft IGoeswB:::c.h]e>K, b~:2Pf>tCC<ll

<> ,:> ,) .;) 0 0 ,) ::::::1 ':), .:>
.;J ,) .__, '
:<'>ro:@~ -wcoto:ocPw~ lco~tocowe:cbco uC2ccoB:2a:e 4hd:'o C..@<'>

.) . . ,) 0 ,) 0 ,). ,) 0 ,) 0 .;) ,) ' ,) ,)
o~"J.Q
.,) :_j ..) 0
:~toes&!<e~o'lP
,) ,,
w:&;b::Cbco0 .
ckrro~:c.o:&'ccO>hl
,) ,)
:
,;:j \.
lc:occc.c:::Cbre
,)
WCOCSo C.O::~Ik@o C.groeBOCe.G C.CC~~IO 0b C.C.OeJIO CCcce:chco ICC Cot'>
o 0 o OL .:> L .> .:>
:~Qk eo@e~:oe>oes&, "l:cwto:~c.Pcoe> a~d;;les -~~ C2cc0e~ahl ccc@e~
.>:::lo .> .:> ' o..>o .> ,._,,:-::~ , .>:.3 ,
oro~ ~bco3~c.ree>
:;,'\:J.>. .J
to:c.Pe~:cb8So
o
:h>:c.esrf,ccoestu
o .JO
:cacolLm:ob
.>OY:J
~::~
'::)'.)
l
ecoc.cco 6"e~e ~:oococ.we>:wco
1 J~ 11: 1 11 r ~
Olro:cc:~cocc coes::~~fl 1o::co::o rc.es
.
.>o .:> .> e .:> oo .> .:>.
coc.roe>co:C!
o 6 L o
1btoes :::>@<ll~:c.Pe~:lb
.>...J L
:lll:JJesc.c.oBdccc.cc
~ .:>
1:c.hJec.oce~ahl .
.> ~ ,-;:j
@e~bdcooocb&:c.~es
.) .)0
1:hlcchxree>
6j !Gc.ccahl
':)' .)~
~c.cdGo~ c.~e:ehco tcb 0
~~h-lcocc
,) ~,)
dtdecc~ 0h.:c t:Jc.Q~
"'J,~
o <e~ececc~a.:cc
..) ,) 11 ttccaRC2e.beeR~
.;J .:>::!.:> 0 ;:j
c.cc~coc.c
.:>
e:Cbco

IW
o
COflOO
.:>
wre:o5llillu
.:>
r
, .:JS
II oo;;,wwPe:ot:l
.:> .:> .:> ::3
r
CCCCWb: khi~ ~o.;cc:c.Pft
.:.oo;:j .:>
II
.>
to:ehco
o
bec:d0:to::>b~ tohl1~~ccroes
, 6 t- :,j._.t_; .)
locoPe:o~lffi
o , .:. "'JS
libobeecccce~
'S', o, o .:> :tcro
,
~~ (~) COfJOO~eC.CCCCCC
.> .> .:> ..>
:~COC.Soe>
.:>
1cb~do
o .>
CCC.C<ll~:2~~
.> .:> e.>
toC2CC~ft:::>Q
o, o ,:::1
t~~
--
BURMA
. . -LAW ...;REPORTS
. . ' [r965
c:- c:- oc:- c:- ' c:- o c:- e o ~ c:-
?8~~
'"l
c:~cs;>CD OOO?CU~QGJ<.90C G(\):OI~CJ):::D:TI e:UQIJOXD~.:o:o :;>OOffiGCJ):>
9 r,;:c:-
J(\
c:-' r
11.
c:- '"l c- c:-
l 00 L C.:.
c:-
-t
G
t>l8 :1
c:-
l -l
c:-
0
e:oe:?~OO>
...
OOtjiD O.,)CG~?:DUI:::D~UfGOij:>:D'f>l roc;pGo:>? t?W'JidO) ~JO)G:;DQOO<:j{J)
c:- \ c:- o. c:- 0 Q c:- ,. c:- 0 c:-
?1 lfJ ( J ) 3d9 (\).l):;>O!::D2Uf ;;q::n2~ 2:0'JYffi(\)2; GCO?:J.>Q:::D2 I ~G:::D?I
~8 c:- c:- c:- e o c-o c-
oo
J
G<;p:n~?<::::D? 9())-f:e~p:<D.pro mc;p::;>roe:q::u? m~~CJ)(:IGo:>"?::n2u
~:oo:>sn
1:. LO e .c:- c:- c-ore ") c:- ')Of,~ c:- c:- o c:-
em:;F-}!? :::D.n<:~? ?.?. flD~I~PI OIGCJ)') :l.?. Ol'iltl ll ::D')l)G{J)?Gmpc:Cl1ro
.. c:- c:- c-r,;:c- c:- ~ c:-~ c:- 1m c-o ~c:
qcroe:;: p:.x>:nooc;pGro?tj1D:::D2 !I g)100'PGO:>?~:::n2 e:12e-1Gro:[jro
t: 0 c:- c:- c:- 0 0 Q ( ~ )
Oi:.m~w~ :::D:D:C::::D~:D~>Jffi CJ)DL:o:>G~Y~Y~GUII O:>'f>::;>m e:tiO:::D Qtf::i
c:- \ c:- ") -~ r,~ c:- 0 c:- 0 0 c c:-
'!:J;)UI mJ.pm~o.:: ~:ut:<:j? ro::n:nu:tl: o:>~OJtD':f?Sl:::D2~(:):x>S] ::nrr>G::n
~oc:- 1m c:- ~ c:- c:- e c:- c:- o c:-
(:)tl~CGe:~?c: Gcj?OJ211 m~C'i(~m 2:02?l:J?ro2: O?tDGt'f>l:J? 'JGr:::D2
' 0 0 G o ( ) c:- c:- ') c:- 0 c:- <:' o \ c:- ") <:'
illYo:>
t.
e:.s~oo:>
.Ts
Q ::> m~:r>:t c:;:rooiOOOC 8d0:>CUC:;>8dt90C Go:>:UI~c
C:.:. I . t. ota J
. (' 0 c Q . ~ c C"
.po:>m:;xxpGo:>? oxp::;>qL::D2 2:09YC0~?:9J 100'f>GO:>? G~:Gm?m
c:- ~ c:- c:- 0 c:- A; c:-. 1m c:- 0 c:-. co . c-
?XG~?:n~e:;~ G:qj?:D00?:9J (\).l):;>Ge:J?C:C"Jt GCO:>O?:;>o:>Jffi'i!o:l2'11
' ' . c:- . c:- c:- c 0 1m <:' C:::' r,;:c:- c:-
?Xfl:oi::r.>~ o:>:ooo:>~m;;,JmYp:9_ G~ro?uei~'P. roelc:tliD Grope:
: b c- c-
o:>(T.>CDC' c- ")
:;>romGO:>?CDUI: c
GQ:Gm?mc:- . CJ)CG c:-c- 0~
?:I.> C~<dQ
c- c:- c- c-
(\)I!)O,.'XJO)IffiOC .
. l . 6 ... . -r. . ~ Jl u
0 . . c:- ooc
<l?~'J1Gf~2Uf Y;;q~cGu II
, .. . ..
o c o c:- . c:- c c- oc:- c:- , c
. US(:)CJXP:o:>lml f2:roY: 02tYJ2:009 8d01CUCQOOilOC f?tl.."<'X>
~G:::D?
t' c . ") .; c- ') ') 0 ') C' gc- c- c:- c
~~ o(J.)s:Gro:uw Gurc:ct:ur:m cr:~~t~ro g. GQ~Gro?rr,.oGo:>?ro.::rl:
J. .. -~ T- . . L J 6l c T -.
:oa:')!$
~\
~~~C/YJ~
LJ
roQl~,J.J (:)OJ?:~m.
b o
c8::n::Sn
L I. C:.
rrl'rom:c3m
df -L L .
~t:di
C.\
:;>~~mu~
LJ
C'\ c oo c:- c:- c [9' c o c _0
-Ga:Gm~ :r.>:J
AI 6
g ::u:.>m
l L. .
roro..Lo::n:-n
Jl C.:.
11 CJX'O::;>o:>:-n. SJ G: 0 Groi?:;:mm::n
-,,- T C. . U L. ot,
<" . .. c-e c c-o r,::::: c o c o c c:- c- c c:-
gc:gG'J?mg())OC G'J?ffi~Ge:lX::9_ OfQ~o:>~ II UJQC roc;p:~o:>Go:>?~C
r- c ~ c:- c . o c~c
f@\)13 1~101 mc;p:(:)U:1{8d~O:> ~jj .~CI us(:)OO'f>:CI:p??~ ~pmro O:>CG~?(J)
c::: c' 0 . (' C'f,':' . (' \ c ~ c:- c:- 0 r,;: C' C' r,~ C'
l!lc.:<T.)_ uo:>.:9Jm~~~ - G~:Gm?:n<iroo:>a:> Dt0-~u9r ~;tl~.QJffi Gmtl:Gpmr
. -i C\ C\ C 0 .' C c C' c
<(:l~~ ~~ . _G2~-~:I.>?:D<1 g::\l'-''?Uf ~;p:;qoo?:~~ II (J):;>C o:>c;p:q<p~o:>')~
-'"lr26(8_~:;>~~l oxniy~:~myCJS ~"'"'
l~C.\: ; : t.-J . ' ... :- _r: t.:1 Jl.. J JJ
rot
6
~1gbS~G:::D?
UJ o .,
ro~~G;~I
. 10
GQ:~m?~d6
:-1 AI
, c~ c .c . c r,;:c ., <" . o o
~~- Dt?:!:)'f~C .0'-'J?:~UC .p-:>:.D:"D:J;lt:jQ) ':J:lG~!:;>~90,;>2~ osg O)~~cqm .
-~~ro~0Gg:wro6 . 6~wro::n~u.
T . J T . :. ~. 6 ~ . .- T C.:.
~Go:l~
L
.. mm:Qro-;>:
-[".
S?mroGQ~G(J)')~
T 01 ,:
C ;t;: Cf-:: C 0 C CC 0 . C.. ~ '1 " 0 C' : (' .
-<?C9.~::>..:nt:1c:~ s::::m , -mf?t:Goo? ro::pro'1o:>(:)D:.u' q ~~.ll ::?~\)13
~ i:: c- , . '' . c or,.. . c t ~ -~1:-. o o<" .
~1Q)~:; .~G;.;))?_:n~ ~CI1:'~ .;;qtS:>!Go:>')roe= 9,filP~_~c; (:)O)~(QQJ'J
. 0 C C C \ t': c:- (' 0 C 0 C 0 ~ . C: t C
.?~~J .~4'!~C ~~:G~?.:JY~ rJtCI1~0Je.:!CY.{ Oy:;>~o:>~ II ~G:::D? 'Sc~~:(Q~::n
J~ -~~~$i~on- OJ?~~rE~o:>cl<,n~Ji II 0@#. ~~~ g;J3.~
t<"'" : , ,4_-.~ . 4 . . .. ~- .<:: . '<" c' ~~-~ ~ . . ,u~ - :ti . : ..~. ~
?.~~-~~

0,wJ~-r:. 5~:~?~f8::>~ffi~~~~ .:?1S?~~~~=t.: . osQ
:I ... :: - .
~- v: . .' ... ,\ ... l ~
~9-~5} ~VRMA. LAW REPORTS 4?9
o c- . o o r;;: c coo ~ c- c- c-
o:>p:'.\lo:>~. o:x:p::;~q . t:>o:>m~(90 comQ~Ge:_ec: roc<iplGO::D~ II o~~:l
9~:m
c: "
f:lllX'OCQ~GOY>
c- G
e:o~~
o ( o) o
oxp:Q rf{l .pO.)m m
r c: c- c
~[0J009f G
C'C' o C' J:::C' O'j)) C: C: G e:~?C)O)
q~~oro~ro'P G:qp:r.>c:o:>:Ejc: ~~01 ~ OfQOO:l:GOo:>~ II e:::x>:l::O-f o1 J
or ) o c. c: c- c: G c: c: r;;:_c- ~8
.( <:\:{!9<> 'P'
OSYOY.p:cqc:n ro:r.>Goo:> :-~c o:>roc:~:G-fG::D:> 'l(J)f:tjo
QO
J
C: G C: ( 0~ ) C: G r,:;::_ C: C: ( 0~ ) 0 C: J:::C: f,;:C

::>:>~II e:of co,tJ.r ~~. 2~e12i?l~ C\{tr<f ~o:>~l ~Ejc:ljoGmpc:qm
C' 0 C:
e:o:sn
"'
. c: o _c;: c: c- oc: rc- c:
q::; . osG:mp::o,e~ 8d~SGO:CO:l~::;lJ(I)8d91 Gf<:qCOj(GJ?;o:>:> 190::0211
G ( 0~ C) o C: J:::C r;;: C' C 0 C 0 C' CG 0
:e:~pt>J? ottJ~ ro1 .roc;p::;~::o2

roelc:r:lll>Gmpc:<J:{mq tr.(O::;lJlU?<=~
. " ' C' . - 00 C' c: c: C' 0 C' &,
"Q.SQ::x>~ .s:>tD:r.> (}) o:>CIG.:D:>co:n:l cc:~G.s c ro::nroYOJ~ (}) comro
C' 0
l- A (.i, T L Jl C. l T 'o J l l 6 L
C' 0 r,:c- C' f,;:C' c: C' 0 C' C' 0 C' C' 0
ro~n cqtmtlc ~OO'f>GOJ:l?'lt!co co:uG>9t ::O']rDGOJ:>Gmpc:~m ro'f'GOJ:>

"G 0 c C' 'i C' C' . C' p r,:;::_ C' 0 0
:e:o9~:r.t GXij:>mco:>:::o~roG>I I 9c:mro~: o:>Go:>:><J?ta:>mooe1:>c:q roro
(' C' o C' G ( f.": ) 0 . c::: C:
roroc: ofG>oo:>:::n~n ' 2~~oo:> o:>mGo:>t:lJ:l:'p Ol[j:::> m1 ro'P:rotgp:e~1
o.c. . (1'. C' c: r;;:c-r,:;::_ c: 0 c: ~ c:
'0St:lro'P:CI1ell 0)0~9c:Gp:~~ rom:>9c:Yp~ tlo~o:>~~~::l?~ 11 g)J
(' . c: 0 0 ' c:.
o:>:r.>~:O~I:>::r.>x>:>:>l oc~co;:o:::Dm GCX>:>:r.>G>ro
c C' c
::>a:')~ Q~ll>moc GCI~Gro:>m
. c: 0 .
u ~- CJ -r 1 L L c.r tJ ~l
' 'l c-, 'i or;::;: c-
zq,OJ;)I::l~ t:l:\fJ~()I~ ~T.>;o._t:jG::O:lCO~:I e~~po~
G ( o~ c
C\{ij~ (1)1 OJ'P:Q
o c c)
C
:o:>:n OC' C: ' C:
!JdJ)CO:;Q~(JJOJ::; .S:l(.)):T.> C:
l>G 6 :>c:m
(' 0 0 C: C
o:>Go:>:>roo:>:l 0 ('
!:OO)!:OI:lo:>
C.:.
r,:
<Q!Yt~~O)~ II
0
l
1:
t. A
G
T

O)'P:Q 2~*00) OIC:J<> ~~ 2:09'=l"?t_ell o:>mGo:>~m~OIJ(J)
cC ) C'G
l
O_C.
--c.:,
1:
J
C: 0 C
0 C 1: C: C 1: G C:~ 0
Gp:Cf.l o:>CO]JG~a:>:>c;pl f~:cog;co~:GJ2:m9 e:O'JI:l :;xxpGro:>t:j:~
c- r,;:c ' c: r,: co~ . c: c c c
~;;xxpG'J.>?OOC!IO G~:Gm:l:r.>O)CG(l:lffi<il:J~ ~ro'PGO)') O)IOOJUGfo:>~q
OOC' ,..!i. C J;: C 0 1: 0 ~ C: C 1: ~ C:
-g~~CGO.II ~o:>:T.>G::O::lJ?:c;;u ~:n;;q_:;~Jmt:lp:at GUft:j~'Jfa:>~: SdG~:>c:
0 C~ G c- o C c \ C' c:
-G5JGOII ro;;p~ro?e;j: 2:09t:l ~~ Yli~: YIO~Gro:o:> ~~GOJ') G~FGm?:r.>
C ! i C'C: 0 C:OC C: C 01: C: \0
OJ:::G '):r.> c:m CO:UOIX>~Y:nt:l(}):J.>I roo,')GO):lC:@:ro OOOJCUCOI8d<.9CI
~ \. C. L "' L 06J1
~ -- c: 0 00 c- . c- C' ' (' c: c:
'Ge;j:>:::~ o:>~o:>~::l):l::l:UI O)'f>;~O)~O):l:r G9:~cquGO:GO)') f~:coG:
C C' 0 C' C C 00 (' C C OC: Co
~~:t:lJ2lCl:l_a:>~: G9o;?:::oe3~ ~m;;q11::o~ 11 :::>@~7 ~~co~c mro,coc:;~
ro~o:::
' C:
G~pG:n?:r.>i
C' \ ~
Dtcqu~
C~
ro'P:Goc ;;:>mmt110tl:1
C r.: C:f,~ ~'t
' G
2:U9t:lef.l
0
C' C: C r,: C' r;::;: c- C: C' 0. C\

~ro'P~o:>? G~~G:n:>:n-:n::GrP:nGe1:>:::~ ooc~:>:;;u::o~u o::_G~~Gm:>~
or c or.;: c . o c ~ o c S
o S ~ c
Cl:l_~Gm o:>_sp::;~
p n:r:>:nllj'VGO l:ldo:>$.~0) YDt'i)t:l~~~ mro~rq g)(<{g)jf~:
r,:c ' o~~: ~oc . 1: c: <' c- oc oc- ' 1:
tl~ ro;p:~~\9;;: t:lDt~c u ;;~1~~=o~~YJ2: ro:>ts 9 9291 mqco::::;~ro~oc
Q . ' C' C: c- c- ' C C' G 1: C r,;: c
-e:or:p-p m~ ~~:nGtCI3JCCO~: mJ;;ro~o:::Gp:moc Ot:lS!UG>JlU ~:lj~
. C OC c OC' G _c;: 1: . ' G
~Jroqp~ GO:~co:>~.ll 8d:.>LS :::>0 0091 2:0t:!:le<:IG'f'f>~C tr.l~m a:o~:>
~ . ('
-mm-:P:O?)O)::l)G.S9~
~ c
. c- ' ;l).~mclg:n
o:>:CO:Do:>C': "c: c- II G
0::0:)) . :'))ii)OJOI(J)I
c c 'l (' .
~ii-ll 6 \....!. ~J t 6 ~..!t6 -J C.:. C:. Ci.d~ .
C' C' r.
~
C C 0 1: c- G C: C 0
~ : . l>G;-J?t::Y::::romroc
, . u,- L.. 6
.:DO)C:o:>:~~G::l):l
L 1
"'j(})f:C)()J:m .~OO'f>Gld:>:>co~
l l
!
Sl.'HOdffii M.V1 VW'HOH Ot

u:::lcenesl:o ~6Wlh:.ce~c.~~c~decc~rroco
~"' :> o .;) .> .) s-o: o o
w:c.r''roPe:~c.3hlbea
.> ,J ~
(c) ~~ '~t:o ..,
a~oC:::>b
.. .>
.S.b::>;do~
..) so.l
w(uot1dwns~~d)
~ o
wrecel!o
. .)
bw 0 .acocoo2~
.) o- "
c.cc~&:
o
n@ccblto:c.ro:k
.;) 0.)
~hi
.) ..,.,.j
:::>ci=:'J~::>~~ro:~::>'l:erocc
.:> ~ .>o~ .JO .)
'co(uoqdums~~d)
0
c.cc~Ghlrorecei:n
' ,:,::_j.)
1bw
.
i. acbc'~oa
.>
1::>!b:>:ce:C'I()c.oCb~:c.&l:C~ 'OH6:ce:e6> bw:AI..oc.cc~:o~bwaco'ro ro:1P~
.> 0 0 B'
1
=::>b
.> :) e :> .;) o o .) .) o .;) .>'"'C ,.J
:::>o:c.ooc.cc~:c:CXlhll~~ 1::>&> (c) ~ C'IGOCooC~ oc.h:l~'&, . II .@cco~:2ooe~b:o~

.JO ~.J,.; .) ;) .> 0 .) :::::J 0 :> .:> '-"'
~w becc~o2 jc.}:!J:_?_r~b'~:_r~wcc~socc c.cc~r~.Lo~ &c.G:c.~rro J:o~cc

~:c0oo :>~b~:~oo;coblw!JcG:il~c.cc~I=:'J:hl~:hl~:hlooPmob:c.Goo
:J .J . .) ~ .> ~ :::::::1 :.:1 ~ 8J.> :>o
:::>Peaxb~?ik
.> :> ..,
axb~
.)
<Oroe'ltc
.> o
IA<.Ocb~t'ltc:
e,.,)
::>O~ I ooocb:e.o
o .>o6- :> .J
WC<O!::>O:c.G<.O
o .>o
II

II (r)oorec.ohl:te
.) .) :J
II~CCC~
, ,
(.(.)C\)(.0 CC 10 1<0 1(co) COW ICC b (b) 1'0 ob:}.coc.ae> o-f COQIOAObCc
.) 0 0 0 0 .) .) 0 l; .) 0.) .) .) ~.;).)
ll .l@cc:~r2@bhJ
.J .) e e db~ 1(0)
o tJ(; ICOJCO .J
<.0~ Jaobecboo~
.) . .> e
o.f (c) 10
.> t..
~G~A.)O.)
II @cc o;;O~Ghlecbec rcfcc 6CbGooCtn lceG:cPA1_lc:c.G<.O

.) .>o .>~ .J o-
:occo~k:c.PA@ccG
..) 0 .;)
<.0<.0 IW
.)
1WJ~ \ .;)~b~:~eccoblw
::::::t 16> .) .) :J ~
o~:ACO:OC.CO~
.) .) ,J
no:Y...o:c.Pf:i
\....)
(~lUO't{ ~lMTld).
cb~~AW
.)Q
C.CC~~<.OCCAO~:c.reec
j6-.) .)
1<.06CCCOaxb~~t'IW
.) .) 0
ecce
d:e<.OCC .)O~:c.Paw .)ofco'/:ebwCooC<.Oee
.)0 .) 0 .)
ICG<.O::::.
J
cco~hfca~blu
.J ~ .)~
II (c)oorec.ohl;oo
~ .) :J.
11 ;w:ol:'lewe~b:o~
. 0 :~:J,, .)
~hlec ,bec:c.Paoorero&cc:!>oocc-o?i!Ca
.... :.3 ~ .> .> .>o!.l
fuor~dums;}~d)
\
ooPece~oooowooPo
.> ;, .>
-:c.rAooreoeck
.) .> 0
~bJoGhldcc:o~cooo
.) (.. '\ .) .>
o~ooPeoeek~booceco:\\
.) .> .) 0 .) l.i .)O
ooo:ab1o
.) J l.
-wPeoeck~~:c.cc:be
.) .) 0 .)
bhlc.~ 0'<.O:ococcldcc\;b-:or:loeck~bc.4c.okc.~rwc.o
.) :J .) .) 0 ,) :::~., 0 .) .) 0 0
g,:c.n.,g.'re~ecg., ~ (c) ~ agh---:gJ,oe~ (uo!~d=~~d) f>Pece~

bee Z. 6Gb .)
Jol6:ce:a6>
.> e .)
;hi:Ablo
.>W .> t..:
bee ro~ Aooceo2oo-:ot:l
, o
100~
oleoocc ".)
:J~.) o .>
[(aruoq ~leATJd) cb~:!>aec c.cc~oteoocc o~c.rAec cooC<.Oec :c.e<.OIOC.CO~
.)0 .)0.) .) .) .)
tt SDIOdtl'd M.V1 VW1flg

.. u~~;sJioJ.O~
:oc~~~c~co"
.) :::1. 4b,.olxd~co!;les
\. .:> .) .) ..) .........
:c.(J)escocco~
..)
"ohl:~:ocro:)
:> :l .> .)
@cd:o:oS
..) 6~ ..)
rOc.~::~
0 ::::::3
C:Cc~~~~~6lCCCto:chl
0 0 .:> Q ~
. otJ .)~reo lf 'b~ ..)O~ore
..>
~!:>
::J
;.)l,;
OIO~Ore~
.) X .J
0001ea:;cc:~:l'l6l
t,.; .) 6 .>
.,:@roooo<b:c(J):
.J .)
chcorocoee
.> .> .)
'coaiPeesccc~&:croce~:c(J)co6>
0.) . ::=:1 oc:J:~~:x:m~
"\.J:.:l..) '.>
@cc:crl'l
,)
&~:9q:>COGfb:,~
~ . .) '
: rbes;cr~wrecobocc~axc
. j- ..) .)
'co:<bcorr
0
coretoc:Jk
.) .:r..
. :'l:_ecoc.4~
If
. .>
~
. . 1redcc:2rod6coc:J:k
,) ..) \.) ..) ~ "co@cc4&:11Pco8chl:
.) .) .J!.:J ba:; . ~Gb
.) fc'/cc
o~o2~ o
, ;c:Jcco~(J)c:J~~bre~
.J:i .>o.J:l .J \:o@ccuhl
.> .>:1 (::~snoq-11UJwll8
uounu~:>) 2ccl'lesccc~
.> .>o
100II'lQcod,~oo ::>ct)~.C~(O "och,l~:cr~:::>C~OC.C IOCOCOC.CII II (s:.) corecoCJibe
O.:J.J .l .:> .l:::::::'J ,:,~ L.> \J.) .l:J
rrrM~cob@cc:~broecc~cocc
t,.; \.) ,) J (., ..)
ooo~esll1>
.) s rr .)@cc(J)c:Jcore:
.) :1.> .)o&,l~&Jcc
~\,;.)
:~:b~e.c
~
1olh>10~:..JJco~:b~
..) :.:.J .)~,
rr @cc(J)!Sil:o!Joesb:>4bco~:b~
..) . > :.l .)~.J 0 .> .) h>~b;~cc:o~cok
0 \..) .) .)
l~cJ:::I~ccc~::>~0c:J@CO"...cccc:::>d.:>e.ccob
.., ::::J ' .lO.J:':J.> :> .)
0 @cc:~brok
.> .) ~0
nedcc:cco:4c$hl
.J .)
46co:b~
~.> ..J
t_oo;~lacc:o~k:Abto
0 \. - .) .) ..) t..:
t..)o'fu (c) :J~:~ AGbc~o2h:>
.) 0
ohl.obu n(!;) .)col'ecoQ:k
.J:.=t.) .) :I .
11 52cc:fC2~b~
'(bt.loc) .oc ooe.c:kobcokk
\. 0
0~ ooZ.
.> .)0 .J
(.(j) ,r& ~e.c:'l:x>ob<D :c.~c.uroc.c.u
\. .) 0
11 @ccc ~cob:>IG:~~@b
~ .) 0 . '5' .) ,J
h,~ . bbc
J:Jo
C~corl'lCCI>
.)
rbces.
.l
I (ro) cnc.c
.>:>
ICC
e
~ ICOQ~~ob(c of
?:.:J~;,:>
OC

to:toow
LL.::J
11 0fC cf:pr~C(J) rt.Cro ;I~ 1(~) res C :'fC ~0 J~fl :of ;:o:_?l'l_?bCc ~(,0
C rco~COI O$:d
.J .> t, e
. . .
o~mb:>1S!Ato
.
u.00.)
. :J 0
~Peoo~ (uopdwns<~Jd) cC:cO:d<?$hl ~,t;ti; 6 ~cb roeew o!h>)IJI'l:ol:ldcoh>
- .> .> t1 ..:> L o .> :,] .J::J .) o
5961]
.... -...
,...
...
.' ... .
. -a
;.! __);'
;2 ~~1~G~J~
o1 . ~
.'
1.
0 C' C' C'C'J;:C'C' C'OC'~()GC'o()
q{G::X)'):D2:;~1 ~~CI:K::r:JO"'-i<; G~')C::J.i:9c 0 9 Q)9CCI:i: j
C'
qc- .
.. The definition of common 'gaming-house in s.ection 3 of
the Burma Gambling Act applies to private houses and places
as well as to public,: and sections II and 12 render liable to
punishment players in, and the owners, occupiers, and users
of, common gaming-house. VI/here a house was .entered and
searchro under the provi-sions of section 6 of the Bunna
Gambling Act and gaming instruments were found, the
. presumption mentioned in section 7 shall arise although there
was no proof of any payment of commission from the players
to the keeper."
' (J) 4.B.L.T. 15.

: ~ .
0 (' 0:) (' (' (' 0 ('

~G~'J Sd:;q<.l. GCO?c:,~~?:. Sd0)2UG9 U(.J~ ~ S'd91 "tS'dUl;:l:>'J
( presumptipn)
.
<.QOOO>I~~
t. ll . -l
f;;ro<SEl~I
\Ji . l , T
c~:ror6eoos
I
o~~
t.
G(\ o)
~ C C' 0 0 0 C' C C C 0 C f::::: C
m~Jl tl5:>;;:a>Jro~ OJO)JG::DO>JX~~'J 0-{rof'JGOO')C~m'Jf Cl.{fl'JO~~:lC:
c c ,;: c
'~9c1Jc:0 oo 'Sc c .,
<=>~t 01
G '
oJ C!>9ccxt:
() c:
? ~c-
" The provisions of sub-section .(r) of section 6 of the Burma
Gambling Act are all important, and unless those provisions
are strickly carried out a house or place cannot be said to
have been entered under the provisions of that section, and
consequently the presumption specified in section 7 cannot
be made."
c: C' (' c:
co~~ Go:>-:>c:ro~-:>: Sdm2oGs ~sv ~
r:(o.) 9X!' r,:tl5')r:a>Jro~
c: (' 0
""20?~
(' ' 0
oc cc'c C''l 'l

~O)y')G~!~~OXJt S')CCI: 01 00
c- c-c-c-:c()G<"
.,S ~'\CUC~~o:> C'
<f GX:jCCJ:?:osc~
" Section 6 of the Burma Gambling Act ~mposes upon all
officers issuing warrants the duty of r~cording the substance
of the information on which they act, and their grounds . of
belief in such information: An officer issuinga warrant must
rec;:ord the substanc;e of the information in a manner similar
to that which lie should adopt in making a memorandum
.
.(9.J .B.L.R. 1! 3+4
~
(?) 1. J.B.R. p . .u().
. .. .
~
-436'
of evidence undet section 3S5 ah.d 356 of the c:riqtinaL J'ro-

cedure Cod~, ex.<:ept that he is not bound to specify the name
of the informer ap.d should not put him on oath. The offic~r
must not act on second-hand information, but must have-
before him some information given by a person who has
direct knowledge that unlawful gaming is or has been going;
on,. and _the information which affords reasonable ground for
belief. He must record his grounds for believing the informa-
tion to be true, and a mere record that he believes the state-
ment of the informant to be true is not sufficient. This..
implies that he shall take reasonable means, by questioning~
or o.therwise, .t o ascertain whether the information :is true.''
O)A;
IL~
G~TC":co');r8:r
tf l:J t!J o3~~3
SX'OJ;g_ l ul
a3CJ3~')G~')[QoS!Gi[:
l , l!.~ l.:/
~r.:rojg
lJt J I'
c (" (" (,~ . t' (" ( ) (" 0
c;c:TvroeuGs 't3~ ~ 3d91 tl5');m:c:;:::oet presumptton ll;{OO:>lJOA'>t
r,: C"OC !':":' <: 0 :1 Q <: C' C'
~Dte\(O'tCG[~p:::l ::r.l-;x;>v 0~CCXf1~fJ:::-
If he issues a warr~nt without complying with the

essential conditions laid down in section 6 of the . Gambling
Act, the omission constitutes a defect which goes to the root
of the validity of the warrant and even if instruments or
gaming are found in a place entered under such a defective
warrant, the presumption allowed by section 7 of the Act:
cannot be drawn or applied."
o;t~~:~oSco'):::o~ 11
,.:>~c~~ccce>\.~
::::!! 0
..:bQ:crohl
.) ~
,r,}~ ::XOes~ccoesb:>
:..3..1.. .) 0 .) .) 0
cboa
:
:C2'rol:.o~wb
.) 0 '.:1
111Jf)
:.J . :ccro:::>O:ceoo~c.oe
~ .) :I .) 0~
oceooaili
.) 0
0 0
.
"'
oto:f)bJo
.) t...
,t;f):ccro:::>O:c.oohl;CO:
0 . .) .. .) :1 :.:1.> .
:c.cc:be: bt:lc.@ ibrowPeowh:> fto ~hlcc<b~ :f)blo coc~:o~to c&:eio~
. ;)~ ;) .:1 0 . .)~ .:>~ .:1 1., .) 1..
cccotoft:f>blO
. , .) .) 1.,
c..cce>:oe>coto
.:1
!Gdcoroc.M:.oco
':) .) 0 0
1bro (c)~:J
ftcb
.)
coo<!'
. .:1cow :c<bw:ocroe>
.)
cccc:flbJo
.:1 .)\..
(o) co~roeccoo;cc
.:> .)
ccce>11J:lcro
:..3 .)o<ocb.
:~:$'6'> :ces:crtXbJ:cro:fc..lh>~ . bes:df>:3'c..le>ro Lo~lne>socoe.G .
uree>~~cefttucccc'JQft
.)00 .
0-.)
cccc11Jcccoes
:..3 .:> :..3;:,
;:)toes
.)
wb
. .:1
0 Me>
.
~cc:oocoto
J .:>
1co (cJ::l(D)
:..3o
oe>\t-tt!:2
.:>
tu:ftbJo (o) col':,esecce>a..>cc
e o .:> 1.. .:1 .:>
~c~~CCC!:><bhldc
.) ~
ICCCCCeCoOO
.)~0- .:1 0 .)
ISC'.oiOIOfJ
':) l, l,
&b
'
c.u20:CoCOflWCD
.) 0 .) .)
wmbiO
0 .:> 1,.
:~&:Cbco coo~cb .:>OJ
obcoc.!- 1:ccrow (c-hll:o) oe>;~:C! 11 CCftoe>bjje>.-
ft:J .:> .:>- :..3o .:> e .:>
toCCCCIOf)GCOb
0 .) 1.. \..)
IO~ro~&:!~W:ftblo
.) .) ~0 .) l..
(o) co[,a:;
. . .)
ecce>cocc
.)
oeo~rol(f)
.) ':)
S.IHOdffil MV1 VmDS: 8-F

BURMA .L AW REPORTS
" No presumption arises unless the search as well as the

entry, is made in accordance with the provisions of section 6."
440 BURMA LAW .REPORTS
"
~ oc-
c:oeo .)G~~ oc~c

0
wrro:~oo
.) .) .
(e:cbcoe~es) oc rc.o~:8e
;l(:o 0 .;)
r
::>'!?
.)
(ro~cbcoe~es)
o
to:xese:2
.J e
SDIOdtni M Y1 YW'dfl9:
BURMA LAW REPORTS
BURMA LAW .REPORTS 443
.
"Where an oral lease reserve a yearly rent, the parties
_intend to create a lease from year to year but ~at intention
... -. ...... -
( o} .~ooi -~, ~.>(~) t ::>1!:)'2. ~ ro~':):t 4>?~o~JoS,., lijjll
30
BURMA LAw. REPORTS
not being eipressed in the proper legal form cannot be giveJt

effect~."
BURMA LAW REPORTS
110. For arrears of rent When the arrears

Three years
become due."
gc?t~QJcf8d91
u ~
'rnw.j':xJ?~:>t
!''c ~ c
~G0:xJ~ lk -~"9tn..,
. . .. J
~~ o1. ,ll!lil9;;~9~
. . . J
(9)
O
.f'.!J?:l:> (?) Q)9~CX(~~~-- : .. .

9
." Where the three years allowed by sections 6 and 8 of the

.. Indian Limitatiqn Act to an ex-minor to institute a suit
expires on a day when the Court is closed, a suit filed' by him
qn the re-opening day is, by virtue of section 4 of that Act,
in time.
Sec:tion 4 of ~e I.iriutation Act does not extend the period
.of lhnitatio~. : ~ut it 'eriables . the plaintiff, by excluding the
time during which the Court is clo~ed, to institute his. suit
. , on ~e re-ope~ng _d ay ~d so to.. have the benefit of th.e three
- ~ . years pefiod'wbicli tlie .Act' 'g ives him for tna:t'.purp&e."
~ . :.. .. ... .:: ;. . :.:j ! :
.t. f ~ :' ~
, :' )' .. 0
~f:~'f:ro~::cictf@ro::l:~f~' <~.;(~)~(cS)rnoo~oS" ;u1 :n~J.,~ :;.E

o~oo~;;~-9 ~~8~ ({f) ' ~g~:~~-~~t~ ' ' . :!.;_,; "
' I j
" There is a marked difference between the langU.age and

. ~ffect of section 4 arid section 14 of the Indian lliinitation
-- Act, 1908. Section 4 provides merely that if the prescribed
time for a civil proceeding expires when the court is dosed.
~t can be comin.~ced_ 0~ the day when the court {which
- . :.. .m~ans. 'the proper court) re!opens, the section does "nat altex
~. :. : the period prescribed for the proceedings under section 14~
. . and similar sections, certain periods are to be excluded !n
-~computing the presGribed period, the effect is that any day
: . ::so excluded have to be added to what iS primaiily that
. r : prescribed peri~."
. (?) ~m;)8~96cxt:" ~; ~~ 4l..;~JoSp JoG;, .

(<1J -~,?~0?--~ -~8~~ s;;~ ~'l' 4l?~~~t? J9J' .~~~~m?~~) If
uo~rw~:il
:,t
&i-es~
S~~Od:nl M V1 VMHl9:
CIVIL REGULAR
Before U Kyaw Zan U,J.
STEEL BROTHERS AND Co. Ltd., (PLAINTIFF) c.c.

I96S
v. May n .
Y. A. GANNY SONS AND TWO (DEFENDENTS).*
Breach of contract-srtit for refund of the r.1)71tract pTice-jurisdiction to tr:y the

suit otz account of the agreement between the parties-whether such agreement
is against the public policy- -under s. 23 or contrary to s. 28 of the Contract
Act-Civil Procedure Code. 0 .49, R. 3
The plaintiff s!ied the defendants for the refund of K 6o,6o8'39 being loss
suffered by the plai11tijf as a result of the defendant's breach of contract. The
contracts were signed in England by the plaintiff as buyer and in Rangoon by
the defendants as sellers. It is. alleged that as the defendants reside and carry
on business in Rangoon the Chief Court has jUJ;sdiction to try the suit. The
defendants contend that in view of the clauses 26 and 27 of the contracts by
which the parties agrees that proceedings either legal or by arbitration are to
be within exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts of England or arbitrators
appointed in England, the Chief Court has no !jurisdiction to entertain the
suit.
Held : The law on the point is now well-settled in India as well as in Burma
When the English Court and this Court are competent to try the suit it is open
to the parties to a contract to agree that dispute in respect thereof should be.
adjudicated ~upon by orie of them and such agreement is perfectly legal and not
contrary to s. 28 of the Contract Act ~or is it against public policy under s. ~$
of the said Act. The presen:t case is not a case of absolute'restriction but of
,P;i'rliai restriction.
Q OC" Q OC" . 0 C' C' 8 c C: G 90 C"
~~c!:ld: ~CQ)~cooroop 1~ rr-..t~t>p(])C9f:"1~(c)O)rou
1962, B.L.R
152 (C.C.) ; The National Petroleum Company; Ltd. of Bombay v:
Meghraj, I,L.R. (1939) Nag. 61~ ; Continentai Drug Co., Ltd., Bontbay T.
Chemoids and Industries Ltd., Calcutta, A.I.R. (1955) Cal. 161 ; Khandesh
Lahsh'mivilas Mill Co. v. Vinavak Atmaram Kaurkar, (1.935) 156 I. C. 277 ; .
Bhagat Ram and another v. Ramniwas and others, A.I.R. (1949) Ajmer, 44
referred t().
,Musa Ji Lukman Ji v. Durga Dass, I.L.R. (1945) 26 Lab. F.B. ; T. Motandas
and Co. v. L.!,Hahwnat Rai and another; A.I.R. (1955) ]. and K. 26 ; Hooser~
Kasam Dada (India) Ltd., v. Motilal Padampat Sugar Mil(Co;, Ltd., A.I.R.
(1954) Mad. 845 ; The American Inter11Qtional Underwriters (Burma) Ltd. v.
U Maung San, (1961) B.L.R. 41 H.C. ; U Maung San v. The American
Civil Regular No. n6 of 1962.

33
c.c. Internati011al Underw,it,-rs (Burma) Ltd., Rangoon, (1962) B.L.R. I9 (C..C .)
1965 referred to and followed.
STllEL BHO Kidri Prasad and others v. K.R. Khosala, A.I.R. (1923) Lah. 425 ; Dwarko.
THERS AND Rubber Worl<s v. ChJwtelal, A.I.R. (1956).Madhya Bharat x:.o ; Radha K.uhcn v.
Co., LTD. Bomba,~ Co., Ltd., A.I.:R. (1943) Lah. 295, distinguished f rpm.
v.
Y.A. CoNNY Najional Petroleum Co. Bombay v. F .X. Rebello, A..!.R. (r935) Nug. 48 ;
SoNS lu'lD Chittaranjan O.tha and another v. Parvl R.api Nandi, A.I.R. (r946) Cal. nz ;
Two. Mulji Tejsing v. Ransi Devrai, I.I....R. (1910) 34 Bom. 13, distinguished from.
Cargo Lately Laden on Board the Fehmam (Owners) v. Fehm.am (Owners),
(1958) I.W.L. 159, distinguished. .
Held further: Under Order 49, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure the
provisions of Order 7, Rule xo is not made applicable to the Chief Court
exercising its ordinary original jurisdiction.
Messrs Soorma and Boon for the plantiff.

N. R. Burjorjee for the defendants Nos. r and 3
Mr. Banerji for the difendant.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is a "suit for the refund of

K 6o,6o839 being loss suffered by plaintiff as a result of
defendants' breach of contracts."
Accordittg to the plaint the plaintiff-Company by three .
contracts marked A, B and C purchased from the .defend-
ants 200 tons of Expeller Sesamum Cakes c.Lf. Glasgow
to be shipped from Burma freight being payable at destina-
P.on and the defendants, who drew 98% of the contract
price amounting to 4,629-6sh-9d. have not also paid the
freight to the company amounting ~o r,o67-18sh-8d.
ClaliSe 9 of the contracts reads. as follows:
" : . . Should the analysis show castorseed husk in
. excess of 005%. Buyers shall be ~titled to reject the parcel,
in which case the contract shall be null and void. for such
quantity rejected. . . . ,
It is alleged in the plaint that since the cakes contained
:a.percentage of castorseed husk ab0ve the pern.lltted to-
lerance of 005% the contracts became nuil -and void, so
when the.cakes were sold at the request of the defendants
to outsiders the Company realized only 1,925-ris-5d..
Hence the suit for refund of the contract price paid less
the amount realized on resale amounting to 454S-I 2S- ST&r- BRo -
7d. equivalent to K 6o,6o8 ~9 together with interest there- T EsRs AND
on at Court-rate from date of suit 1oth December r962 tin co.'v~TD.
realization. The causes of action for the suit are shown Y5~;._1;0~~Y
:to have arisen on the dates the contracts were entered Two ,
into. It is further alleged that as the defendants reside
and carry on business in Rangoon this Court has jurisdic-
tion to try the suit.
Tne defendants in their written statements contend
that in view of Clauses 26 and 27 of the contracts which
are reproduced below this Court has no jurisdiction to
entertain the suit which is not maintainable and in any
event premature.
They also contend that the suit is not maintainable
as it infringes the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Con-
trol Regulations. The correctness of the figure ( I,067-
I8sh-8d) relating to freight and the liability to pay the
same are not admitted by the defendants, who also con-
tend that they are not aware of any request being made
by them for resale, and accordingly they are not bound
by it and without prejudice they submit that even if the
cakes were resold they were resoled at a very much lower
price than their actual value. They further submit that
out of 200 tons of cakes, 100 tons were actually purchased
direct from the Company's godowns at Rangoon through
fue Company's brokers and loaded and shipped to the
Company in the United King~on while the other 100 tons
were purchased through the said brokers and as such the
Company well knew what quality it wanted.
The relevan.t clauses of ijle contracts mentioned above
are ~ese:
26. Domjcile.-'Buyers and Sellers agree that, for the
purpose of proceedings either legal or by arbitration, thi!t
Contract shall be deemed to have been made in England, and
to be perfonned th~re, any correspondence in reference to
the offer, 'the acceptance, the place of payment, or otherwise
c.c. notwithstanding, and the Courts of England or arbitrators.

1965 appointed in England, as the case may be. shall except for
STEELBRO the purpose of enforcing any award made in pursuance of
THll'RS AND
Co., LTD. the arbitration clause hereof, have exclusive jurisdiction over
"GANNY all disputes which may arise under this Contract. Such dis
Y.A.
SONS AND
putes shall be settled according to the law of England, what-
TWO. ever the domicile, residence or pla<::e of business of the par-
ties to this Contract may be or become. Any party to this
Contract residing or carrying on business elsewhere than
in England or Wales, shall for the purpose of proceedings at
law or in arbitration be considered as ordinarily resident or
carrying on business at the offices of the. London Cattle Food
Trade Association (Incorporated), and if jn Scotland, he shall
be held to have prorogated jurisdiction against himself to the
English Courts ; or jf in Ireland to have submitted to the
jurisdiction, and to be bound by decisioJ?. of the English
Courts. The service of proceedings upon any such party by
leaving the same at the office of the London Cattle Food Trade
Association .(Incorporated), together with the posting of a
copy of such proceedings to his address abroad, or in Scotland
or in Ireland, shall be deemed good service, any rule of law
or equity to the contrary notwiths't~nding.
27. Arbitration.-Any dispute on this Contract to be setded
by arbirtation in London, in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the London Cattle Food Trade Association
'(Inc), which are endorsed hereon, and are deemed to form
part of this Contract."
On the pleadings the following issuse were settled :
1. Has this Court no jurisdiction .to. try this suit by .
virtUe of clause 26 9f the Contract marked
" A " and attached to the plaint as contended
by the rst, 2n~ and 4th d~fendant~?
2. Did the .2oo tons of Expeller Sesamum Cake COfl:
tain a percentage of ca?tor~eed husk above the
permittid tqlerance of .605% .as alleged iri.
pcrragraph ro of th~ plaint?.
And j:f so, did tl)e suit contracts become null and:
void-as alleged in paragraph 8 .of th~ plaint?
3 "'vVere ~he 200 tons of Expeller Sesamum Cake c.c.
t965
resold at the request of the rst defendant as
paragraph 12 of t he p}amt? S TEEL BRO~
stated m T HJms t.N o
And if so, did ~he plaintiffs suffer loss to the extent Co.,w~Tv.
of 4,545-I2sh-7d as stated in paragraph r2 Y.A. o ..~-mv
Sp.NS AND
and 13 of the plaint? Two.
4 Did the rst defendant being new to the business

entrust the entire purchase of the Expeller
Sesamum oil cakes to the plaintiffs' office at
Rangoon, which knew the quality required by
its main office in London as alleged in para-
graph 6 of .t he written statement of the rst
defendant?
And if so, what is the legal effect?
s. Does the claim for freight infringe the provisions
of the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act?
And if so, what is the legal effect?
'6. To what relief or reliefs are the plaintiffs entitled?
Readjng the pleadings it is clear that disputes do not

-only relate to the exces~ percentage of castorseed husk
but also :to the alleged infringement of the Foreign Ex-
change Control Regulations, the amount of freight payable
and liability to pay .t he same besides the question of resale
of the cakes by the company at the aHeged request of the
defendants. Under clause 9 of the contracts the contracts
shall be null G.lnd void only if the a'naiysis shows that
castorseed husk is in excess of -oos%. The other disputes
in the suit are not covered by this clause. Hence the con-
tracts cannot b~ sa:ld to be null and void in entirety a!J.d
.un~er Clause 27 of the contracts " any dispute " is to pe
settled by arbitration in London but in spite of ~his clause
legal proceedings have noyv been taken to recover not only
the refund of the contract price but also the freight paid
less the amount realized on resale. Hence the first is~ue
c.c. on law which goes to the root of the suit becomes relevant
196s
and the learned Advocates for the parties took up this issue
S TEI!L BRO- .l.
THERs AND . as a pre11nunary ISsue
f or arguments. E:v1'dence mig . h t.
Co.,"LTo. have been necessary on Issue No. 2 to come to a finding
Y A. GANNY whether the contracts have become null and void but in
80
~~o~ view of the other disputes involved in the suit, e.g. Issue
No. 5 for which no oral evidence is required as the Com-
pany has admittedly taken into account the amount of the
freight claimed in its pleadings the arguments were heard
on this rst issue. The causes of actions for the suit are
shown to have been arisen on the dates of the contracts
on which the suit is indisputably based or founded. The
denial of the !St defendant in paragraph 13 and 'the 2nd
and 3rd defendants in paragraph 5 of their written state-
ments to the plea of ~e company in paragraph I I of its
plaint that the contracts have become null and void is ipso
facto a dispute between the parties whether the contracts
are null and void.
It is not disputed that the contracts were signed in

England by the company as buyers and. in Rangoon by
the defendants as sellers. Under section 9 of the Code
of Civil Procedure :
"The Courts shall _(subject to the provisions herein con-

tained) h~ve jll!isdiction .to try all suits of a civil nature
excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly
or impliedly barred."
and section 2o of the said. Code says :

"Subject to ~lie limitations aforesaid, every .suit shall be
instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose.
jurisdi.CtJon-
(1} the defendant, or each of the defendants.
at the time of the commencement of the suit,
actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on

business, or personally works for gain ; or
.(b) ..................................................................... .. STEEL BRO-
TimRS AND
(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part arises." Co., LTD.
,.., ().
Since the defendants at the time of the contracts Ys~~~=Y

actually and voluntarily resided, or carried on business, T\vo.
or personally worked for gain in Rangoon as they are
doing now and the contracts were signed in England and
in Rangoon the parties and especially the company musjl
be fully aware that this Court would also have jurisdiction
to try the suit or else it would not have put in the words-
" Any party to this contract residing or carrying on
business elsewhere than in England or Wales, shall for the
purpose of proceerungs at law or in arbitration be considered
as ordinarily resident or carrying on business at the offices
of the London Cattle Food Trade Association (Incorporated),
and if in Scotland, he shall be he1d to have prorogated juridic-
'tion against himself to the English Course ; or if in Ireland
to have submitted to the jurisdiction, and to be bound by 'the
decision of the English Courts. The service of proceedings
upon any such party by leaving the same at the office of
the London Cattle Food Trade Associa'tion .(Incorporated), to-
gether with the posting of a copy of such proceedings to
his address abroad, or in Scotland or in Ireland, shall be
deemed good service, any rule of Iaw or equity to the
contrary no~thstanding."
in clause 26 of the contracts. In any event section 20

of the Code of Civii Procedure does not apply to the Chief
Court in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction. Vide
section r 20 of the said Code Residental Qualification is
not required for trial in the Chief Court nor is it necessary
that cause of action should arise in Rat1goon. The learned
Advocates for the
parties agree that the Court in England.
as well as th~ Court in Burma has jurisdiction as ordinary
tribunals to by the suit in the usual way. Clause 26 of
the contracts however takes away the jurisdiction of the
c.c. Burmese Court to try the suit. The point for determina-
= 1965
tion therefore is when two Courts have jurisdiction to try
B:~ a suit can the jurisdiction of one Court be ousted by agree-
Co.,f)!"TD ment of the parties? The authorities are in favour of the -
Y.A. GANKY view that they can. The concensus of opinion of the
SoNS AND
TWo.
-
Courts
m Burma as we11 as m . In d'1a Is
. t l1at wnen
, two
Courts have jurisdiction to try a suit the parties by agree-
ment can choose the forum. The choice of a forum in
such a case is left open to the parties by agreement which
is not considered illegal.
Mr. Soorma the learned Counsel for the company relies .
upon section 28 of the Contract Ad. which says :
" 28. Every agreement by which any party thereto is
restricted absolutely from f:nforcing his rights under or in
respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the
ordinary tribunals, or whiCh limits :the time within which
he may thus enforce his rights, is void to that ~xtent.''
What he wants to say now is that Oause 26 of the

Contracts is illegal and void. When the company has
solemnly agreed to do a thing with its eyes open it is rather
astounding that it should dishonour such an agreement
and say it is illegal and void. A provision in the contract
which enables either party to settle a dispute under the
contract by instituting a suit in England cannot by any
. stretch of imagin~tion be interpreted to restrict absol~tely
the right of a party to enforce the contract by the usuaf
legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunals. There is noth-
ing unfair about it. The parties were not desirous of
litigating claims against each other at vai-ious places, and
. for that purpose they made it as one of _the essential terms
of their contracts that all claims should be settled at one
place. Theyagree<;! .to . this term ~ith the full knowledge
of the inconvenience tb which they might be pu~ in con-
sequence of this term. If the claim in su1t had arisen on
:}.ccount of any unforeseen circumstances which was not
in the contemplation of the parti.es, it would have been c.c.

1965
another matter. In ~o far as the claim in suit was within
the contemplation of the parties this term cannot be lightly ;:~~ ~~~
overturned.. ,. Section 28 of the Contract Act applies only Co. ,v .LTn.
to cases where the agreement absolutely restricts from Y.A. GANNY
SoNs AND
enforcing the rights under or in respect of any contracts. Two.
by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunals
' h f G OC' G OC' 0 C' (' G (' (' G
as m t e case o ~~~c,O<>:J s;cG>'{CO~J~rooJ? ~~::nc,;p())c9~:~~M
c88oooS (I) where the term of the contract said that all
disputes which might arise out of the contract or in con-
nection with it should be submitted to the Foreign Trade
Arbitration Commission at the Chamber of Commerce of
the USSR, Moscow for its decision without any recourse
to legal proceedings. In :the instant case the agreement
-of the parties in Clause 26 of the contracts only partially
reStricts from enforcing the rights for it permits recourse
to legal proceedings in the English Court.
;
The learned Counsel for the company relied upon

.Kidri Prasad and others v. K. R. K.hosala (2) where previous
decisions of :the other High Courts were not even men-
tioned or discussed and upon Dwarka Rubber Works v.
Chhotelal (3) to support his contention that the contracts
a re null and void inasmuch as they give " exclusjve juris-
diction " to English Court. In t~e former case the plain-
tiff who ~as. from SIMLA made a contract with the defend-
ants of Ferozepur and the contract was signed at AMBALA.
The defendants pl~aded the C<:)lUt at SIMLA where the suit
was filed had no jurisdiction to try :the suit because accord-
ing to Clause rs of the contract the Court at FEROZEPUR
alone WiiS given jurisdicf:ion .to tty cases between the
parties. It was held without, I should say, any discussion
'that litigants cannot by agreement .inter se divest a Cour~
Qf its inherent jurisdiction over the subject-matter of a
(x) B.L.R. (1962} rsz (CC). (z) A.I.R. (1923) Lah. 425.
(3) A.I.R. (1956) Madhya Bh~rat tzo.
suit any more than they can confer jurisdiction on it by

consent where i.t has none and this decision was relied
ST.Bl!L BRO- .
THERs AND upon in Radha Kishen v. Bombay Company, Ltd. (4) where
Co.; v~TD. the contract having been made in AMRITSAR the arbitra-
Y8.A. GANNY tion clause in the contract provided that any proceedings
eNSAJ).'D
Two. f or th e fil ing of t h e award or any smt
ansmg
under t h e
contract should be taken or brought in a competent Court
of law at KARACHI. These two Lahore cases, I find, were
overruled by the Full Bench of the Lahore High Court
not very long ago in Musa ]i Lukman ]i v. Durga Dass (5)
where it was held that an agreement between parties to a
contract to the effec_t that a suit concerning their disputes
arising on the basis of that contract would be instituted
in one of the two competent Courts having territorial
jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit is a valid
and an . enforceable agreement and is not void ~der
section 28 of the Contract Act, which makes void only
those agreements which absolutely :restrict a par't y to a
contract from enforcing the rights under the contract -in
ordinary tribunals. I am in entir.e agreement with the
interpretation put by the Full Bench that section 28 of
the Contract Act prevents parties from divesting Courts
of their inherent jurisdiction, but it does not in any way
vitiate an agreement between the parties by which a party
who has the choice of the forum agrees to a limitation of
that choice. In that case the contract was entered into
at Lahore and the defendants carried on business at Karachi
\\;hich is.1n another province. There was JlO dispute that
the suit could be instituted within the territorial limits
of the Courts at Karachi as well as at Lahore. The agree-
mep.t between .the parties.was any suit arising out of the
contract wouid be institut~d at Karachi but the suit ~as
filed at Lahore. The doctrine of conferring Or depriving
jurisdiction by_consent only. applie~ Io cases of inherent
(4) A.I R. (1943) Lab. 295. (5) I .L.R. (1945) 26 Lab. z8r. (F. B.).
jurisdiction of a Court but the question of territorial juris-

diction of a Court is not a question. of inheren~ jurisdic-
STBEL BRo-.
tion. In the instant case both the Courts in England and u 1ERs AND
in Burma are competent Courts and there is no defect in Co.,v~To.
their inherent jurisdiction. Y.A. GANNY-
SoNs AND-
In Dwarka Rubber Works v. Chhotelal (supra) relied Two.
upon by the learned Counsel for the company the decision
was based not on section 28 of the Contract Act but on
section 23 of the said Act read with section 20 of the Code
of Civil Procedure. Section 23 of the Contract Act says
consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless
1t is forbidden by law or is of such a nature that, if permjt-
ted, it would defeat the provisions of any law and it was
held in that case that although an agreement confining
the parties to have recourse to only one of the several
competent Courts may not be within the mischief of the
Contract .Act, yet, it is of such a nature that if permitted,
it defeats the provisions of law U..'lder section 20 of the
Code of Civil Procedure which, as pointed out above, does
not apply to this Court. The agreement between the
parties was that all disputes between them would be settled
at Kanpore and that Kanpore Court alone had jurisdiction
but contrary to the agreement the suit was filed in the
Court at Gwalior. Reliance :vvas placed on Radha Kishen
v. Bombay Company, Ltd. (supra). The judgment express-
ed that if an agreement purports to oust the j uri~9-iction
of .the Court in any way, it is to that extent held contrary
to public policy and invalid und~r .section 23 of tQ.e Con-
tract Act. This authority based on the overruleq. decision
of the .Lahore High Court cannot be cop.sidered as good
authority. It also relied. upon National Petroleum Co.
Bombay v. F. X. Rebello (6) . of the Nagpur High Cour~
and Chittaranjan Guha and another v. P.arul Rani Nandi (7)
of the .Calcutta High Cqurt but th_ey were_~ot followed
{6) A.I.R. (1935) Nag. 48. (7) A.I.R (1946) <;:a!. uz.
-460 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c.
1965
by the same High Courts in their later cases. The National
Petroleum Company Ltd. of Bombay v. Meghraj (8) of the
'STEEL BRo-
THERS AND Nagpur High Court and Continental Drug Co., Ltd., Bom-
Co~. LrD. bay v. Chemoids and Industries Ltd. Calcutta (9) of the
"Y.A. G;;.NNY Calcutta High Court. In The National Petroleum Com-
.SoNSAND
Two. pany, Ltd. of Bombay v. Meghraj (supra) Pollock, J. said
where two Courts had jurisdiction .to try a case, he was
unable to see anything contrary to public policy in an
agreement between parties that disputes between them
should be tried a:t one place rather than .at another. On
this point it is enlightening to read what Mehr Chand..
Mohajan, J., said in the Full Bench case of Musa Ji Lu.kman
Ji v. Durga Dass (supra). The learned Judge observed:
... There is nothing against public policy in an agreement
arrived at between the parties that where several Courts
have territor:ial jurisdiction to hear a case they may limit
their choice to one .of those Courts. So long as the case
1s heard by a competent Court which has jurisdicrion in
every way to hear it, thereis nothing in the public policy
which dictates that, because other Courts can also hear
the same and because they cannot hear. it in view of th~
agreement, that is a matter against public policy." I
should say it is not surprising that a well-known company
like the plaintiff-company which has agents or. branches
all over the counuy. at the time if not in many. parts of
'the wo,rld should enter into co.ntt:-acts that 'disputes should
be ~.ied at one place.
Mr. Soorma, the learned . Counsel for the company
referred me to Mulji Tejsing.v. Ransi Devraj (ro), a very
old case which, I ffnd, has no application here. It was a
case wh7re the stipulation was to decide all disputes which
might arise under the contracts by the Sub-Committee of
the Bombay United Rice . Merch~nts A$sodation to :the
exclusion of the Court. The parties were precluded from
------ - -
(8) I.L.R. (1939) Nag. 6.p. (9) A. I.R. (1955) Cal. l6r.
(to) I.L.R. (1910) 34 Ban. 13.
suing at law at all events until _they had exhausted the c.c.
1965
remedies provided by the Rules of the Association. It
ST!iE!. BRO-
was a case of absolute restriction from enforcing the THERS AND
rights by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribu- Co., v~TD.
na1s. Undoubtedly the agreement was in contravention Y.A._ G~
. .
of t h e provlSlons o f sectlon
. 2 8 of t h e contract A ct. The SONS
Two.
AN'O
Sub-Committee was the exclusive authority and it was

rightly held ~hat it went beyond the principle. In a later
case of the same High Court (Bombay) Khandesh
Lakshmivilas Mil.l Co. v. Vinayak Atmaram Kapurkar (n}
however, Broomfield, J. said that section 28 of the Con-
tract Act did not prohibit the parties to a contract from
selecting one of two competent tribunals for the disposal
of their dispute.
The learned Counsel for the company tried to get
support from Carno Lately Laden on Board the Fehmarn
(Owners) v. Fehmarn (Owners] (12) which is an English
case. . There was a term of .the bill of lading that aU
claims and disputes arising thereunder " shall be judged
in the U.S.S.R." I do not consider that this case decided
under the Administration of Justice Act, I~)56, which is
a special enactment that has no applicatiqn to Burma
giving jurisdiction to _the Court of Admiralty in England
is helpful at all to the company. It appears it is a case
of the Judge exercising his discr~tion under the Act.
The law ori ~he point is now well-settled in India as-
well as, I should say, in our country. When both the
English Court and 'this Court are competent to try the suit
it is open to the parties to a contract to agree that disputes
in respect thereof should be adjudicated upon by one of
them and such agreement is perfectly legal and not con-
trary to section 28 of the Contract Act nor is it against
public palicy under section 23 of the said Act. The
present case is not a case of absolute restriction but of
(u) (1936) xs6 I .C. 277- (12) (1958) I.W.L.R. IS9
partial restriction. See also T. Motandas and Co. v.

L. Hakumat Rai and another (13) and Hoosen Kasam Dada
s-xllEL BRo-
THF.Rs ANo
,
(India) Ltd. v. l'IEotilal Paaampat Sugar Mils1 Co., Ltd. (14).
c o.,v.LTD. In Burma we have also an authority on this point in The
Y.A. G/INNY American International Underwriters (Burma) Ltd. v.
SONS AND
Two. U Maung San (15) where the agreement between the
parties was that in :the event of any claim the same should
be settled and paid in Rangoon and the entire cause of
action should be deemed to arjse in Rangoon and further
all legal proceedings should be instituted in. a competent
Court in the City of Rangoon only. . The proposals for th.~
insurance were made in Bassein and the suit was instituted
there. It was pointed out in :that case that " even if part
of the cause of action did arise within Bassein District,
the jurisdiction of the District Cour.t of Bassein fo enter-
tain the claim was ousted by consent of the parties. On
appeal [U Maung San v. The American International Under-
writers (Burma) Ltd. Rangoon ( r 6)] it was decided very
recently that the agreement was not invalid as it did not
contravene section 28 of the Contract Act. The Bench
relied upon Musa ]i Lukman ]i v. Durga Dass (5) (supra)
which was a Full Bench decision of the Lahore High Court
which I have discussed above in preference to the decision
of the Calcutta High Cour.t in Chittaranjan Guha v. Pawl
Rani Nandi (supra) which as pointed ouf above was not
followed by the same High Court in.its subsequent cases.
Lastly, the learned Counsel for the company argued
that even if these authorities which I have relied upon
above are the correct interpretations of the .law still they
are distinguishable as the two Courts which have jurisdic-
tion to try the suit are not from the same country and
accordingly they should nqt be held to be applicable but
he could not cite any authority to support his contention:
The .learned Advocates for the defendants th~~ referred
(13) A.I.R. (1959) J. and K . 26. . (14) A.I.R. (J:954) Mad. 845
(15) (1961) Ij.L.R. 41.(H.C.) (16) (1962) B.4.R. IQI. (C. C). . .
to me Bhaaat Ram and another v. Ramniwas and others c. c.

1965
(r7) which was relied upon in The Ame6c~!1 Internationt~!
STEEL BRa-
Underwriters (Burma) Ltd. v . U Maung San (supra) and Tr.E.RS AND
submitted that the fact that the Court where the suit is Co~_Lro.
agreed to be filed in situated in the foreign land is im- Y.8A.ONSAND
GANNY
material. In the case referred to the suit vvas filed in -rwo.

Beawar within British India though the agreement between
the parties to the contract was that the suit would be
filed in the Court of Kishengarh which was outside British
India. I am of the opinion that the principle underlying
the authorities I have relied upon apply equally to the
present case. Section 28 of the Contract Ac.t does not
make any distinction. The Act may not be exhaustive
and a pa...-ticular point not specifically dealt with must be
-governed upon general principles: It is not necessary
that every order of a Court should be supported by a
specific statutory provision and when there is neither pro-
vision nor prohibition it has to be guided by ordinary
principles of common sense, justice, equity and good
conscience. Since the laws are general rules, they can-
not regulate for all time to come so as to make express
provisions against all the cases that may possibly happen.
The inherent power of the Court to act Ex Debito Justitiae
1s expressiy recognized in section r sr of the Code of Civil
Procedure.
Now for all the reasons given above I must hold that
this Court sitting as it is in the exercise of its original
civil jurisdiction ha~ no jurisdiction to try the present suit,
and under Order 7, Rule roof the Code of Civil Procedure
the plaint must be returned to be presented to the Court
in England in which the suit should have been instituted.
The learned Counsel for the company rightly and quite
frankly pointed out that if the Court holds that it has no
jurisdiction there is no alternative but to dismiss the suit
(:t?) A.I.R. (1949) Ajmer 44
c.c. without returning the plaint as the English Court will not
1965
accept the plaint without payment of English court-fee
STBEL BRO-
THERs AND in English currency. I also find that. under Order 49,
Co., LTD.
11.
Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure the provisions of
Y.A. GANNY Order 7, Rule 10 is not made applicable to this Court
so;-!~~
0
exercising its ordinary original civil jurisdiction.
In :the result the suii is dismissed for want of jurisdic-
tion with costs.
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS
Before U Kyaw Zan U,J.
U AYE MAUNG (APPLICANT) c.c.

rg6s
v. May 11.
DAW AYE AYE SHWE (RESPONDENT).*
Guardian and Wards Act- S. 25 application for the return of his ttuo minor
daughters to his custody.
Held; The paramount consideration in the matter of custody of a minor
of tender years is the interest of.the child, rather than the rights of the parents.
Maung Aung Khin v. Ma .Shwe Hla, .(rgs8) B.L.R. JH H.C., referredto and
followed.
Held further : When the applicant has many other wives and children and
is practising some supernatural feats as a bigot accompanied by ill-treatment
of the respondent with an inclination to rape young girls, he could not be
considered to be a fit man to .have the custody of the children.
Khin Maung Yoe for the applicant.

Sein Hla for the respondent.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is an application under sec-

tion 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act by the father for
the return of his two daughters, aged about 5 years and
4 years to his custory. In my order dated 26th September
I 964 I have held that he as guardian within the meaning
of section 25 could apply to the Court for .the return of the
chilc;Iren .t o his custody. The
parties ~greed .to argue. the
case on pleadiQ.gs and affidavits filed by . them without
adducing oral ~vidence for . .the disposal of the case. and I
. hav~ heard the arguments of their learned A~vocates.
The. parties who are Burmese Buddhists were married
in November 19 57 and according to the applicant the
respondent (wife) had preViously left .him no.t less. than
. six ti.mes but on 22nd February. 1961 she. promised in
writing before Ule witnesses not to repeat and made an
Civil Mis. No. 49. of 1964.
34
4.66 BURMA .LAW REPORTS
admission that the children were rightly in the custody

of the applicant. She further promised not_to call away
U AYe
MAuNG the children again or c}aim mamtenance
f or them or f or
DAwv.AYE. herself. She stated that she could not show any cause
AYE SHwE, for leaving him except her own ang~r. The applicant
alleged that subsequent to her promise in writing she had.
. left him twice but on the third occasion when she again
left him taking away the children on 30th August 1962
he asked for ~he returp. of the elder child who was allowed
to return to him on' I 8th December I 962 and later with
her own consent the younger child was allowed to live
with him. The applicant stated that the respondent had
often returned :to him and afte.r: she had lived for. 51 days.
with him and the children within the space of about :ten-
. months finally left him on 31st October 1963 taking away
the children without his knowledge. He said the respon--
dent was not in a position to maintain the children and.
had applied for maintenance in the Court of the sth Addi-
tional Magistrate of Rangoon in Criminal Miscellaneous.
Cas~ No. 19 of 1964 which is still pending.
Ma Ya deposed in her affidavit that the two children
had lived with the applicant happily for about a .year in
1962 and that :the respondent herself had spent her nights
often with them until she left him finally on 30th October
. 1963. These are the essential facts placed before the
Court by the applicant. . .
The respondent in her affidavit deposed that the
applicant is a much i:narri~d man and indulges in black
magic in-' which she was forced to. take part against' her.
wish or play as a medium. To support her affidavit she
. has filed a book written l?y him. So far as she knows:
he _has taken.six other women whom -she has named as hhf.
.. wives. His own book testified fo the truth of her state--.
ments. :She said she had left him only twice as she was::
driven out' and had suffered his ill~treatrnents. The 1:vyo;
witnesses who signed on her prom~se in writing are his;
own employees. According to her she was forced to sign c.c.

x96s
and put her thumb impression on the deed. She denied
that she allowed the elder child to return to him. She U AYB
MAUNG
said the child was secretly taken away by him from .her v.
DAw AYE
relatives when she herself was away for a day in Pegu AYB SHWB.
to attend the funeral of her aunt. She accused .the appli-

cant of asking for the hand of her younger cousin Ma Win
Kyi for marriage and when he was refused she was beaten.
On the following day she took the children and left him
to live with her parents. She fears that her children
will be ill-treated by his wives and other children if they
are given back Jo him. She has deposed in her affidavit
that the applicant was arrested under section 5 of the
Public Order Preservation Act for writing and publishing
the book which contains wrong doctrines and untruths.
Her mother Daw Shwe filed an affidavit to support her
statement that the applicant secretly took away the elder
child and that he forced Ma Win Kyi fo be his wife. The
mother also protests against the giving of the children
to the applicant whom she said was a much married .man
and a bigot. The respondent's cousin Maung Tin Hla also
deposed that Ute elder child was secretly taken away from
his house j)y the applicant when he was at the back of the
house. Ma Win Kyi a girl of 16 years of age deposed
when the respondent went to ~egu fo attend j:he ~uneral
the two children were left in Maung Tin Hla's house and
when she was maJd.rig coffe~ for the children Maung Tin
Hla was wi.th the younger child at t he back of the house
while the applicant's car was seen taking away the elder
child, and some days later when she went to the applicant's
house to re~der help to the respondent as her children
were said tQ be ill she found the children were in perfect
health and learnt thaf she was never sent for j)y the respon-
dent and on that day at about 5 p.m. the applicant
attempted to rape her bu:t she managed to ~cape and hide
in Shwe-Bon Pwint Paya in Pazundaung. Ma Ya again
468 BURMA .LAW REPORTS
c.c. filed an affidavit to say that her husband is the agent of

1965
the applicant. Unlike her first affi<lav.it she gave more
U AYtl
MAUNG details in this second affidavit. It will be seen that she
v. did not say much in support of the applicant. She
DAW AYE
AYB SHWE. deposed that she had personal knowledge of what she
said in her first affidavit. She said it was the applicant

who told her what to say. She deposed that she knows
the applicant has other wives and children and that he is
in the habit of travelling to places in the districts as shown
in the letter written by his manager to the Advocate .i n
connectionwith the maintenance proceedings against him
in Court and which is filed in the record.
Now reading these affidavits and other connected
papers I find there is nothing against the character of the
respondent. The allegations made against the applicant
were never rebutted. His application stands on. his own
affidavit alone. When he has m~ny other wives and
children and is practising some supernatural feats as a
bigot accompanied by ill-treatments of the respondent with
an inclination .t o rape young girls, I caimot for a moment
consider that he is a fit man to have the custody of the
children. . His character as .disclosed in the affidavits does
not warrant that the welfare of the children will be best
served if he is given the custody of the .children. The
paramount consideration in the ~atter o_f custody of a
minor of tender years is the interest of the child, rather
than -the rights of the parents. Maung. Aung Khin v.
Ma Saw Hla (r). When the father is in the habit of going
out on business :to the districts it will be a sad affair to leave
behirid the children 'YVith his other wives and step-brothers
and 1:listers. However well looked after they may be by
them it is the constant warmth~ love and affection of the
parents ~hey need especially when ~ey' are .t9o young.
The learned Advocate for the applicant submitted .that
the 'eider child has now reached her school going age and
it will be in her interest to be with the father. It mus'E c.c.

I96S
be remembered that she is still in her infancy and it will
U AYE
not be a burden on the mother to send her ~0 school as MAUNG
she will be attending only her kindergarten class. The DAW " AYl3
decision depends upon the facts and circumstances of each AYB SuWB.
case. Under the facts and circumstances o~taining in this

case, I must hold that the applicant is unfit to get the
custory of the children. The application is therefore
dismissed. Advocate's fee five gold mohurs.
..!:
r
:>"'!:
.:>
r ,, ,
Lo cccccg.>
SL)!Odffii M V1 VW)IfiQ OLt

n:~oo teo~ rcc c.co(t,an nw&ec&be :c.oowc.fcot">-
..> e ..> ..>
.JL.t
472 BIJRMA LAW REP0RTS
uo~obl~:oct:;Je~ro
.)~ .) ::::1
4b~oe~:oooero
.) . .)
4b::.oe&ro~wcccoo!::~
.) .) '$'., .) .)
0
wPeed:o
.) 0
~~8ccce&-,
.:>:::1 C:oC2cc4cd~
.) .) .) .) C2cc:ol:leeflCOcd
.,:::h. i::to
.
0 0
0
11C2cco~atil
.) .)
.:'"'l:le
.:>:I 3':::],
...et'lcoro
.)
to:ol:lhl:xo co:de1bccowcfto~
0 .) :::1~.) . .) . iGwccc.oo
:> .) .)
~~d~hllx:,
.) . ~0
cneahl
.) :I
.
n;::ccocucco~ to&o~:chco 1Cb~~hlbwe:;eo2 lw:4cc::cwe:2 :~ib:Cbco
'$' .) 0 .)~~ ' .)0 6 e=f
o
~c@o :C2ro~cQ~(),
.:> .) ::::1 o
11 o~wC:o~ ~eo~cohl:re ~wcn&>oh.:ccro 1~
\.:> .) .>o.:> :::J .) .:>o .) .L
'l:oc4ccchlb:> er:::troe5o ,,ee.ri c.ccec~~ct:;J w~e&ro eSo ~Mero:&ILB
O ~0 .)c):j .:>L ::::J 0 o .:> o~
ueesccc~o~~e
L .)00
:of:l~lo~roob:c~::.co
.,:::Jo o .:>o .:>
Co@ccotoC'~
., .:>o .,
:4ooroo~es
., ., .:>
1bro
wi'etecooo~:>:ob &<.oto 11 .)C2cco~o~cnhl :C2ro:ol:lh::te :lre::)l:l~oh.:do
., o .:> o \ o
'5 .) .:>o.:>:::J .) .,:::Jo o l!i .:>:::.l~.bo .)
:oto4~
.)0
~H~es
.)
h:ccce 0
:c c n:C2co:'h:co
.) 0
11 re~ 1oee
..L
ba.>Cbec.cceec&to
.) 0 0
c.~
wPetewoo :~ccoPwto eco uC2ccbEOll; :1Pe:3f:lb:cae :4o:ob :d:ca:&!cc
., o ., .)0 .:> o .:> ::::Jo &' .:>:::.1 .:> .:>o .>O .>
:Ol<Bibc.ccecc
6'16 to:c.Pe:40eJcobles
0 . .) .) ~
ccc~~b0
1:ol:l~~wc:ro
.,:::J::::l.:~o .)
:4o:ob
.) .)0 .)
a;eces
.S.bcockcocc~b:>
.) .) .) 0 0
brocccece seo2 11 o~C:oe .)
C2cccoch~cc
.) .) .)
bescccecc
:J~o2 cnhlw:4oorooo@ro C2cc:....,QQ~ccn :C2co:1:sco &&ro l:ol:l:ecc~4ro
.,:::J .) .) .) .) 3':::.1::::1 .) 0 .>:::.1 .)0 .)0
.co:de('dPco JGcl;o~ :fJocce~:o1e~ co:cco ucccdhl~to tnC2ccroahl
.) '$' eh .)l., 6 .) .)~OL .) L.:>:::J
:ol:lote :excnwcco~ Cebce~ wc:va:@ w:cPe;~ ccce~b 1:fi1d:1;co::es
.:>:::.l.:>o .> .:> o .:> 6 o o eJ.:> .:>
:C2c.owc.co~coccoe4!W
.) .) .) .)
c.[,C2ccte
.) 0
:oQEikror:roro
.) :::.1--..J.) .)
&&rowccn~
.)
C
-eb~ee .)
wcnesC2
0 .) 6
cccco~41W
0 .} .)
ad:ocnw:ob
.)0 .) 0 .)
II C2cc:2cne ~b~~e CG
.) .) \ .) .)00
:c.l;orotDob d-JC2cce~ ~4odoc:d~ro dro:hloo:o,oe c.dxxcro w'to:de

.) .)O .) 'o .) .) .:> .) 6J.) .) l, .) _o o
{)b:c.cocn
..)
ccce1Pero\','
~&coPd:ewoo
0 .) 0 .)
~:~ccoPcow
y .)0 .) 0
e2cchloc.o
.) ~.)
oco:4oo:2
.) .) 6
oecctoe
11
.)
C2ccecewce
.) \0 .)
S~:~ooror:c@ro
.) .) .) .)
11 C2cc
.)
Qecewce
::::J,. .) ccc~~:4ccoPcow
.) .)0 .) 0 .) 0 :;, C2cctc:ob tbrocoPekw~
.)
oi:ccoh:&ib:c.ro
0 .) ~ .)0 .) 0 0
cocftoe 11 C2ccoecnhl cccC.OC2cce~oro :ces:ob ~cre;e.c.occno1Pec0 11 C2cc

.) .) .):::J .) \o.) .) .) .) j
ececoce
, .)
Jg@Q1:n w:4ccoPco'l:o
'$'.) ::::1. o .)O.) o
IC[,wPelea:to
.) o .:>
n~&:ob
:>o.)
Johlec&:!cce~e
.)~ .} \O
&to u Peeet;edu :oQi:echleoPe::> ::::mi&ro~ IS&ccccQlQ :or:l:PeeciJro

o o \o .):::Jo ~ .) o '$' .:> .,;::J J:::l J
'co:ci('~)Oe>
"' ccccc
..-:~ rrb r 1
e:soororo ' 1 ::::l
ICCCCJO J
oro '1 1
:s-oc:cvoaaro
1 1 ':':1 r
cccce~::::c(')e>
0 .) 0 .) .) 0 ,J t.. .) j .) .) .) .)
W(J)e:GC2
0 .) 6
t(n4ccoro):u
0 .)0 .) 0
ctd:ocnto
.)0 .) 0
:cPAtt:cooa;clb:>::>.)
e~.esl0
.) ':)
uC2cc
.)
roeJb'lQ ~~eechle
~ .) 0 ~
h)toccccMbchle
0 0 .) 0.) ~
S~~eoree
.) .)
~C2rohxi:ccco
.) 0 .)
JCceoe
.)
C2ccbcohl:6
.) .):::Jo
ccoeCI.)C\)
.)
l:d:owPd:echl::>
00.) 0
~:ob
::J ;}'.) .) ~ ~~f(')~chle a.:a;ccnei:o
.)
,@ccbd:c.h-1 c00&!hl h.l:cP(')C2cc~ro ccce>rofecn~a;cc0~ ccceh-1
.) ::::1 0.)~ 0 .) .) .).) .) ::::1
crocoche
.)
&cccbl5e1f,
0 .)
d:obco
.)
bccca~es .)
l~:be::::ba:dxo
:> .) 6
nC2ccneat)]
.) .),_).)
C2e
Lt SDIOd3:~ M V1 VW(Ifl1
SLtiOd3.tl M V1 Vmflg tL.v
,. 11
ll~cr.CD
, 'I
C0~6CD~I
~,. .1_ ~~ ~ IL ~ ~~ 11 II
CC:CIX.OCOOCO!P::>eCSCO!rn O'KOOC.CCCO OIOC:~CO
r " 'I b 'OC
:\
0 .)O ;) 0 ~ .) .)O :J :> .> e \.l; .>
ro~LOJ.Cl~~ ~t~ Cs~c c.cc~~refo> c~) cc .?'~~:~~ ~~e bsllc +.

l r T 11 ~- ~ _ ~~ n C '\
uccc ~"~coec~ l~l:e SDC
J(j)~ bs:~tlc z~:n&:<hco::>lk:(l) ::>~eccocccan4b(j)~ra.(j)~

~ :1 6-.1
.) .) .)O e .) .) .) .)
c ws:::cco~
~~:~n:x\Ja::
.) .) ~.) . tca.x:eln hXttc~:liPcu~(l)Sl
.) .) - .)~
tba:: col ocb:ncocc~<h
.) e-::~,b '::>&>.
,)
1000:: Cft~(l)l2 ( Je~\ :Q:::>JO~ b:>:<bcoeocron ucre:d :h.l&:dsco
...l. o e ...l. J 6-.1 .)l. o .) e 6.:3
uR:~&:2
o.)
:n~~eb:l!esu
e ~ o
uc.c.;cc
.)
9
0
a;e:axcecr.ro . .
, _ ,_
.1_ _ _ . 11
,.
II ua..a:.esa:::mccema:;
.) 0 .
@cc:~cc@beo
u.) .) .) 0
.......vb-ob .)cofledie1:'oec~
.)
10~~
.:>
bt~llc
;)
J01re:lll:cbcooo~c.~4bl
.) .>o
too~c.a4bli::c.ooe@.
.>~ .) O .)~.)
O o~ :2
.> !.l.> o
C o4S@h.toecc
L .)0.) ~.)
'::1
11 ccccceco
.)
,. , '::1
cncccc
.>
oo:]Pcoca
.J
o ot
OCOI1P.CD
.> .:10
o p n o o o .-, v _n ,
:::ec.cc:tll e:floJ~ccrooo~ooecsocccflaoiC.CC~OO.
.> .) .JO.) .> .>--.J 0
I~CCcc.zcb 'oc.h.l~oo IIO~::OIOfiiC. rP.~<Ihl C.CC~IC.OO

1
@cc4ro:Jirco
,;,J
bcs cof f!C 0
.> e_,.> .,:, :::::J o .> L ..:>~
h1,$)~o~
::Jw .> o
(e) :Jo) (co) (f) c .>o chcs~aecoeca:::<'~re:l?t:Jccro
.. o .> .J .>OJ.> ~~,.Q~aRc.cce
.;,j~ .>-.J
orco~ce
~ .l
eo:b~obo:cbco
o .l 6
@cckcc.cc~4Q:,:~rco
> .)
bee cor ~c'b
.,:,
:~~cc:hleee
.,:, o .l 8'1\o
II .)@M~b:<.o:2o
.>
toooa:x>:1rcocs~laec
0 .l .) .) .JO
~c.cc:
j -
are:aRccro
.) .l OJ~
&~~ ,,~cc~hlcceo
, ::1 .I oec~e.o..b
.> .>
c ro5l=
eJ
1eCQtlc
.:J
ohl~ahl
.> ::1'"", ::l
coo~
.)
b .J~cceiro
\ .J
:@roc.MPecsccc~4ro:irw~<J>b!
.> .l S .) .J ......1O
eo u@cc~IO
.)
o&coc.cs~2G:or~
Ol, .) ..> .l .>l,
n-r~
IC.Iflfl P_ 'l
. C.CC~OICO'.fce 'co:
b~::>oo:oxo
L.l 01r
C.IJ~~:;c.
~
rY
0\:f'.CC~CC~flfl
1r 0
0C0 CC
" :> .l .> o .l o .l :> .> .> .> , .l
: .)~eCD Good t'!C},

.) :J:;"Joocc.o><bn
.) o:J.) ucoreooCl:te
.) ;, :t .
1! ooa oo:lPcow O~GCC:C'Ire:AOco&lloe&,s-:o!;l:oeehlw l:sw cor AGo:h.lc.ccc.,~
.> .l .) .J .>OJ.) .>w .) G~b
.)o;..J
(~:cbco~&es) ~~~c ~4Q~~c<X~@hl

o.)O .)~.) . .) ~
Uwt) r
.) 0 3>~
be ro!.o>
Csllc t (So:cbco~~w) . c~f0:~ (le~) :~:5Lo~
:X.o~~~ore:
.) ~.)
2 :~
0
h.l&:cbco
.
1f 11 . 1
fteCOesCOO.Q)OO
~
S"Lt S.D:IOd3~ M V1 VJAru09: (596I

SJ..'MOdffii MV1 vmng 9Lt
.: ;-t
c: 0
roc-oo:>OiH.O~V
-l IL JL
~ o ~c c
<cpt:ljlr_:jl 2r.lJCc:l~~
t ~lij G{)')o1o1 (G~T) ~8o8: t (m~~m'P:~)

c: ('
~t~Je .oC
J
~roll
r,: C' r,: C'
(roO?t~m'P:~)
C' 0 C' 0
t:I
2 GOO')C~l:jf<J')~CC
(" (" ~ ( ) c:c C' 0 C'f:(' C' c
WO'.)(>lln:l.)Cl t:nOOeOGSI{tlll 0~ 0 tr.l'j t:jOlt_CX>C~?IOI>jCc:JC:-~p~ororoJc:~t .
q8~ j(i j ( o) c:\)mro~:~o?:~~ Go::pq ColGO::l:>q 11

r.;: (" ("
~:[jc;IJOOII
0 c: <"J;"'.J': .
ll~u;t<>CPcpt~:l:>C! Cola:>'f?~:l:>Citr'"'G:l:>?
[
GOOIO0 I tl'4<Dc:(-~)
o;> I Gu.l
]
c: c: c: c c: c: c: c: ~ ~ r,;:c: ohc: r;:c:
.OO'jCQ:l:J?CICT.lJfl::l;llolJ?I~ ~flGQO':>CCO-:x:IJ?I~C O?f2lfe!ll::'lq ri,?C!t:ic:m-:>:[jq
~ c: I:"S
Col<Y.>cp:m= :mro~o~s 11
-- c:
o'1 ( o) :r..9 tf"~<?1ro:x>2
o c: c:
u
(" c:: (" c:
c:x>ow~:l::'lro~rou uwoxp:mooc:
c:
~coos qs~
c: c:
o7
( )
o &XJ' r.:c:
t:lc'tmJtlt~t
~
(' (' (' C' C' C' (' 0 ("

u.~;>2:~: oro-:>coro
0;1u.1-:>: ~roJ<>Gf>9~9. 2oosro<>J~a:>CO-:>:~u ~ J
o ~ c c o c r;:;:: C' c c
~o:>cptCI~p :r.<:l:)(l) 0(! tO~OOColJ:xl~C::l:>IOJ2000X>r_:j-:>c:H;;:l:>?CtmJfl~J~
c: ~ C" c: ~.s 'T' ~ ~"- 0 r,;::: c: (" r,;::: (' 0 (" r,;:::.~
,C ;m?l e~~.:r:~o~-:>c:IG-;11 G:x>-:>cox-:>::l:>~~r_:j2'Jf ~t:j-:>c~OJ~t::J?Cll
c: <" c: _oc: c: '1 .. c: c: :t.....~ c: oc:oc:
o~ :roJt'~J"'iS c:t~ce~~m qc:o>e ~'l:o..,-r-cpmooo-:> ~~
A\ (' ('~ 0 ~s: 'T' - ~ (" ~ c: (' (' oc:
Co!J?:~Gf:y GQOXiFI:J"~:l:>~~ IIG<.>I ~:P2(T.)O)GeJ?Cll G:xl?CtmJfl~J-:>:OCtcl
0
~:l:>'X9JC
~ ('
:x>eoc:GOt:r.<G~tf::l:>-:>
C'J'
~~'j~CP
c: 0(' c: r,;::: ('
OOGt:j-:>c:t OOOlCro
c: r:c:
Cjf)Q(I)
c:
r.::c:
IX!octroo:>Gt:j-:>CU
r::: (' ('...s c: (' <'A;
,C:u.l-:>1 ::Ju.ljtf:OOOO)O):!
c
~I ~t?O"'(.\)
oel'J'j
~ c:
Oj ')roGt'j"'::l
,...,.s
c: c: _oc:
t:nOlJlO~<;o:>Qf_~ Gf~'j:l:>C!Cf.)O'.)Gt:.PC:I
' c:
Gc'XT.XX>?I:IJ
r,;::: c: o c: r,;:::
c:
cqmot:j?CIGt:j?CI~JJ-:>l~
o r::: c: .s
(' c c
'T'C: (' c ( ) c. ~ (' 0 (' c:
cpeoo:>mJ~~II <jClu.IGOI S <{OW jiSj 0 et~tllr.l~?~<;otOOI~~II
f:: C' C' C":C' C' C' r,:c r: c:o C: c:
c:le!Q(X)')C~Ofii?~CC fq QC!l?:l:>fl 0@:)~ ~teD I Of~?Cj~CCJtiWJ?ll C!l?ColJOO~?
OC' OC'
,.R_,... (' (' ('

9'1"""""-r'l2:tf l:l:>2 il
0 C' Q C'O
!nU:>~O)allOO!J30?ro II II ::>~ CCD~ II
n. L o -r tJ L
.. c : Q ~oc-
~~o:>'P:~~m U H2:r:::!5lt II
* oa(i.., ;,~~~ mecoS
C. .,J LJ -,.
O)O.)~~oS
lt. J\. J
::>o..,n
.)
C C: Cc:;!! ~ ( ) C: C' C C: C: C
t oeiSj ~'Cicpc'Oce;,ljtu.l'ta:> ::> ~.:>JI-l<DC::l:>? OeiSj ~tC!ll Wo:>ro oe 9<"1l
' '1 c: t~ ( ~C
c: ") ~ .c oc- o
G~~OI 1000-:>C.'as;:l OX?.I <T.l'{'l::l;1eilet .mloltot~<>jtll
CX1Xplu.l:l:>C&~eooo~ow
c: c: c:
::>'1
( )
::>
r:;:
~c:t"~~p:o'lccr-~~~~~
'c 9 c:ct o
BURMA LAW REPORTS
C~~c + (&o:cbco~t'oes) liJ.,se>
#::> :ThcCCCG~:g ~~&:~
~e&eca:c'bc.o
0
I8t SL'aOClffii MV1 VMHlH

ur Lo
:ec~:g-l-lll~
of
~
]~ll)E)
C~llc
S.DIOd311 MV1 VffilfUI Z8t

.a:965] BURMA LA.W REPORTS 483
co c- o c o c cc r c c- c- ~ c o c- oc c co
u Jl t - <.>:l:DX>T.>
~t:n:l-:x>':X>t
jJ L4 t
rr.>~t:;ftlo~y~:; ~:>::'Ot2:
u 0 UJ u c-:;:oo
I
rou:ncoro'):;omur
. \ L bJ l
oe~j
L
.
o
Q ')')( 00(.)1
LL
c @
c o c cc c
IJ() ~~:D')~(;)I.'Drr.>~T.>IJI?:T.> QOJ')T.>OeQ:; c~e=~'): c:
LILL U tl L Jil .
~
~;;sT!L
cc oooc c r,:c . c r:;:c- 'T'~ c-o c ~8
S"J':>~~~ ~~CYe;! t:J~GU:Df3;?11 ~')Q:'D 2()g')g;>');t:Jq G()l r:i9Yf3;?~~? J
C' ~(' OC' C C' ~) G C C C r,;: C L, 0 GsT~~~G~:
( 0@~0 ~'Olc:lf~?lCC o:>sp:~o:>Go:>? r9~ 4>~C~:op ~~JC:t:J~GO<J?
c- c c
c G c- o r c r;: c . or;::, c. Ol jll
s;>GOO? 'DSJ2 Gro? 'D::q'J9f8'J ~I) 'iJ:G!~pq G~., :n~:.n?j9q ')<f.~t~,c"
'f,;:c C C 0 'T'~ C C~ C' C . C OC'
tJ4>g~?::~ Gt91B9t ox;r:i~:n? :n:nGOJQ)Q)JC'OOJ?Z;p :nm~'P
c Be: .
~
oo 'l c c@ oc o c c o
.S1X.>KP~ ~:; G:D? S'JIJ()il)OJ 8'JYOJC OJC 00?: c:r 8'JGOO?OJ8'J2
IL T J l> L L l JL l> ,
c- c c ~ ~cr,:::::. c c c co c o 'l c
GOO?'D~:J~~:; t=~=t.~:f>t=~~~9f S"J:OJCf(.l)? OO~W?.'DC'I.f .gr:')Y:
:ec c c c oc . o. t: 1r c coc occ c
IOD):OJ: :;.\:; G:SJ:8d?3a
tj . J c. Jl
::;:oo.._ IO:D tlCI
t.:J
~mrocmo:m
l Til
G ucac~:n
L Jl . C..:,
cr,;:c ~o co c c c cor,: c r,;:c
SdQJ::;:t:JDgr:l~ 8'JGOO?.'D8'J2 QOO?.'D~9f~:J.> <tJl~ij?::;. G:D? ~G:.n?Cjq
or;::, c cc c r,;: c c c . c:
'9'f. XZ8? :!90:D2;!:J? ~:Cjo:>~JOJQ)J~OOOO?:OJ~ II
C' ( ~ (' ~~ 0 (' . (' C' ) Q C' . (' 0 c. C' .
(J.)()f O@~I:S ~01 crf~?~Cco:>sp:~GO'.)? 09 IO')C~I~ qc~cro
c r,;:i:- 1:': o
c o c c c c o r,;: c r,;: c
m~J :~~:~DG~:Jt snro? 'D8'J2 Gro?.'D~:.>~tS"JOl:J.> 'i}=~e~:>~ G:D'):DG:.n?c:Jq
o~c r,:_c ~ c o 'T'I:': c c~ c o c o .
'JU[XZI.:P e~~ep::::Jt Gt9t r:19f oo:::r:i~:n') :n:-oG:DQQ)JC'OOJ?:':P roGm
r c c oc: ~oo 'l c c:@ c c o c: c:
s;>')fc.g:; OJ'DOO~CO SOOI(l):J ~~ G:D? GOO?:T.JCOUCO:D:D SJGeQ'):D
LJ t. T U.T J 1:! l L L 1;.3
G o c t:: ob c o c~ : c o c o o c o oo c
8d2 o~:;
L J
G:::m::m?~ o::::~c:oo DCI
A . lJ~ Cllf.. :1
o:>:uc;o::;mo:m
l T 11
008dGOO'):'D8'J2UIO.!i\C
l L J o
r C' o C 0 ');; cr;:::,c C: f.~ .OC C C C rC
oo::rn:n:u;;:o~~JJY:~J?lll? <;i=~~ OO:::~:jCI02:D?~(j:i q:::~~:D~ 8dQJC:j910
r.:oorc r,:c C'9 ccc c
G~"Y? ~:G~')~G':X>? OJG()')?tl~ 8d~eQ'):J)8'J2 GOO':>ro~9f8d~OJ 'Jtl[
orc r;;: c ~ c: . r,: c c
919:::r:r1>Ge.P:::: ~:~:~oooo?::ne;? .u
O~C'
CQ!jC
(
oe~o ~;01
(' ~C'
c:lfl:}?tCC
OC' o
o:>&p:~~GOO?~JlO
('
IO'JC~:~C
C' ('
r:J ) e C: o C'
-oc c . c c: r,;: c r o 9 c c c c o r,;: c

qc~cm 8d9JC:e~DG~~ s;roro?:D8d2 Gro?:ncqu9;>Sd0l:n ~:Ge~?qG-:x>')
rc 'T'(,',..,C . o~c
c:~ . . c o r,;:c ~ .c o
c
:n;;:.n?-9~ 'J~:I{eJ::;: t:JD~e!'):;g\l.f Gt91 r:i"''f oo:;(jGOJ? ~:'DGOJ:;):;)Jffi
c o c c c c o c c o c
S;)';OO?.'D8d2 GOO'):x>CO:JOS8dJ.>:'D COSdUG:D? oo:n;Qt?:.'D OUXD
~!')]~')
U J L -IT l> ~ e>C.::. 1J L IL
c G c r.~ r;:cr;:::,c c c or;::c c. orc rc c oc
9r IOD2:0:> ;['jgi9~eJ::::;~ Gi3'J:Sd'Jl1jtjC: 0:D~~l9~0J,9~1 o:>:n;;qc~
oc c c c r.;:c 1:': o c o c c c c o r,;: c:
'J::n q:::)l::;:o~ m~Jc:~:~'DG8~ m~ro?.'D8d2 Gro?:~9u9tm~m 'i]:G~:~')q
cc or;:::,c r,:c,..~ c . r,;: c c
G:o:> o:>~J.>);9~ 'l '~e~:::c:J~~?c: <f.ro:;q:e~o:xm::n~u .
. .'T' C' ' 0
C' C' . c ('
.c 0 ('
g)1Sd:JJ.>c roiDQ)O)m:~
T
G31 o:>s:.1ii m mem 101>G'~:Qrmroc
. T
JL A . 0. JL.
cc:ooo:>:n
I 41\. C:.
c: rc: o
ll .. b
o c oc c c c c o c c
s;>QtC:!tlDG .'D OO:'DSdd G~?."Q::O:>::!S8d))1J ~:G ?CGOJ') C OJ~:?
\1 D l t. . o t. lT o u . . .
. or- c r,;: <' ~ c T~ c o c c c: c o . o
''J~:I{[9::::['j~Ge!?:;: Gt91 199rl cq8d()GOJ? ~:;)JOJSdOO.''DYJ?: Tl_ ~2;!0;1Y1
C' 0 .C' or;::, c r,: ' ~ <' (' (' . C' . c . 'l (' r;;: C' r,:
~:J)<Xi S'Jt>l>Cl~j::;gyi.ltJ.) !jf')if'?(:n~f:~J.>OJ~ Sd~l'j:D? 8dQJC:tJIOGt:::J
'T' C' 0 C' oc . C' (' c C' (' C: 6 0 c (9 c
~()I OOC O):J)SJ~~eQ'):Th,"\):J;lSS'J)):J) 8'400 ~ (.9;y;, (V..l)(X)'ll!Ut G>G
c
?::;:1

.:. L . IT .:. L L l ~'
484 BURMA ~LAVf. REPORTS
~&~
~;;sTIl
~d
J 0
~sT1":10~:
o1 jll
nr [,0
:ec~sf~_LS~
r
s>t
IJ.c~
cs&:
S8t S~'dOdffi:l M.V1 VW'dflH
486 BURMA LAW REPORTS (196~
C'f.: (' ('

GPeooor:lcooc~
~ G OC' r
O'J'PI0;1e!: 2IG4>?00::0f:.G~~C
. t o~G:J r: c
t:j~GCD?C~t:H~~')~CC
c r,: c 0 (' 0 cr: c c c
ljCOOC'J-fGCD~')(D(X)')g :::l~
c )
c c
~t"' J '}0011 c
~c
J cr:
J 0
G~?Ct1 ll: ()I

cr,: ~ c c c
tjCOOC'Jcj>GCD~ ')(DC::O'):~~Pi(~J :>:
c 0 ) *
c~ c c r,: c c c
'(>C'::Ona: 'l!l~ rll'2 3'39!nC:l~QOit::JC:-:n::oro
r:: 09
c r,: c
~4> \lti~G::x>:~~<: <UCWIX>?t
c c
00 (" "" c I WII

~GOIC I :x>C
JL
c
~:[je>~JOOII
r: c
II!T.l::Oro
c
oc; c ~ c
~ID(,Iti~G::O:::O~
c c
COO~<X>O(.!T.l?:
c ~
OXWOO?I!l:ICjiD
r,::c
'1 c c c: c cr; c c:~ .c ~~ oc:
GOtC:::l:lc:rororoG::l:l?G9J?CT.XX)?l~'Joa G~?Ct!I[I::O~ E;f>C'::Oa:>e!:<is~ ?':Jl ~:3
c~ c: c c-r,: c c- oc o c c-
:J !T.l91 'Pe=e~: t{!J(,I ?'ll!l ~t!~Pf :cm:::o~ w,sY:~~ mJ!L=~j>::O~<Jtoq::
r,;: c: C"
etOO'JGO~~ II
r.c c c c c o ~ Q
~:jCOOC'jf Groproan::l[:n~ro II II~I!{:'JG~ Gfel:
1 e:::nG::D II
~(' (' (' (' 0 ('
t:JC ~C'jf GOOJ?tr.?OO?:~'J:l[~otroll II
~ e oc: !;; c: c o c:~

ro~::l[e3: e:GcO?::no:>.p:u 112JI D~~C Gcqj-:>mo::r:>:<:>'JO(c G<.nctJ!l:'
c. c o .oc c r,;:c ')C c c
:0~1 ~'il(J:!J :;q~ y.y:mGro~
ro-::>:1 roc~m-:>: s;}ti<D GOic::oc: :;ororo
.-- c: c ~ c c c c~c c: o c oc
G~-:>:;: :O:DG:00)01Jm~1"J:ro91 GO! O.].C OO':Sj-:>::oG!tJCI ~c:rot0)9_C
C C f:CA; .c f:C ')C C r;::;:: C: C 0 C"
.
()) U~:
0\:0~11
('
ro : "-l:..D"Jl \9~9!
.
CDCYU)"Jl 8Jtl<D GOIC::OC:Gt?j"JC:
.
~m:;q
.
Of
c c o c ~oc
"-lCl'ol:"-lQ;\1 "-lOl::: GOI <D.S(l)CI);X> .I!J.l'olO)C "-l,:x>m:x>
c c c , o oc o
00(7)00 G "J;QG<D())"J(JI
Jl T . \,_,# Jl 6 ~ o o\. u L l ll
(' c . Q 1: c c c ('~
:o:n;:x>QJm:lJ-:>::D';ji:O;,): tl4:>~ g~y~(J on:;Gcqj-:>:x> cxn:Q9~ G"-lOCI:)Jt:
())I
c
ro::~:~m-:> :
r,;:c '1<"
Od'<.'l<D G;JIC::oc:::x>:IJ:J.>I
c: c o c o
~:IlXl"-ll SJGQ~ 1:10)0)
, o co c
0)0)000)
.t.:J . l:.:t L ~ l JJ -~ ll
<D"J ::D~O)"JO):l):Il
c OdG.S c oc r::::: c ~ c c c
::: G.SOOCG:m-:>c: GUI C\JCO)~)()) .U)roQGC"-l::DII
o tLCi. TTl~ u Ctll-1 ~
c. 0 c 1: c c (' (' 1: c c 8c c 0 f,'? c
. g~~UC t1~G01 "-l~'=I:Y:O~ OdOlJC: ~:j<D:O~ o:lOluf~ ()2-::>~ ~"-l'fe'OC
. (' c . oc c
09 ~1>c g ::nG:x>::o~1
(' .c c
mro::o
--T ll 0: oo:
l
mro-:>::o:IJ
.Li.
. GJroc:l
L .
ro:oro J U ~
em
* o~lij. ~~~I .'f?C'OCf.i6roe~~o:f \' ( ro) II .

c . c c c- c ro fR
-c~ c ~
t oel!l<f
~I 'f?~Oroe!:'i~CY.> ~Cl ~C~J~o:>G::O? 0)::0?~1lfi.Q~O)'P:Oi1e!~
<:. O.C" Of.":CA\ <"::"~
c;l~~~t!tSl ;oct::!"' 11
u@cc:<:\.~@btotn
.:> .:> .) 0 (5-
rCC C<J) Cool)
.)
.)co&:cbco IICffl:bJob<J> OO~cfl4bl

.> e .Jo .J~
l .:><l>~e Os;"tVC
";)
100~~~41:1
~o ,.:J ~::~ooe;:;Jhl
.) . 3.... ::1 .;:,0~ .)GCC5:(!
o
.
urvc c<l> l:dt~:lx:obG OO~c~4bl I<Pf~ O~>~Vc IOO~Gt'14biiJ.ocooe@l::l o~ 4e'c.ocdG&,

.l e .>o .>.~ :J .:.J .lo .>:J .> .> ~ .J ;, .:J .>o
n0Cl;lJ C.G ucPfl:kobGOO;c.~4bl

.J e .>o .>:.3 I.J<Pf~ vbPJc IOC.flSOe:d
:J .>
ofoo??c.t'l4bllPoc.ooe@l::l
o .l .)0 .l:..l .J .) :.:1
IIC.()).)C.es'S':Bl.!c;:ckco fb:oe~t'lc.ec-~e.cc.cce
:,:>c.o~, ~Q
oJ "'~
Vob flSh;h':lcocc~ch--
.)0-j., . ~rmobl:oee<'lc.eG-
0 .) ;::)
(c) (,t)b f'lsh:korcoc.oo.;:>d,
.) .) .)
II cob 0c cofle
"
16 , .
oc.coe
Q t - '] : ~,,
c.coco:=:c _1 - r
cc;CL"CC oil> :>oc.seoc.fle c.cocot 'e)"cc:co.
ae .>nIne:to 1
co
.;> O .J .> ee .J .J ..>li e
S~"tl0d3:'tl M.V1 VJt\))10.9

.:
11 ::>C.ft~:ro~:2u
:> e
nc.o&w&be:
~ . .
c.ooc.oc fro~
.)
11 :xdo:2
:> .
:h-lb~~b:arou
e ~ o
68t S.DIOd3)f M V1 VW(09: [596!

Sl.'tiOdffii M.Vl V.Vnfflij 06t
I965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 491
~
0 ('
lO)I ::1 S'd')Cl ;);e.g:;
c (" GS~::;('~:DC('OXDo:lG:::O')Cl('J')O):''n:
(' 0 (" (" ' ('
Cl)ffialalGO:::O:DII .:>:G.:>n
Q C'
oe~j
J1 JJ L:l o I ~ f. o t:.:, lt. IL t. C 0 l::. [.
(' r,: C" (' r,:c- OC"o ( ) 0 ~ C' C'' C'
;~ t12GOO:>C~~fl,l')~CC~~ ? 0{1 S'd~:o:>q>g?;(t:jgro 9~ff:~:::O~II erooo-,8~
g)j :u:DGcm?
'o ~ C'C
co?:~-::::o::ro:::osCDG:::o?
C'C'O
m:dl.l~C'
:~-::: ~
-:>:roo:>C1.>1ol oo::n? C'
r,:c-
r:;f~"~.C
OC'
c\. o o l J1 IT t. Jl J ll JL
:::0G0)?3d?! ~(' ra::n GO II ro:::omrara~:::< rome:o:>G<.D?:l?
f::G toe
!>CliOJ:'clu?::x:>:n
\-.J
C'
;L
C'
C.:. IL U.
C
Jl c:J
C"
:L
Q C'
9
J
e:-DO>CII
<:'
' C' C" O[G C";C' C' ' ' o C' C' ~ C'
G'));;~~:x:>~'f? m:o:mS)?1'ijtJ:tjJ>:::O~ II 93d~m ~Cl:OOGOO:SJ o:>q>:aJ'q
o c- rc '~ & C' C' r;::: C' o
~ ~:~Cl?CG:::O?S'dGI9~ 9~ ~CalJOYdJ?~I Sdtj?: m<OCO'JXSdCO?:'<}p:<q
c c c- c "~" c- c- r~ c- c o c- c-
1~e;:5JroJc 'J:SdGff~ o:>::p:~8dGUI qc lol2;~tJ4f:Gf::02;'1 SdGo:>?Sd:::Oq
C C' OC' C
q)~~;;:~::oe;u
~ C' 0 0 c c oc C' . \ c C' c C' c
m~8d~JL:5~:u-:>: at~ aJ~~t=~9f ~me:::oe;u Glnc"i1~,~c:'q
';l:>GOO:lCCD
C" C' ~
l,l')~CC Sd'cl <f CDO-:CO:Cl?C OC <'
S'd?lol:;l GCOI?:T.>CO?:::O::O:D ( ) G C' C' o C'
-~
f...w
c c- \ r
'
r c
C'
L ll
&_0L
ro~:,:!c.g-:; IOOI>QC\ G.SCll:::l:::o:::; l'li>G"DA.'U:'Im ::nmG::OQS'dal m OOGOO:
!l. n.LJo6:-l TI:.:J
..h. C.:.
C' C'
L
C'
0
~
C' C'
R.
C'
r,~ (" (" (" "~' c- r~ c- c r.: co c- (" c-

t:l::x:>~:..p-:>:l? <j:::S'dG:JI ~::; tl~f:O?-<:p lolC:JC~CG:x:>:<Jt o;?OOG::O?ro~:
(" co r;.. C' C'\ (" 0 (" C' C' ('
co:'l?~c~::n ~?~~!:::l::o:n~::ne;;q oxp:~cmm ~::nmJq~:eoon
(' (" c 0 \~ ' (" (" C'
OSI.l
L
can
7~
m ro:J~c:co?t~::o? Sd?~.>.'!XX>:va
J t. t. 0 :.-1
roYJQGO:aJ:::O:::OII
o c.:. comoc
Jl
r,:;& [...C'
m::p:~e3:m ~:>~~tl:::um~~c ::n:n-;;::o~~l~ cooooo:e:tloo::o-:>ro~:'
(" C' c ,'iloC' r,'?r.:(" c.c
C' C "(' f~ C' OC" C' (' C" C' OQ
Gp:n ::o:n~"D~p:m o:x:p:QroGol t~41t=tc~~ ~QJ()')Iolp:~e:
(' 0 ~ 0 c C"\ C' (' c
l.le;o;;ro? ra::xr;;:n~91 ro?~l.l;:.>:<Jt <f:DQJO'.>~J~::oe:u axp:~Go:>")(J)
C C' 0 \ 0 C C C'O~ C" C'
ffil(;:l?:q:,:n~? CD:T.>::OClOXl?l c:~CI:DC G:::OOY.l :;0)') O)ffiG~'Xi?m
tJ .. ' ~lf.J l .ol f. "'ij ~ G T-JI .
o c- c-,....c ,....C' o c ~ c- C" o
S'd:O'J:CJJ?::T.X::~ fcC!>S:::r.n)'~:: ra'~:::l? CO'L J:CO?JCI S'd?<)>lGO:::OCo . ~O::::OCCD
U -- l J AI .0. 0 lJ l ~I o t.
t;; c- cr.;:<: C" c c c, c-
. ~:19~ttjG:l::O~ 'fO)alJCD~J~o:>~::O~ II
0 c (" 9 C'. "' C' ~ C' "' (' "' Sl C'
CQ;l;l;x>:r>..<.:G::O'J~::l':;oq:oi:D~~~
-1-c.6T l .. Jt.JC::J
GC\:>I?,T.;CO?~:.>I.OOI:ClGO)?
JJ ~ . o -1
m OOiol~!l::;>
J..... a
(" C'~ 0~ c 0 C' '"I 0 "(' ("
~:l?CI:>.T.>9J o:><:p:.~tl :::O .'l?G::O~J?:~ COI>GOO:G:x:>?~QI o:>'f:Q8dGOI OiC
o c c- o o c c c c~ C" o
,q
fc DS:O):"l')(..)I'):<J?
.....,oT c-u ,. GC('p<UICI
~Jl- -JJ
q:::Sd'J::Jn~~'::
J.
GS~:;
r&) qOO?::::O::ncJ:?
.. . ~ -:.
~ C' C"~ ~C C C' G C' C 0 C" OC" C"

o::'P:~u::n O:.l.-"GJ:'l?SJ tltroe;:n~:~:m:> Sde>J!o~qco-:>:~9t 8d'cl~e>J<fCD
OC' C'
~::;GO::Ot:?ll
;-
: O:TI?;) OOD:;;}GQGS
o o 3: o. t' c-
S'dCO:o:>m:::o
3
CJI lloJlT
e:ro::o::: :roGs~::
J ,J tt. -c II. m:m Sd~Q
\~C" (" ~ '"I C' 0 C' . 0 ~(" 0 r:::
.G:.>:~tjc:::oe? GD?~;;:o1:x>~ ~(:lJ~'f~:JI ro'Jdooo:tjc:ot Sdl9?:
~ c r,;: C' c C'r C' o C' C' ~ o C' C"
OO:>~~p:::tjq m~~:l?j9~ : Gn:>01J II G~?:l?CO?:~O?.I cxrootJ:o:>ra:~'JC
C' CC' C' C OOC" C' 0 C'OC' c o C' C"
ra::t:>[~Oo:>~~: G>Xt~C 11. :::O:l?:>o:>rap: ~ <5JO')~C~ill'I?Sl::O~C\J~:
r:- c r;:s oc-:o c . c c- .
r
( ) Ofi:SO ~~C>I C'JfW:l~CCCC)C~:I oocp:~oo:> o? _n:)l(
r:- c r;:c o c <> c c c
.( 9) Ofji:S ~~CI ofW')~!fCO'JC~U !7.>cp:~oo:> O":> OOjll
nr~b&eft tod:lto
o :>:>
tc2ccdeecoFe:dnrcJc.~~
o :> :> :> :> :>
&d:oo
o-' o
c.cce~uC2cc
:> o- :>
Mb~>o:d~la:cccdp c.cc~c.reecore:~axc.kMctJ o.bec:~rn th:C2cc
0.) :> :>:.3:> :> :> :> :> :> :> ~ 0 :>
ecolkcooe
,:> :>
&octo
o, o
uC2ccEO!oc&
.., ~
&(".~rco ':r"'T
o-.:>.:>
~.-v... Cooe2ccew~c.cee
:> '\:> :>
ft;!:lirw4ro
';) :>
b..
0
o:a:c.e.G c.cc~:c.ro:~-~e.c
:> :>
w:c.rftCL.lre:~c.8Rl:o
:> :> ....o
~~c.rft
:>
wre:ftCC:CC@ tOcore:~c5Rb:> II C2ccaR:~bl:c.ro:oeef.c.e.G lhcxc:l:c::Q::ce
:> :> :> {..:> :> ._.o :> .>::.1.:>:::1 S'.> .:>:::1.:>
~tcroto
.:>0 :> 0
d:ca:.core:k5k'l
.:>0 :> :>
10
::.1 (., (c\J 6ilb ~cbseo2:Co:::Pa.ccc.:>eb
:> .) .)
CC'cc
.)
: ~&:c:bco:&ec ~c.@o :::toec~ccaR:h'eocc:tc &dlto o&a:o:e.c l;\ ,
~ o. .:>o :> .>::leh.:> o-,, , :> ~i:i.l-
nC2cc:croa:dtc~
:> :>
4bo19.~~ :d:cecc.&ct:c.!b:d:o
:> 1.. ~:> :> 0 :> 0-
uC2cc
:>
toohl
t., :> ::.1
:hl:~ec~ccctca.
e1 :> , ..,
db.:;~ 4-bo:r.eefcro
:> ~.-
g~ccaccec
:> :>
:cro&l!e:co:a:cfcc~
:>
cw~a:cco~ .)
d-::d~wrees:::c.~ew
0 .) .) :::1
'Gg:tc
';),. 0 h:ccs;c.e.c c.cce:cro::)kec :> .)
l
wj<)~b e.d)s~c:2:6:>
.) :>
'bPa.:cco"c:b
.)
~
.)
~~eec:~ 1ffita:eeC2cc:::rorc~
':) 0 .) :>
~cr.a:-ec
';),
utoc.OO-,f) ~bce::-fila.:cca.:~ :C2roHseec&1Q3 uCC'cctr.~cd~:C2cd~
t., .) :> :> :>u:> :> :> :> ':) :> \, :> :> :> :>
tC2cc:~Q:c.oo:oeee:cw
.., .) :::1
d.&be~ccx:ccc.fa:~
o ..,
t:::lcro;e::"b::baft!l:::b
:> ., .:>o.> e Y :>
C2cc
:>
: O-'
~&:cbco: &ec !co::c.et':ece:C! :> e ~
:t:7":14e\~~~c.C2o
o
~terccca.:c.lb:~
::> - - .)
Z6v.
u~cccoeoocoo
.:> .:> 0 .:>
tcc.rowtFco~l(fl
0 .:> ~
:.~ccoRe~:::c.EDlero .:>4b::reoRa:c.cco0
.:>u .)_, .:> =.1 .:> .:>w.:> .:>
wS.e>ro ~:~&:cbco~&ro ~cceco~IW 1~ cWleto:::c~ee.clnc.ccoe.c
0 .:>0 y ~ .:> 0 .:>.:> .) :::::::J 0 .:> :::::::J . 1.-.)
ua:!e>P.o:n~
.:> .:>o
::>~ ~ors&cccca:la.:w 2cc:::.t;l~c.co:neee.c.e.c ~c.e.c&be:ccxx.cc.lb.: eco
.;,oo .:> ~ .:> e .:> o .:> .:> :::J .:>
:h-l~:dxo:&e.c
~
ho ~~e:co~h>
.:> .:>
c.cce~e:l-c~ra.:.:Ce.a:co
.) .:>
~Cc.:h>u~ccbccf)
0'\0 .)
:6+ S.UIOd31I M V1 VW~fHI

n~e&eclo:oQo6G:cl!i::xoehl~ 1bw (c)o asb
0 ;):::b 0 :, .)~ s
. o~~ww
. .)
Cbo~:c.Pa~co\;:x.oe~
.)Q .) .)
~f:c.ra:@~o~
,J .) .)
ccc~:c:;;t:b~
e,j 1.)efe 0bflc
~:h:Jl!c:cbcocoo~cba~
ui>ot;l::x::e!G-1-hlwi\oaw
.;,::).) S'.>~O :>O ~i etj . .>
cocc&,
. o .> '\
i1lil:W 11o~h
0:1 :..'J t; '\ 1
cob
.>
cc ooroa
~
l~e
:>
c..fJc c.cc~co~re:X.o b6 .>c.o~w1;w:c:;;tc.oo~
~ ., &.j.> . .) .
I<J>f~
y
Cf:tfJc
:J
I
T
11 (e) cC so~eo~soersoo.:>cb I ~fe C3PJc *

C(:C~~W:b~ro
e::.J
IG~b (.,SlJc ICD:~:h"Jtc:ctKoo:;;
. . .) e.:J
o~::b fl~a.;cc(O
.) . oh " l~:lihl
O'J ::1: 0
,:croo:;~c.ct)
O.:>
tbco:xcdc.:Je>:t
.)
n.):::cft~oca~
.:>
ccoc.o1c~
.)\,
olre:~"tc:chc.o
.) e.::J
uo:~:a
.)6
(:Q~e>J5eb;'he.s)
6.;3 0
nco&edkbe
.~
:ccoo.:&o~ 4boce::ihl
~ ~
0 .,:_:t .)
n:ll5c.~e>cco3llGeu II co&w~:ccoc.oc roo~

.) . .) .)4booeohl,
.) .):3
ue2ccce
~
~ cocoo~
,coco 11 r r, ~.
o ,ooco~ e~e:eo
u n
,._,e~e1co
, ~ n
c.ccc.ooocco~ccc~: eelf.ooc
J ,, ~co
e ..:> . .> .J .>o .J o .> :> o '. :> o-
:oc~~=@ccehl:hle:2Pweo Fac.O,ooe~ :X.o1eeo(;co t :oc.~~coco@ccehl:c.cc
" ::::J .) ::J e'J. " . . . . . . .) ., v .) ~ .:J "~
t '""l ,
a: s-l'lcccccc: crococ.IOO~
. .r "~
:cc.ot'l r
o.;cccooo~oococro~
' 1 '""l
u ccccet'lcocccc:ci'IOOC.te~cote
r<> n r>
.)Q.) .,) .) .) .J .) .) 0 .) \ .) .) .
o~c~o2 @cc:oOeco[,Peh~eo 4b:2oe:flcc w:c.Pa:@~o I :,Qccb!o~:oct:;;l~*~!;ahles

.) J .>::h.J .JO .> .) .)0 0 .> .>-s .> ~ OJ~
:@oobeos~oaa;:e4o :oc~~\;ehlw c.o&:ccoc.oc!k~el;e.ciG:lu ucorecohl:~
J ':) .;, .J ~ o.:>:.:l
.;, ., :J . .J .J S
---Cb:oec:x.dboeofil
.:> J :J
'lX:olre:~:cbco
.>..J 0 .l
'ohlcceXl@c.eeo
.J :J \. ~.l 1:o;~eob:>
o .>O 0
coi;o~coeo~e
.J .l So

u,Jcr!ccoo~bee: oQco~ Pe~u1eo
\. J~J,) ..)Q
~bo~da:oo
.>
(~)wcoccc~
;; .J .>
bw (c)o acbooo2cceo
.> .:>
cbo~:cPMwt;:::coe~
.>o .> :>
of:c.P~
,:,
: .)@&o~ccc~:t:;;l:beeo
.) e.::! :hibee:fletl
~,'j \.0 .)
:o&:eo2e:cecocoe~cocc('ocoo
.) :J .) .) .)
wc.rw~
0 .)
ooc
.)~reca:co:cc:nw
0 o e ~- c.cce>:c.coco~c:.ccc
.:> .J
4b,W;hl&cooc.cccob:iteo
.:> ::1.>~ .> o @ccl!c:ccca:clk~
.J J
o
ucc.o:o ~:Acc:ccClloo~:
r-:10 r o~ :oe
0 .l .)O .J ..) .)
.)C10C<!lhl-(c)
.,) :.:1 0 fl&b
.J
S~OCC.UeG
.)
cbote:c.rfl~CO\;oc.<:e~
.)C;) .) .)
o~:crfl:@~o~h,
.J .) .)
C.CC~:J::':l:b5W
e.:J
* ( &begcooc.uc~oo~~boreohl)
o ;) ;).) .)~
oo~cB~bl@ocoo~@hl
o;)O :>:J:> .):..J
o r
::l'S'
.:> ucob rc 001'1~
.)
( (bcmwc
.)
Froel~boreohl)
.) .)
esocoB
.)~ 0 .) C~t.lc t

.:>

:::ceo::>~
IIi>
oc.a~:::cl'le> cc.ocow~
.> .J .> ~
B" ,_
:e cc:ooco
~oooohlcoo~cb
;, ;, ;.:J;,
!i961] S.DIOdmi M Vl VW'B:O.'tl t6t-

S6t SDI0d3.~ M V1 VW~Dtl
Sl1l:Odffil M.V1 VW"B:flH 96t
s..oiocimr M v1 vmna
.. -; ..
u~::>l:aoc:eG;:~Q W~I'IW e.:r::-:l&r~,..,.,.....,~

.>~.> ~.>:.:1 o . .>o :> ~ ~ ~
lJ a1flcooc.coc.cc
001e---
I(')~~~
-., ~
svb Cc rof~ ~H C~vc cccesof,re ~ s~ ~r;~~soo~ 'J>l: C~vc ~
n(e) c~c 30kn t;ro'r!?JSOO~ ~tl: C~vc
G
~
cocol5te
.) 0
~b:hro.
:)' 0 '5'.) .) ..>::,~:~Qcco
16wcccoo .>:::I
occe~&-> wtocr::<kb:bcCD
.) .) .)
4~ec
.)
.
Ccwi(Z II CCccce&-> ~C2cc::cadh Wtoro~b:tt:C 4c\",a;e,~ I C~:::JQ
0 ' '5 .) .:> .} .) .) .) 00 .>:::!
~&,~ :ccc; oPw rl.~ ccccoco coc.Qoo.:~a;co c~~Q. ~col;"~:~cc~
<> ' .) 0 .) :::J .) .) .)~ .) .
uC2cceocco
:> .,)
U:C2cc:ccx::ec.
0 .)
..weco~
~
tbes(c) oeb ~Gb .)
GooC :oo;rw .)
coo.-xb &:MTI
.) 0 .':)
~b.o:o~wrO"lcoo
.) l; .) .)
w\\-~ecd)
0 .>o ..)
t:hlce&
ej.
toC2cc::X'n:c~
.) .)
c~\\-~ro
.>o
lt!ccccMe
.) .)
~bCD::da:a::co
.)
wc::Jeco~ ~>f:~h-lotoa:; w:!=;'J&:cbco :l!a;cec~ ~c.C2o t :cecl;"~:~cc~
.:> ,) ,) ..>~b e:J .) 0 .)
l'c:c.rowclro~ tewPe::Jbo ccc~Me -:1t:J ....l co~}';::x:e::>hl co~

.> .>.> .J e .> .J ~ .J .> .J~ .>
4 0~e C~;~~c l:f,:h,IA...:Cbc.o~@ I]gjcooccoccc II II ore:~ :h.'l&:c1co
..> ::J 6:1'""" .> .> bje _, o ct:J
II
u2t~bc:e~
.@cc\)cc:e~&
.;) ~
coeoc:db:ec:cc:t>~P.ecM
..) .) .) 00
II ::>\ol:et~:@rok::::lccc:t>t:.l
,:) 00 .) :s.... J ::.1
:ct~ccc.\;u(c:t>:Cbc.ofl
l, 0
<e.,~M~ :c*'cc:b~:L(l:oci3:1PoocnW
o- o B' .:> o u.:>.o;l:e*'k::::lcc::>rco~c:etoG~o:b~:Lb:c:t>oo.:>ml;l:e
oo )"'"' .) .) o :> e.:> .) o :>-
~=>
-ba1esb;r('lcco~ro~:ccc~(')rw
<:i .) 0 ~.)
fl, ..)o~C.<tcoco
0
wc.IJe>wcccoroc.AtQII
.) ~ .) .) .)~
Jlwreeot:l:'l:e
.) :J :J
r
0~
.)
s.DIOJ::nr M.v1 vw-ana

S.L'tlOdffif M V1 VW({Og:
1r 11 1
fleCOe.GC.OO.:;>W
~
SLt!Od3}l .M.V1 VV'rnflH oos

1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS sot
~ c "' c c c o r,:_c
OO'{':orrt:j:~JlO G9COOOO'J G<.l?CG<.l'JC ll IIS'd~~ oxp:cq ~GSJ:~c; oeG~j
8'JGUI o:>c :n moo: rom::::o]:ro
~
"T' C' C'[. 0 . C' C'
u:n:>o uc~ ro:::oro~ ~G :>mG:::o:>
A
(\)G::l)Gg)~('l)('l)lll:ro.s~:::o:nm
rt J1.
o
t
c.:.~L
u
G Jl
C'\
~ T <t c
c GCDCI('I)')I
o
CJ
t -r
cB:
.6 Jl
ll. ~L
CO~o.:>ro
ll ll
OS~
L
C'
Jt.
:"lOCI
r O';;QI
t
:Jd(\)0
\..
C'
~;;~:q
:.81
J
~C' C' C' C' C' C' OC' C' C'
f:j~GCO>Jd~
o
t.j~:~q GOOJC:3CID 9 ~4> ffiJQG4>9f :D~t QJ~OO OO:>:o.:>~ II
~(' OC'
a~~?~CCII
c I,'.$
S;)QJC:tf""~ :~
1 8d9QJl
o
0c ':f:l c
~~1$9 ~I ~tiC\) Jj
r.~ c
90JGt2 ~2:<{c:o,;c
e oc c
r,:. c c c _C: S ' c c r,:. c o c r,:. cr,o C'

~G8'J:~~~c;<Jc:<::~~ GtD?('I)J~: 9o.:>?: G~:>COC:~q~:::o2 tl~~l Gj)OOG())')
A\ oc o r,:_c c ~ c c c r,: c ' o c
~:~:~m~~ rotlf~c4>m?:~p:elo.:>211 G~:>coc:t:lc;OXJ~j?f?O;iOO?O<f
C' C' 'I
C'
oo~:Goo?co.s
A -r
C'
o.:>:>:GmmGo.:>?:DQI IT
008'J:C'
em

C'
G.s?~
T J
0 C'
romo.:>?:m?t
!. A
C' C' C' 0 C' C' CC' o C' 0
cc:8'J:>: m?oc:Gu:o.s G ?roo.:>:n(J) G~?coc: em e~:roc mco:ro
I . A Jl -IT I. C L o 11 ~ -- -r t.
C' "() r,;:c CoC' C'O\ C' c r,:_c
::l)('I)Go.:> Sd~()) j Bdt'IQ> 8'JQ}Q>Q9C: ~('1)~~:::0~ II cqGf ')('I) ~G~:~~
' o r,;: C' A\ c c"' oc o r,:_c C' c c r,:_c
m1 p:~~p:rq
t:llro91 ~<:;U4>QI 8'J~0;1 tlf~?::::o~n G~?coc:~~ro
\ 0 C' OC' 0 "l \~
T .6 u L Jl
C C'
.s?:ro~i?>m Cl?Go.nro:n: ~Gro:::o c 8'J~o.:>
C.:. A o ci,
C'
T
"'
.sro?QI Qc.n?:m0L o1:.s:>:
T
roe~
o:'l
o c. "l c c c c o c c c c ' o r,:cA:, .
<iJffi:::0211 QI:U001Sro~: 'i)mo.:>211 Gf?o:><ro;> ;>?:~~ tlf9J 1l?'{J ~9
r,;: C' OC' 0 "' C' 0 C' C' r,:c C' 0 C' OC' 0 0
o.:>j9q :Jd(J~ OOGQI('I) 'iJffi9f tlfOO?:::O~II cq~ SJ~f?:Gf rqG8'J:~~('I)
c crc o
G~?COC:IQCffi
oc o
DL
c c c
8'JQGU;r:::0
o o c oc c
L
' c
~OOC'D.'llC
Jo
QCtll?:m
U . t"V
CI(')')(\)(J~:TI(J) OO:::O:TI II
oC.:.toC.:.
0o C' C' C' C' C C' S. OC' C C' 'oC'~
COS'JQ('I)
tl
~GSJ: COJ:1)
C
G~?COC: C<::ll

CIC(JitDG:::O.S())('I)C~
11 T I.
GC\:lffi?:~
J J
C' C' 0 C' C' C' ~ 0 C'~ A\ 0 .C:
roc:m? ro?o.:>~ 11 cqG.pm G:::o;;ro:::o ro~Jm el?:cqmel99J rqGro:c:11
G "'<' <' <' C' \ r,~ <' c:;::: Q C'
e:G;;>Ic:o,;c ('I)J~:::O~ro? (\)ffiJtJ:Gpm ~t.j?~ Go.:>~: ~?::::0~11
C'"l c c c c C'A:, ccr,:cc: co c

8d00('1)01 S;)QJffiSd(\)('1) ~J?;f!S UO?o.:>ffi9J GQ?COC:t:Jt:;ell ~m:;qQJffi
~99c:1
C' r,:c.c:
~G8'J:r:Jqc:11 'iJ:~c
o C' C'o
:Jdii)Q>Q~Jo:>
C'
8'd9CJC:
C'
8'J
[s"c:~1G:"
:elc:
0
~1JGU II
0
~')CQ())C; ~ro
~Oi. T
.
~
C'..
..... . Jl
0
L
C'
ooGro:m;:;:-
T
o:n?o
c.:. }} 8'JOO:
ll
C'
rom::::o
.L - 11
c.;
0 g :m :::o:o.:>oQo:::o:n
. l
C'\
0 -j
C'
c.!..
r,:. . C' r;: C' . C' .C: s C' C' r,: C' 0 C' <: <: A\
tJ:IDf-:>:::02 QG:J?:r:Jq,m CjC:el!GtD?o:>p: :G~JCOC:t:jqq Go:>fro~q'9(;l:9J
. C' 0 C' . c C' 0 0 0 C' ('. C' 0 C' C' C'
Ull~XK'f.>OJ:'DO)::;
L c;, ,;.
ffiG8'J:m
l t.
(X)(J.S
JT
c: Q>:::OG.cD?I:::OO?~:
"l C
~(.})0?
t..
~Gm: CCf.)

~ c "A:. r,;:c cr;::c . ., C'A:, r,;:c cr,;:c C' C'
Gel?:"f.>~t~ t'IIDGQ>I ~O?tjc: G$10,) ~ffi9J t'IIDGQ>I G:::OfO?t'lq G~?COC:
r,:.c o ~o C' C' c c r;::, r,;:c C' r,;:c-
c
r:J~~ "'t~1Jffi'{>~ ~GO)')())~ ~('1)~-?:el'-': t:liD:::OGC\:l'?UC r;,4>
ffiJ200
c- . r;:c c c ~ c ~ . c c- c c ,o ' '
Go:::o~ n ~Gro:~c;m qc::::o~1 Ge::emGt.j?m (l)trotr.c; ~~ ~'P ~m?t
.c c r,:. c o o c o cr;:: c r,;: c c (: c c o C' c
. Ga?::~c:r:J~Oi 'ijrocqm0c:~o.:>? r;,4>o.:>2n .c:o::u;;ro't;;:ro2: ~:::01 01))9;>
.c c . c' ., o cr,'? A\ c- c ., c c o c C'
ro2: ~92~:n"!Oll 'ilmt!:91 o:>J2:;t;l~:T.>~p:Go.:>?ro;;>l~ Go.:>;>roml~qol))
0 C' C' 0 C' C' .C: S . C' (:- C' C' r,: o OC'
o:rT.>:::o~~ ~:::o2n 9c:<::~~ Gl.l)?mp: G'.J?coc:r:~smro2: rol 8'JO{c:
c . c o . C' o
Gro?OOOOO:T.>OOOO?:o.:>:n c c
II .T>m())CG:::O.SOO:::O ?l:::OBcoc c
coc:o.s:ro? Go.:>')
A t. c:- -.t T o T L T
S~?IOd:li M V1 VW~fl g: zos
hkco~co 11 ~ccchl~b:>~c~ :)Coo~&:>accccc IG2cdhl aRes ::)ccoe:e.o::
o .> .>::!.> .>o .> .> 'S'.> .>:.:.1 .>~ .> e
::>cco~:co::
.)
~xooe~;:;lhl
~ -.)
JS:>hl"JIJ co1o:>~aR
~--:_j '$' ,~:.:.~
tdbrcoa@ro
l, .)0.)::1 0 .)...J
cfco~cd~@b
.) .) .)
4b&:coo coeec Jecb:oewc"'hl 1broe~c : be~:>ba :cbco .:&o~fco ::tech.

.> o o .> .> ~ .> .> e YO-.>.> .>
tc
o
n~ccbcoe~ eoccccchl :hlecohl:~ :@ccc~c~a:cc eee.E;ILB u~ccehl
.) o , .) ::~ &h, :1 .) .) .) ~ .) .) :~
~b,.J;J ::xe c~:cc:roe~ o-
.> 3':::J.>
hlcorecohl:re
.>
c,:J:;J&:cbro:&cs
.> :1 _Y e.::l _. l;c@o
o
ccce~:>bc
.> e
~cee~oo eo~~hl ,ti:.-,V"I"'cco Mwcahl uccccoe~chl :,J;;lem~co~cccc co::
. .). 0 ~ . ~-- .) .) .) .) ::.1 .) . - .) :I .>:::h. .) .)
.r b. r '!':! '!':! ' l ~il( - 1 - '""l b" t' . V
c~
.)
WS:>G.<Pb
) ..)
:>l:Cu:Ccc .)COCCWCC
.) .)
J::>o
.)
oWCOO~-a;ceoc e:L~:ft~
:> 0 J , .
:row.>
. . ::A;e:2Pwec :>lto:hle~
.) .) .) . .) e1\o cftcs~bcs
.) ~orok
.) .) 0 wleeccc~:Ll>akl:=eec
l, ~:~.)
t.~cc;J-e>coooa.
.> ::::3. .>
C!2ece~R :2co:ftm:1Pftro
.> \.>:J,, e . e I)
ccc~~ft::::cco~~bccHrn~.s!cc
.> .> o " '- .>
~
:> :ro~ft co: ~llcc:
.>
:ooec
11
e
OCCCO
I! <hso
'"'"'I~
oWCCCCO or ::,\!;c&:>e:;a llU:CCOCCC
o
Cl

lr .
.> -.> .> .> , .> o -
~bcohl:'re C.O@cc4coM, @cc~::>Q:cro!;coe~ :ckro~ahl-,bcs
.) .) :I . . .) . .:1. .) .j 0 .) :::.1 0 ., .) :,j ...
b.ee ~d,
.)
~cc~Cb t~cc.~:cse~<"
. ... 'S'~~~cooe g.,g:,sorees:s:clee.s.
. .. L~O?e.G
. .
.) - :,j.) -.)
. u@cchl::co h1@cclc:O.:d\e
l, .) .... .
1t
<"CI.)
,. . s-1'
:>occcocc
.)0\
1 r 19.--.b :ccroccceroft
100 cocccnl:lc:C .)00
'"'"'!
1 11, IS',.....,b f::)IC:Cce
cccccr;occ
.).)
n:
.)
beo
.) 0 0
11
.).) .)
1
0
cod.. <"COcocc~cb
.) .)
IICCccrocodb:e
~ \ .)
toCCcc1mc.~::oo
.;) .l, .)
c.~@cce&
.) \\
to:::c.<"e
0 .)
ro~cce
,
coc.~:;~cc:hlcn~@b
, , ;,:~.) .)
~bao oto~c.Pccccn~r.::.:::b
, , ~ ;) ,
:o~esb::,
.)0 o
~cc
,
~bl:ro~t<Jtbec
.>~
:c.PecoPero
.>
:xc;Jees
..) ::::3
tco~@oe:2 ~c;J~el5eb:~ro
.)O.> e ~ o
lkcco
o
u~ftoebcohl:re
.) .) ,::~ :::)Q~edu'!IJ
.) :J 'oo@cccR .>:::.1 .) ~
c.cc~bao :c.EOleccls~
. .) .) .) .......J l,
:oQco& .cob->e @ccco!;@b ~6wl1 tu:c.Pa.:cco~ e:ob -ofco"oll, @cc
.:J:::J.) .) ..) .) .) .) .) 0 0 ~ ::>. .) .) .) .)0 .) .
, -n
?:roe~<" :ocoee 1r9. ll J _ __ ,
a::cccco~:
II'
cc:o:xo:roro occco 1,.
::c. ~ro
'"'"'~ '"'"'~ 1r1
11 ccccoc.ccc~:>
19
, .>
. o e.)0 o .> o " oo .>
c.cc~bao off:ooto b.;cn~:>&J::)CX>e @ftc:(o~ ~bco~ ~:X.o h.:co4-a:ro <cc
.) .> .l .)0 0 .> .lO .) .> .) ~.) .> 0 '$".)0 0 .l .) .)
ro:ro~ _c.cce~tcoccn~:>& ~cc:2ro<":~<" ~hlcc:&cs ICCcca:ccoeco:2co
o ' , ..>o .> e .:Jo .>::! .> ..> e
"]'
o 1
:cros-ftccc '"'"'~
nccccc.co~o
1r c.ccs- 1b cecn 11 1 . -::1 1" 11o
cocccces-ro: ICO ,co::e::)c:ee
. v, 1
.) .) ..) 0 .) - .) ' .) 0 .) .)0.
:obwcnl:o il:):ob 1Cbroe chi :oQeM~leo IG:>td:.c.;co~cceco~:>r, t2cc
.) 0 .). 0 ;) .) .).::! ,:::J, .):J '$'.)0 0 .) .) .)0 .)
C'l 1n v J_ ,. '"'"'~ rr _,_ v 1 ] , ~1:
:>ftr:ese~<" ~c.coftecn ::)CCwEC 11 cco:o wcccco~ co :re ~wwc efll'l<t11r
~ v 0
.)..J .) 0 .) 0 j .)0 .) .) .l-
~v , v ) ~~ 1~ e;b:a1 1cc 1ro ucccc.
:>1It:roee
.)
.1
- . \, 0 l, .)
1 .']_"
1ore co:letcoro wre <"m::c.
\ 0,-.) .
e:::.) . o<.cc
.) .)0 0 0 0
.....,
.) .
o~ .ce@hl en~:)~ l'lb:'l:P ::JOttcc:CbWro. a:ccro.. il:):ob t CCcc:oGkv~co&

.) :J ..) .) 0 .) 0 ('), .) 0 .) ::> .) .) .) ...J.) .) 0
1100ka~Q
.)0 . ,)!j "
.) 0
'"'"'~1 1 . 1 1 _,_ ':":1
'. .)
rr ::\1i'ce:rooeess>ocnco
r r. ,. . , '"'"'!
~0<-CX>~=t:t :cc co c.s-e.c
.) -
ccwoo JW@ cccco
0\0 ,) ' .)
ICCCC:::
0.)
:roee co .) .),)0.).)
S"'"!j
~Perote ~bco~co& !Gec:oo :@cxc.~@ccc.co~hl
.) r
~~ .) B o 11 ..,@ccoe@hl
, :J .> j , o '$" , .) .)
rg [c('lQCO
.., :,j ';). , ,Q::J
o~:cc~
,)::1 . code ~~ccero& IGcole :ccro::6lcoo:1e thle:hl ~@cclbco&:d:,o t:ceG.
, , , , o 'S', , .) ..J.) ~.- 6j, 6j , - 'S'" o ~.-
~:roe<" cccc::>o
<n , v ~-
cs~c.
'"'"') l , 1 , 1 1
.> .> ,
t::>coro
.>o
ccccrecoooes-o
.> o .) ,
cooc.ccoco
"o. , o ,
::: ::::o::;cee
.> ,
ccc~re
..> o-
05 SDIOdffii M V1 VW'tlfHI [596I

.:~URMA LAW REPORTS
',1
r
0~
.,)
sos SDIOd3.(! M.Vl VWi:IOH

:506 :BURMA LAW REPORTS
~1965] BURMA LAw REPORTS 507
. o c- o c- c- o c- oc- GG c- ( or,: ) c- <: G _<:
G<?',r5/::D2lf ~CDro~oq Oy:o:>~,~~ - f2:G~,Jjc C\{tr@ (Y.) G~,J::>CGffiJ-:>2;1:1 oeSj
SdGr>l 'T'C' ~ <: CQ C' C'\
~~0)(\):),. G~,JXGO)l"):J:!T.lroro SdO~:;>G
::>C: 000)00:::0:::0 IIOIC::D:
C' C' 0 C' C'
('o C'
ol IJ C ll J 0 () l C.:, ~ C.:
.Ql::>:~c
c GCOG~::>~
~ G:::0-:>3d:;>ICD:::O: 0 (" (' ()'1
.c.:. OO:::OOOG:::O:;>Sd(;IO) :>
(" (' <"0
C\)0){100).
GI,I?C()o:>C
IJ J o L- J l. J .1.\ I. o1 J
-Go c- C' c-o <: o r.,:c- c- c- ( or,: ) c- oc- ('
r2:G(;I::>CI G{,l")CGffiJJ2:~ e:GCDltJ1>0fl IODtf:GSd")C C\{tfJ !~ O::>SdQ lOC
J
L. (' ('
c- c- ' E> c- o c- G o c ( or.: ) o cor.:;: c- t!~OO~C~
p)~:Gf O)::>d:~ 2::;SdD!J.(~O::>::>~ e:~~ ;>: ~e17 ~0) 'jO::>~eJ::DCII b;C 0('
t:Jf~,~~~ccll
<"'1 (' r,;_c- (" (' (' C' (" 0 'T' ('
.Sd::O())OI ~GOO::>(Y.)SdOO::>:gp:tJ~Gg:>c_~::>OlC!'iGI,l:>CIOO)C C!t3dGOI ett.C
., (". E> Q C"\ . C' (' (' (" C"E> (" ('
-~Qj())Sdo:>::::o: <J.?C:::::o~ H G~,J:JC:::O:::>QC()) 'J:ett.C '=IG'P(Y.)OOC o:>ffiG:::Oe>
(' ( ) r.: (" (" 0 \ (" (" r.: (" ('(" (" Q c- Q
m~ro a:; Gtl?~a>Jmro. Go::::x>e; 11 qc:Gtl?'i:;,Jmg ~;;::::o:l :x>9ro:x>:
0
o/l:IO?:~
~ ('. ("
G(;I:JCIOO::>CI
c-
G~,J-:>CGCD!-:>'2:~c
C"E> ('
cc:o:>
('
Q
0 0G:::O?!T.lQ,IJ . c-.. c-
G!J-:>CIOo:>CO
1,! Jo( OlJ! '
C' c-o o c- c- c- r.:;: c- c- C' c-o .<:: C' o c-
Gg-:>cGrope:C"r.? roe::;oc=a~Ge~-x:l qc:m Gg-:>cGmpe=~ romq QJ[OGo:
c:;: (" (' . ('Q \ '1 ('. (" (' (' (' ')('
~GeJ-:>c:1 _G(;IXGCDJ-:>2: CD~-:>:G:::0-:>8'd<;>l G(;I":>CIOO)C()) G:::O-jSo:>!3C 'i GQIC;
c-o c- r.:;:
ett.Cc-
!IOQj())'J())GeJ?c:t
c- C' .
G(;I-:>CGrope:
C' C'G .
Sd:::OmcCG-jSI02
c- C' c-
Gl,l?CIOO)CO)
c- c-.
('
0 1:::: (' (' c-~ (" c:;:. c- (" ("Q .<: (' (>
gJropq Gt:~Gro-:>m~~ mm::n;;c:Ge~-:>c:t oo-:>cGmpe:e~ ro;;oo-:>rol
C'
GI,;?CIOmcro cc:m-
C'
-:>: mroro<JC:ro cc:ro groro:::o
C'
c G(;I-:>C4>o:>cmoc
0 C'OC' <" 0 <" ' C' C' C'
I !.L_l_ l l .
c- c-a c- o c- c:;: c- <"C<" r,:: c- <" c-
G(;I?CGmpe: G:::OGO:>QJ-:>:;>j-:> G::OG!T.l?C "fii?GeJ-:>::::IO:::O~t'J<? G[<j -:>'i<;>Jmett.C
(" 0
roo:>OO::D:Y> II
(" ("
G~,J-:>CGffil-:>2;
('Q
G:::OOO::-:>: :Gs

")()')I cc:e"d
@
SdO)OOO)COIG:::O-:>
(" (" c: 0 (' \ (" '1
0 LC:.
GC6 j j"l
..)
0
' -:>:~c
J o
f9 (" (" (' . ("
CD()')000)0'.,C:(Y.)
4) .C)
:;>10)0):;>
l <~ IL o
G
lJ . L4 T
0
l
("
ll
.,6 6 -:>C:Ic- (" ("
CD<'OOOm :X>::>:GOIC
0
0
. ''( G .
.,,
0 ~ 0 (" 0 c:;: c- c-r.:(" c- (" r,: (" 0

'P. ?::> 991 G~ ::>9 (JC=CD91!Ge~-:>c: IO:::O~t:l~ !T.lQjromroromtJet~~C"r.?
c
~-g-:x;:::o:>.a>cro
<" Got
TJ:": \ c- c-
tl:::::o~11 . 'J:~
c- r,:: c- c- c- o r,;:' C'
_mjg:t:l~ Sd010~5 . ooGmSd?:t:J~
o' oc- c- c-o c- o c- ' c- c- . c- c-o c:;: c- -;;,
~Sd<X(C:OC <X:fT.'~:X>CII q{~~C <f:SdGfT<_; Gl,l?CIOQ)Cro. GeJ'JCD,S~
c- oc- c- oc-
cc:<:>,c::::o:nromc: c- c-. '1 c- c- o c oc- c-
Goo-:>ce~ro<;>
''<"c::::o~
. 1001a:>::n 11 cc:rou:>o:>emg -Gg::>c
,I C!.
<"E>
L
c- c- o 41
c- c- c- oc- G c- l.oc- L l ll"
c- c-~
Gmpe:ro-:>: roe;oc:C"r.? ~,~2;;"4>! Gg:>ciO_m c ~c:~[!troqc:'O.)-:> _o:y;;oo:>c:n
c- . C"
&CDOOOI.::Y>
('
LO
c-
C'\'1
0:::0:D l:..:t
~
C:.
<"C'
COO())O'Q:::O:l)
o ta LC:.
c ("
C'O
II G(;I-:>CIOO)C::O:::O
0
C.:,
. o.s:O)(;IO'OC
T
c
L
Co<"
r,:c-c-
<"
c-
C" OC'QC'
O)<;oC:::O
.0
' OC:O
LL
')
~proGt,~~-,:~ ro~oq G'Pc:~J'P Sdt~;'~ qc:nn:G~ ::>9 Go:ol
' . C' c-r.,:c- -c- o c- o ~ r,:c- c- c-
O)~ IOO;'>~j,j'i ~~:::02::; II s:>Q(:'JG~feJ:m G~,J:I:lf:'f> G(;I-:>C_:::O-:>O)CO)
0 ' (' (' : (" (". (" 0 . r:::::: (' r..: (" 0 (" . (' .... -. c . (" c
-9:roc qc::::oe; Gl,l?CIOo:>cm Ge:Pm9::oC:lc o:>~:ro-:> oro9oJ::oe::;r~C\f09C
:~C'.U OC' c- (" l(' (" . " c- ' o . ~LL . L - _'- :
~c:oo-:>: 'J()')O)mo1::oa IOO?a:; <Xl"'?~::o2!' . . ' : -

..' ' Gint~ro:JJL o:rot ror~:r.-.:8 ~Zg.5~GO
1J 6 tJ .l:j o : o .
ri L t: 6 cf.:::o~
l- C.
00~18:
tJ
03mcii
j9c5:::oe?P:;,Jtm Sd;:c;;tcp~8 . ~ol:o~~ m::oro:;>p ~Qqtoo~
~f&o:>8dQ~dk;,::o:1\,
.. . . . ULL il c o3m~.Ol-r ll 'o 3:::oc&o)g;-:>::::od;
t: . . .... tJ .
SdQ;g:r..:&Jl:o)dmJlK
G u .. \:j ..u . . u--~dT
<::CD-:>mro
C" ("
G~,J')QIOcpc:-n:n. !T.l~IC:
C" (" (' ("![>:::0:-DG.SffiOOC:::
. C' . o
'(J.'Q~C()) SlOOSd(Y.)I OCC\J
C' OOC' .. OC'
-~ U .. C!-.- J T 4: ..]I. . L U L L
XC>:eero
.)0
~ .)C2cc:xoG::>ct=~~
.) 0.)
::>fEDtebemcPt=~:cc:orowcc:o~ro
.) 0 .,)
ccOCO<:c
.)
ccc~:cl;~c:o
. .)
11 C2ccooororo
. .) .) 0
~bcohl:ee
.) .) ~
:cG:Cbto
: .) l,
&wC2t=~
0 \ .)
c.o:CG~
6.) 0 .J
tooeccc:x.t=~~
.)
MocoG:x.t=~~
.J .J
JiS<bhl:)~wPec.oco
~ .)~.) .:> .)
0.) .
t::i&C2t=~
:) .)
cb
C2ccb:eecc; :2dh.>:xx.t=~~
.) 6.) 0 . .)
u@cclkcc~bce&
.:> 0 .:>
C'.o@cc:d~xo
.) .J
c~c6~e
.) :::I\.
&Xu 0~oOOx-o
.:> .,)
M~::::>b ISecohlcocc
.:> - -:) .) ~ \.) ~.:>
w:ccrc.o~:xt=~~
0 6.) . .:>
Eacctooeccc
.) ,0 .:>
Xfttl>
.,)
M::>CO<bXOO
..).)o.)
:::>Fco~Pewcc:o~ woocbes:::>c~~
.).).) 00 ' .J:::::J
IOC.OooeS
l,.)
II @c(;bt;Co~ l:oCC!ccicc:oewco @~eo ~llhl:~::>C.OO

.) . 0 . -.) 0 .:> .J :::Jo 0wc.oPewro
.J .;) y ~-.) . .:>
,~ce&
~
l:orol& ?2ccc.otcC2~
.:> 0 ..)
M~~::::>b
.J 0 .:> :::J;" .) .:>
'CbCilhlC2ccec~:c~
.) ~.) \ :::1 :ce~ooro
.) 0
llhl:~ro::>cf.'>~ec.oc~~~t:>d:>
~ .J .) .).)
C2cc:~&:Cbco:&ro
:::f .) .) e.:J !;c@o
0
11 o~coto~ctte
.) .) '0
cosoo2 tobto~ to:::>b :)c~~:::>Qeeew1":o :C2co:2co 11~:;!-roxt=~~ -J:Joo
o o ., .:> ~ .):::h o .> .) 6 ~ .> .> ~o
II @ccecocoo~c.oaJPexhl~ II:)::JeC.CCXfteJ Wc.oPero C.CC~CeC.Oro C.~OO:>C.Ob:>
.;) 0.) ~ .:> .).) .) :; 0.) 0.) .) -.)
:c.Q:cc ~:>llhl:~::x:.t=~e> ::>CoCb&: 11C2cceechle> :C2coJS1b,~t=~ :::>Q~b::cobJ

:::1 6 Y ~ .> .> .> o .) o ~ .> ~ l. o .> :::l~o .>
ewcroe>
.) w:d~c.Qro :::J c.~~::>W::>Ceoc.o:~o
. 0.) .)0 .JO .J IICCccrec.hle>
.) 0 ~
toto~h->
l, 0 0
c.~Pero
.) .
~ccb::C2ccfteo~
.) 0 .) 0.)
~~F~ccocco&::>re
.) 0 .JO
~tec.o
l-
cccc~c~:::>ccoe>
\ 0 .)
cooocn to:xoGx~e> ~H~ro llhl:~ro::>c~~ wi~:>cro~:2 1Scoccco0

., o .> .J .) . ~ .> .> e.::J.) 6 ~ .J .:>
o~coPero1:n
.) .) 0
II .)C2cceJC.O~
0.)
coCbcet=~c.o:~o
.)0 .)
(u-hlro)
~0
llt>l:4ro::>CeJ~
~.,) .)
J:::X:.~e>
.J :::J
:::>Cbe~
.)
too~cocot;"~ IS:ccd:C::>Ce~co:~o
0 .J .) ~ 0 .JO .)0 .)
::>o::>tocnhlc .)C2cc::>eo<:D::>c.eJ~
.) .JO .) 0 .) .J
11 .,C2cc<b~
.) ~ .,::>o:::>ccoe>:::>cco~toto
., .) ., 1:) cocc.o:c~b:>
o o c.MPero :::Jo 11 C2cc
.)
lkcc~bceto
0 .)
m@ccGhl
.)
:::>Qe(!nro
.)~ .):::J\
:CC~O
.) JSc.ohlcocc
~.) ~.)
:cro:ccrco~::>Cft:;,
6.) .)
::>ro:c~ro ~cccco~hl l(;:c&;ccro :2CD~cc~cctc IICCcce::::>l;hl~ ::::>c~e>

.) ~ .) .)~ ~ .) 6.) .) 0 .) \ .) ~ .) :::J
cct=~ :~h:c&;c.ocbocncc Cb:hl~&:, l(;:w:~ :ccwbcc :2dco~::>cee~ -:h1'JIJ

o .) .) ., ~ .J ~ o 6 .> 6.J .J ;;1:.3
::>c~~:::>te~:<b:C ~oc.o::>co<:D:::>c.ee~ ueroccc~~ :~rJ:eJe> wto::::>b uo~ccoe>l;f>
.> .)L e e., " o., l- ~ "~ o " o
:2cPcoe>::>ceJe>
6.) .J
teroc.cc~cco~hl
L
11 C2cc~GQ :cPe&b:c&;w& :)hlcccoroG::>o
.)~ .J ~.)~ .) .)~ .)
I:bcQro
0 :::J to::>coG:::>We>
0 .) .)
h:~co:P<:De>b
.) \
C2cdn::::>b
.) 0 .J
11 C2cc::>& toe> bro:c.P(').
.) .) .J.,
wPehec.oro
.) 0 .)
t:>to
::> 0 (0cjbc-hlb:>)
~0
::>cro~cccl;'e> .J~~:~ccc.Pwe>::>c.roe~c.h::x.~~
.) .)0 .) .) .) :::J
w~xcee>
.) .J
Ghles:::>ccee>::::>tee~
.J~ .) .Jl-
~cM&:>:llrco
.) .J
to:cP~n.hl
0 :r~ .J
cccc:::>c.oGxMJ
.) 0.)
u.JC2cccoe>~Q;
.,:Jj
cccobcocoPc:ro. ~ccc.Pcoe>ce c.cce::>~:w:C ~~:c.Pfteocoro
.J .> " " e .Jo ., ~" .Jv " .J
coPeee:cQw
.) ~
:C2rocccM~ C2t=~:dn:ch ::>lf:o:oe><:Dhles :cro::>c.o<b::>c.ee~ I&
.) .) .) ~ .) .) .) .)~ .) .) ~ .
C2col!, 0to:C2co~co
.) .)
coPeoc.hle>
.) .) ~
II .JC2cco;:c<b:CCil
.JO .)
1Soo2~
~'\.)
o~:dft:coorococoo~
.J .J
rocc~c.occ C.CC~IO~ IOe> ~hl:@~:c.Qro o&>~ro w:cPOOX\:lroc.oPero

.) .J L ..L .>~ .) :::J .) o .J "
605 SDIOdffii M V1 VW~og

: SJ.~O&ra M.V1 VW'tlOg: OlS
S.UI0d31! M.V1 VY\rnOH
usc<'!b~~fb
c:e~<<ohlo!oCboot.ot;~t; @cceaocb~c.cc~cocowo:&> <'!)J~::>!;l'l1 ecc.coo~:crAcoo&
1 .:> .)::.h o o o .) 1.. .) .) o :.:J .):::Jc> o .:>
;:;Jcc~~bcohl:k:c.a:
u)"' 0.;) :;, ~ .
?o
..,
O:c.roro~
~
"co::>O.-,Cb:
0 .)
oc.~~c.oc. ~~C>:
.) ~ .)
:>b
::;,- .)
cotoocoh->::lcccoo~Ab
a;y .) 4i ~ .) r:ohniJ~bc.
~.)!j~ 0
<
~rc.oec ..,~C!lO~~CCI;?b
.., - -
t'!~C.COO~ :c.cc:Cco&c;nl;coou
eo o o .;, .>
uwrecohl:'l:eAOoo
.> .:t :1 :~
u@Aflro~w~fro::"Jc.co::"JOcc
.J .)-o .> " ..> .:J
co&eo:b~l;::"Joc.cc:ob
"' :;- .>
ohi&Jccco~:clx.o
.:J !j.> .>
of6\;:c.oooocc
o o
:accaxb~&
.:s~.) o cf' .>coccro .>o&c.coo~:c. llo!coo&
.)
CSwc.oo~ o-o-
~ .;,
tu&:,.J;J:o~reOc.t::l~ooc.G
5':::.1 .> .> :J .)
:c.cc:~totoc.~~co~M
00 .) :::::1 j - 00
a:ol:lc.Oec.cc~reco
.)~.) .)
ccc.otoo:..JJcoe
\ .) ~.)
c.~l~:l'l~wac.obuo!;l
.) ~ .)~b .) .>:::1
~:lrw .)fuc.rro~CCIC~
.) l, .) .) 0 0 .)!.l .)@cc~:clx.oefuccu
Jba.,h,h>;;ahl 0
uwrec.otJ:kfiOOO
.) .) :J ... .) .
. u?cc.rf.c.ooc.ccF
()~
.)
cr coccec .>
~:ob
~o-.)
gc.ec:c.fl'l&col;coo
. . .> .>
c.cc~~~:lrc.o~,Q
.) T..l .>o&x.coo~:dtico:>l:b
.>
bee (c) (;f' t'!Cb
.>
cooecoec:dA&col;cno
.:J .) .)
C.CC~~aJrc.o~,QII
.) T'..l .) .) ~ ~. ~
uwrec.otl:b,
U@ccc.ohfe~Aec~ba~h ~C.COO~:cfAcoofu abee (c) (;f' 1'1Cbc~o2c.occ:c.r,&cnt;cno
.) .> .>o :> o o .) .> .) ..> .)
ccc~k~:]rc.o~,.Q:c.ro:ob
.) ~ ..>
ohi~IXO::"J 'c.o@cct;c.cc~a~
.)~\.,.0 .) 0 .)
0c .)c.occro @cc~chco
.) 0
e~ro .):Xocbec
0
u@ccco~re;~ro
.) .) .)0
~baoorc.oat
.) .)
oc .)wcoc.oo~
.)
of6:hl~(h~li.~oeo
.) 0 .101
.)
~<Q
.>~
abee (f) f'0~ ACb:c:;Jcocc.o>Cb
.) ~.)
<.O:~&::cbco:&ec
~
lln.:>e:kcc~
:,-,.
otJ~~o-t:ae
.):_j .) .) l;
~:cbcoefuec
0
Cb~:d!'l::>rew
~ ..;)
IS:2rooooo~~&
S".> ~.) 0 :s;:;Jccoo&:cc~otl:o:cbcoe~
.. 0 .) 0
.
(e:Cbcoe&es)
0 0.
r
~~
.)
(~~Cbco~(Ues)
'
S~"tlOdffil M.Vl VW~(lg Z!S:


":coCT.l4>:>UG89;JQ
('\ C' O)~O)II'l !COSG:l)')
(' C'
:l)C(.))OO:>;cr;)")f
g C'
COC(.))~t?:GO(J.)'):l)UG:l)')cr;);;;
0,
=>e~j
] At.:.. -, A (J . 6T IL L:, it. (J et.ol I
0 0 0 Q ('6 ~ 0 0 c C' C' 0 (' 0
cr:l.OfQCO:l) cr;)q)QC:;!qOO II ~:l)') cr;)q)fQcr;)GS~CCO!D! GO<.r.>?~:~OOO'OC CO:l)C(.))O) (' c
L -1 . L 1 ' 0\ J '- ' J J o C. lll ) L 1L L
o c~r;:coc c
'O~~roi)LtjC~CI:I~ II
$.8
GI:I'JCCOfiG9
.J) ,
coso::;
O(' (' C'
~C
C' C' f:C' 0(' C'
:>.>:lOO)C~lQS~')~CCI :l~"lO :;!~D I
~C" OC' oG
t::Jf~?~::CQ)'}E: ~:~:~p:
C'
G:l? rO.......
1:: C'
t1c"cox~
J
('
T J t.......t LUf L ~...;J LJ
0 (" . (' C' . ~C" OC"
c:Jfi:I?~CC II
~'l~~ff:l)~ll
0 0 c 0
morr~ootp:~oo~ro II IH~~~~~
0 0 C' Q C' 0
morraoo&p:~m~ro II ue:~f:e:lll
~ (' ')(' (' (' 0 0 C' C'

ootp:~e:l:~JlO GSIOOOO? GI,>':>CGI:I':>C II 118d~~ m'fl:~ Gl:nC~f:G~
'l' c or,<? ~ c c ( ) r,:c
UJG(.)I O?,C G~J:{~l 8d0jl:ffi'fl!~t:j:ro 'flC'OJ0)~8~ ?0j j Sd'J tJID~
OOJ!l:~f::O~~ G9,?~CD') GCO')tr.Kif> ~0 1~roJ.5GID9f m8~QJ~oSco'):.:D~l!

c c c c c o c c o r,;:c c
.G~')~~r:G~::o~ ~::oro ~?. ~ID'11::0')1J::O~~co2: G<l,?~::Otj~l qc:m:>:
e c c c c c ( ) - c
B D~ffilll:co.sG::O? CU:>C\U:>::Obll?: 8J0)2UG8U8~ j"l
;t. U
0
l)
0
T
0 8'JC\J COCO:>~ I')'
C' .
61
OC'
ll U
C\ C
1. J .!; -, II. lJ
""
-Gom:>~ ~GID~lf ~bl'tQJ~m~::o~ll -~
e "' c c c~ c " o c c c c
r,:
~~
Jl
C'
B 0
IDUI:<.>~C
6 LJ o
'l'r,:m r,;: c
(.)0)::00)~
('
~I'):ID?!ijffiGCO:
0
cr,:
A JC
c
0
0
c:~C\G(.)J
]
c C'
3
IDC\CQIO)O)CC\)~1:
-~
r,;: c
lJ
C'
6
0
C:.
C'
"rotJ~Sd~ GDI tJtJ:[jiD::O~ II G~?Ct~GSJ?C:;qO[::O~SdQC:[jiD.:D~G-j; rfro
. C C' <:: OC' 0 C' C' C' <:: 0 0 C'
-m G~?cco.s:GC\Cllr~~::o::o'):ro?J
6 T .AI f'L 6
G~ncco.s:Goro
AT iii
cc:e~mro
I it f.
Q:m::o~XJ)
t. II. c L
C\ C "' ~ r,;:c \ OC' C' C C'
1!) ~::0~ JJ. G81::0ffit:j:[j~ roG9:01'c:~?::O~~co~: SdGCO')O)SdCO?:~J ?:
6
' 0 C' C' C' C' C C 0 _<: OC' C' C' 0 C 0 "' 0
Q.x>:n u G~?c G~?c::o:n G~?cco.s:GQffi<:ll ro~oc:romc:::o <1>~1:c:~or:ro
Jl C.:, C.:, 6T ,Aiol: 6 ot C (.1 J l.
\~ C' C' C' C' "' 0 OC'~ o C'~ C' C' 0 C'
ro u:ocrn
A
'Y'
-G8l GSd:a;>. QtJ-j
-r G~')CCO:>:GC~roC0~1:
co~
o '\
6 I
r,;:c
liJ
c C'
C' <::
ro '1C:c:ll::O?: G~?C~t:G~CJ?. ~CO?:::O[j~ G~?C~f:Gjl
C
) Gr:roroc~
l L
C' C'
SJ()X):n
l C.:, l
coo::o:n 11
L C
~')Q')mc
-Ol T o
c "' o c ~ o c c c . c cr,: c o c c ( or,: )

:::0~ GI:~IDQJ9J 8d~GS3'JL'Gf::O~JJ G~?Ct~G.Sd?C~OO~: l,la;>9c. 0ftJO
.
:('f)
\ 'T' C' 0 C' 0 C' C' 'l''
roGQI :::0?:::0 C C\)O)(.)IO)'):::O:nll COG.S')O)(J)0.S G81 Gro:coro
C"' OC'
~(:)
~ G . 0 L ~ J.:.:. L T T J J
c. o
O)(J.)GQI?C:ro
~ c
<.X> :core G~:>C
"GSJ?C::OO)OJ
c r o c o c
OOQIG<.>:ro.ro::o C
"
il lJ L ll JJ <L U .L. o
-G~?C
C'
GSd')C:::O:'D
C' (' 0
Q)O)Gffi')O)U)O (X)O)::O?:::o:n JJ
C' ~ C' c: .
G~')CCO.S:GC\0)
C' C'
I,;U).S
\
ll l' . c it.:"l 6 A c 6 T .AI ll '];,
C C' C' "' 0 \ OC'~ . C' C _<;.. C 0 CC
~C:O)~tJ)O)::O:(J.)GSd')ffi') GI:O)QJO)CO G~JC G~?CCll!G.S')O)~ . C\)0) .S
. II. l ll L L .l l .:"l T L T
':)):'D JJ
C' 0
C08dQ I' G~')C
') . . C'. C'
GSJ?CO) G.S ')0)::0(\)
(' 0 ~ . C' C' .
G~?CCOS:GC\SJ?:
J
0) C
C'
C l . . :r ot J . aT .Jll ll o
C' C' C' c C' C' 0 'l '(' . (' 0. c . C'
~:'DC\0)1!)::> GG')CCOS:GC\0) qc:roGJ:~c QO)QIC\)O):)):'D JJ
L C.:.61 C . AT . AI . L J o L 0 L G .
o r . r c cr,: c c. c c c c ( o~ c)
.018csxp~~(.)C G~?CeJGSdJC::O~ 8d::OCD.<:XfD9::0~ JJ OO'T_J0f ~tJOIS
_<;: C' 0 C' . c-r;: . C' (' . (' (' C' 0 C' C'
~ ~ro~QJCD8d9 G~?Cc::tGSJ:>eqc C0~:391JG::0?8C1Q'T_J::0~ "t~J
ccc C'
G::OOID9~~t)D~<.>::O~II
37
0&1CC1 ~ .....
Ul
~'>[8, "
IC ~ ~I" 0'>
I o ~
~~o
0t')l.)
8 .o,~8
~t')
I (11)
o;")
<...3
o. ()I') 6)
= ~e I!D
8 =8 ;o.,8 . ...nC'>0 ...8co iS) o(;) f"f\1 J) iS)

e.-,430 C
CCl ~8 iS) IC o CCl (;)
e'l v "(')
~ ...v o iS) CGJ ...n ...v iS)
...RJ>o
Vo r-OO 8(') 8 C'>0 e'l 01') 8 (Gl
1>0
21'); 8 ru s
IC
~ ~I') 8 ~ ~
(]I')~; . v . B ~ ~ ~,., ("6;) v t> ~') o B ~ (')I') 8 iS)
~ v Ll:JJ iS)
0
-til
l
"';} 0
al')l>s ...~~- ~~1')~') 81')""~ e') ~
8o .-8 j
:g r .
')~I') 81') ~ ao~; ~~') 2
~') ~21') ~ 8 !'4ln = =~f e [8] g..,i,.,
~ l'4ln ~I) gl') ~> "'8
I')
J) 10o 8 . r.B 8 afl Jl J) .-.'/flo 81') rnl) 6) ce1 r.B') .-8 "8 8 o n.-, t-8 ,; rnl)
gl)~8 ell. 'sl) ~') ~I) 80 81).1:> 21')~ = ~1')"8 ...jh (]0~~ ~,., iS) 2 . .8 ~~ 81') g')~ 0 -~ ~,.,
Jl) 81') B ... ~ 0
8 0...8o. 8 . - r~ . l>e..- t ~') CGl rB 8
r-f!.:
:..,.~ n~ rnl) 81) ...So
... 8
:= 8 8 I)
ICI) Wn ~') 8
0 iS) i..4i r.') ~ 2 I) iS) toQI') ~ CGJ-8 ... '""0 tJ5
8 ~ (')I') &1 ~s 1>8 B el') (G-, _g') 1>8 8
L.UJ . 81') L g 0 . SP.5 ~I)~ 8 w 0 8 "';} iS) - I) ... vo m iS) :Do 81) ~ o(')') Vo _gl)
1
iS)
.~ 8. c-e,., ~ . :-o '-J/1 I) CCl B B ~- 6)8') 81') ~~~ 6) 8 2 gl') jl') 88 . B s B C>8 . .~ rt r.l') iS)
~
51')
l=U . ~,., e 81') '-9/1 el)"'i}' en= ...8 iS) ~ ~~~ v 80 B -t/10 ~0rn0 ~ B rn I l l l00 - 2
8 0 a I) s ~~....~o
-t/11') \) . \) I') \)
8 ~ 80 8 80 (;) (')') 8 0 iS) ell. (')') 8 = ~ l 01) = 8o ()')
~
\)1')
8
-I')
r-8
00
~.e 8 IV 8 8 ~0. 8 LU J 8 1>8 li v 80~>8 g .> 8,..,~>~ 8 - fZiliBo"'8;.,C1

v r.B,.., ~ <? ot:- 0 0 8 CG1 80 0v 0 8 ~:~ (') liBo 8 ~"' ...91> .-g,.., B CGJ o"'~~ ...So~ iS)B .-V .-So afl 8 .-8 ~ 0 g
.-9.> 1>0
P. t> I) . ov o(') 'lo..IC o- =.or, 1:!0!1 t 01) 8r, CiS) =VoWiS) .el) IC [G)o01) o 1.<>0"> 8 o ,. ,
el) Vo oC'> I)c-8 .- ,. , v >
S .""80 t~ L 8,.., 8 3 iS) F.P. !W .!Co ~ 8 B '15 (81 iS) =Ro Wn .-So~ 81') ,&: - o,., .S ~,.,
v IC v :..0 v
8.-, 0 t-<
an ~ ,.., --t> ~. .- o ...Do~ 0 ~0 an ,. ,. ,. . , ru ~ . , L "" <C 0 -8 !c 0 8') (;) 80 ~oo ....D(')r, IC"> .-8o
~
...n Ci"l Q
oo. c-B .. e>8 8 8 r '-RI> 8,.., ,!.8o 88 e I) F .. !"' ~ .----..., Llll) Or, [],.., ~~0 01)
(')') 00 " ., (')I') UCJ l 0 ' ...,
J v \) ... II) "'
8 ...8o ...8o CG1
cc e0 B ~,., v 8 t o0 e0 ...~o 8 ...8o t& 0 "';} B cc o . .cc S m - _R ~ c ~0 8 ~? ~
.-8 . <:) rn,., =-' I>~ rJU,.., 80 ru s o,.., o rn,., ~ P.,., 9,., cc rn ~ .. ,.,., g;
iS)
8 ~0 8 ~,.,
8 w 8 (;) ~ 8 :v IBn IC
= . ' .... 00 ..., 8 ....... J
w"'~ (") 0 ~ :Do .0
0 " 6) (;) 0 FIC IV -"
0 J) '15~ .8
,.., 0 0 '"""""
o..- ~"''-<C <..l

8 8
ru o 8o ~ 0~ 8 00_0 ~ 8
,. , oo 011 8 [B o..- 811 _g
v o an 0">
.v.... \)
8 8 c8 c.,
I)
8
<">11 1>0'
0
(;) 1 ,.12.)
oO')
.-8o ...8 oo ~ tO'"> o ...... . 8 8 .. v ,.., ....D r:8 ,-7.-, o 0'1 ,., 8 -~'"> u ~ ...v CCl v g,., 25
8 8 ... 0 iS) ~~~ L . v ~ 6-) ~ ~~~~ Ci\..lr,ru ...IC n0 ~'-f)'~ v cth iS) 8 ~ ~ -8 _2 H ~,., iS)
~ ~~r-gJO ~ ~~ rg ~~
r!I,.,
em 8
8, ~ ~ ~ 8'"~
jl) v 2 &) t5 ~~ d;h ~~F 8 .-g ~,., 8 [:B,.,[B,.,:=<e B .1:>
t '"~ 8 ~ ~ 0 ...~. ~0 ~~~~ 6) .-8 r.~~[B~...e Cl
.-6)o iS) 2 .-8 .-So~~ 1>8 Po,.,
C1
[/.)
B ~ 1)'"~c.~ B e0 s B g}r, 8,.,.-8 iS) 81') IC,.., ~ ~,.., 8 iS) ,., ~ B c-BQ~8 ~ &q 8 ,!.8o
\) .cth .> ') [B,., I> _) [B,.,
,.v .o,., 8 8 = 6) 0 = 0 ~~~ 8 v
0 8 s
u ~8 ..Do .R v0 ~ g afl
:.s
~ ...~').----...,?~ 888 B,., -,..,~8 ~,.., 2,.,
o...RJ> .-5 ..... , '- iS) ,., t:3 o 0 , . o =.Do o ...
B~ ~1') ...88o v8o,., 8 2,.,~ 8o~
8o uu'
.. ,_...,
() r:'\1 .-. 8 "---" 8 ..,.,., 8 8
I') .-
8,.., .-8o 8 oOI'J ~I') e,., f""ll 0' ~ cc::J C 8v r, 8,., Q) (])] 8 8"'0 8 .-~, !'1 .....
rn:l 8 = u "' 8 o ""-' . oo ru 8 :::::.J 011 8 8 v" v ~ <C
n,;; ,., v o rn') v '-Ril '"Ril v -~ 8 8 rn,., Eel (ill m t& L:J
LU J .-0 L.U J "' ' ;=
...ccg ...~ ...a:; F- ~,.,an ()I') dh (;C) \0
o r-8 8,.,[B,., "' 80.00 ~0 e, !"'[3} v .D = 011 .. ~ 8,., <">">=Dol].-, ~o .o, v ...8o v . !'"~ 8 <">'l = 0\
en
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 51~
(' (' cc:(' ~cc CQO)GYJCcGSdJCCJ.> c '1 (' c 6 c . 0 0 c 0 0 0 oe~~

o.:>oxn11
C I
:>c:m c:.::n:>:o.:>:>oc
l.l 1. L L
<:il:~c:;>roG
J o L I. 6
c \
C C oC C CO Co\ C 0 COO C
G ?CQiffiGO:QO):TIII og')CO:TI: <X>CJ.>OOO.SQQO):'l"lll <X>SdQiffiQ)ffi G<Xl')ffio (' ('
oU oG']t:JC Jil ~ I.ToC.:. I. U ol,l,. G~X~fl<>jl
c c c c (' c c 0 c C .0 ('
cq]C G~?C<:Xlf:Gj)Sd?: ~~<.DYJ?:GO(J)?~ SdO)('J) j::> 10~G'f'm.::n~8d<X> :.c

J.
~ ('
0 c c c (' (' <:. c c l'j~OO')C~
('
a:>?:~1COIC rom:QIQ)~SdQ)ffiCC:I G~?C<X>.S:GClelll O)()GQGQ:Sdromec:

11 .u JJ -r
Jt. c::. -i 6T ~~ o.,. ~, 6 -, ~C' Q('o
c (' c c oc c c l,::lf~~CC!I
.::nc;Gro?GCOJ?OOf~~<Jt~OO.::n~ II
cc c e o c c c c c c~ oc c c
cocm o.:>Yffi'll:co.s::oro2:m o.:>smGu: c:~c oro.::nm~ oo.soc:~c
IL JLtJ .)Til l Jo T Jo
~ (' (' ~C OC o ( ) 0 C C 0 C OG C o ~ C
ti~GOO')C~i::jfi:I')~CC$0~ ::> ~ 'J~~f:oto:>~ll ~'JCot:IJtG0)')8dYli1
C C C C C C C OC ~ \ \ C
OJ
0
f08d~<.D
co
Q)ffiQffiQO):TI II
1. l
C\
c
c
~C<.Do:>G<.D?CJ.>O)~
0
<X>Sd 00):-l"l
I.
c .c
c
m .
com;;m~C9J
c
:Gco:.::n:'l)(J) O);;QGO)?CO:'l"l:l C<.DO<.Do:>
c.:. -1 il c.:. Of u.
'JS'd~OCYJ?:Sn:
(' c , c
~Q
.
Grc r,;:c c <:. c o o C":17:'~ OC' c c C'
roe:190.::nt'J~ 9C:Cl118dmJc;0?'J<$~ 1Jit1C9J'J~C 0)~ II ~GmX:<X>GO)?CJ.>
C::C'OC' C C' 'T' C' <' C <' C o C
ljo.:>~Co:>~~ ~OOffi?l 9c:8dGOI ~C G<X>?C8C11JQ)O)ffio:>~y:mJQG0']t
c co c c c c o c c c c~
Sd~a:>:Oo:>:TIO:m 08CIDQIQQ)<X>?:.::n:-nml mm:COQ)GQ)')ffi OW.31ffiQ
Jl l:.!,lJ UJ C.:. t. --~L- ..u I.J 1
c c c 0 (' "' c C\ c
<0 OOJCuCID j 100)') ffiJQGCD'Jf GCOJ?GO!O)~Q)~GCO.::nt:; II
o @3 c c c c
~
C'
m SdYCDC O:'l"l'Xl Sda:>:mm:o:> :.::n:-n GY?cros.:GOS'd?: COC<.DYU:>:
C,.J JL A c:,-]1 ll --T .l C.:. oT .61 . it.
o6' ~G c c c c '1 co o o cc
Gom?.::no c:Y g cc:roco;>:a:>mroo:>G.::n?Gmol a:>.::n.::nc gem romo.s c
oLoL I. I 6 Jl \.- c:, Jl Jl L -c T 0
('
o.:>IOGOO:cs c ~ cooog:;n
c 00):-l"l II
-IT
0
O)C:OQ)C
I.
c a:>m.::n
L -,
0 ' o. ('
0:0GOO:'' c('
~.:.:
c: ~'
c 0
QOQQ II ... -L- 0. l ... . l 0 L 1
c c .<:. c o c co c c c c c c
GY?Ca:>.S:Gc~ SdO)ffi<J.> O)~Q).tCQSSdQ)~ffi?: mmo.s C 00Gro:
0 T .AI L J L -,T ~ il -- T T

0
, co
Q.::n:-nm G<X>QOO):TIII m
c c oro::nmo
o c c~ c
\O c
SdY<X>m 00GOO:
c~
.::nom1 SdQim~c
o C l ~JIJ C:, C::J :1 JL ~ L C!;.il!-L lJ J o
c c o o ~ C' o o~.
GY:>C<X>.S:GQS'd?: YXC\:>? I a:>C<XJQI?:GO(J)')O) GO:oc ~ G()(J)')~g
.,} T ..0:1 co l n. u OL oL.71 JIL
c ) c\ c c c oc c c c
Ga:>:>cG: m romQ:;Jo:>.::nY:> oa~c Q~01 ecocco oc omG.sm ooo.::n.::n
( JI.L 0 G J c. 7 lJ ll L . 7 ' TO c 11
'1 0 C . . CQ ') C . C C C CO\[ C C
<XJQSdQIQJCOIC Q)~IO.S:OI:Qs GY?COO.S:GCI::D:TI . G()(J)')')QQ : 0::D:TI II
L L ;J J T . J. oT .bJ 1:.:, :!i}lo C.:,
0
<X>G ')C C
<Xl;;JQ G00:00GOO:G.s~
C ~
a:>: ?:Y~<X>C
C C
II GO())?Y:m C\)ffiQI!):'):J.)
Co C
oL o LJ T U. c.:.- JIL ~
co
cooc:coo028do:>C:
c c oc c '[9 c
00000:Q : 0::n~nm
c o c c
mroo.s::n'XIG<X>:>::n::n 11
(. IJ . L l . o C ~-l ll . ~~ - }1 o C.:,

c:,- Jl
o
O:TI'Xl Sd<X>:mm:::n
ll -- -r IL
G . e c . o
: SdG.S~C C<.DO<XJO)Q):'):Sd:>: G()(J)')O)
TJ LiJ ;L c 0 ot
c C'
~01;)
o:l
ot.
c
cc:.::n.::n
c
GO(J)?a:>C
c c o C'~
8dffiiC0'JQ<X>IQ cc og:'l"l
c c G c ::DC<Xlffi:'):())m ~())0)1
c
1 ~ 6 u .ootJt. :-1 -, ~ a. G L 1.
c<:. cr,:::::c co ~ c r,;:co coco'
9c:enGr ?roGu x:'Peoc~ GO?CO:>SJ 02:0?:~:tJro~co~:ot::n~ n c::q_q
o o r,;: c c o G c c c c c r,;:c C'
~ ~:lj<X>QJffi~ 0')CQJffi~ YG\'t9GOO?a;>~:l ~Sdlj08dOJ~J:>:8d9
o o c c c- c . c e. c c . o
GO(J)?o:>OQ.S ::DCGQ)')O):TI COC<DQ)3: 0::D:'l)(J) 0:'11?Cl Sda:>:rom:o:>
G :ro
LoL IT o Cf.. ll ~ . C:, -l l::. Jf IL T ll
C .
02:0-:>:ro: Q)QO):TI.())
C\ C
<DOOa:>:TI II
C
l o ~ L ~ ~
(' ~(' OC'G (' .

( 0) oe~o t~O I c:lf~')~CCO'IC<Xi:~pu O') \>011 .
11C2flb
~
G000 :oe tc~c.5:b~:Cbco

o
to
o
liffi~rure::>bol!7, 11 @ccrubJcollcoccioe>c rcoe>
o~ ~ e~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ l,;
~&,@f'lb<D~:c.ro(l)o~
~ ~ 0.)
b ~::>tnc.cooe>:crflm::>&w:::>b
~ 0 ~
lr.:ewco
~. ~
to2cce
0 ~ \.
co~cocc
~ ~
w:h:!~:dxo:&w
;t'_j'-
~c.@o en@cc!~o~
0 .) 0~
Gc @ccruccw~:::>b
~ . ~ ::f ~
:c.ru~'Grucccoo
~~ ~
~~rnsohl
~ ~ . .) :_j
u.)@cc"liJ@coro
:_j~
w:::>Q:cro~(Oe>:c~::>roi!iGhl
0 ~ :::1 0 ~ .) ~
::>oo-.t.;roe>w t;"e>:~d:l:;c.ee>
_, ~
bJ:Cbcoefues
o
rX.C7J~:oc.Q~ rowroro
.) ::::lo ~ ::::1 l,;~
nC2ccceibh1C2ccecohl:ee
.:> .) '\.) ::.1
cMru~[,
.J .)
lf.!:ceOOGc~e>
~ :J
00 ~
1
Wtororoeswrees~w.)
11 cefut'l :c.ru~co@cce:roro
~.. ~ \ \., 0
w:::>Qcohl:~
0~ .) :::~~ ~
cll>~cl-[,
.) ~
::>ooCb:cee><toto~ro
~ ~ 0
@cc:d~ccelkure:Xoc.o~
~ ~ \0~ ~ ~
m::>:@~w
.) .)
rowroro
l,; ~
uoe~~e>
i!.._
"' 1r 1r ~11 "::::1 .,. , n _ L __ _
1o~e ~l'lro ~:~-c.cc5:cee~oow ~msccct&>:oe> g.>:c.rec~~ ecce>
orobJ Cbwh> 112cco~G~@e~..J:J11Jc.oh&o hxo::>&h> ~cecof>:~cc.ooe

~ 0 0 \ 0 ~ ~~.) .:>03':..3~.) 0 0 ~ 0 .)
:ccco~~besb:hes cccf..e~rotbh> 11 @ccbe~boro &rob:~ reo::c.cc~o
~ ~ o ~ e o o ~ ~ e o o I. o
tcCCOU::>:dero:::ib :cec:2ccrodc C.CCe>~ro:ll rcoJW:J brocroell>c.oco:~
O ~ e ~ ~ ~~ '~
S.L'tiOdn'ti M.V1 VW'tlfHI 9IS

11 MkPwe:2u
.>o.:> e
. uco&w&be~coowc.F..-v~
.> .>
u@cc
~
:ft.'2~6 &o xg d '("og} ~r'Tfi (iS6t) n['!TJN oomJ:C!fl y 7 'A iiJnH

u@~b
j
orod.o:cr~crococlb:>e :ccob~C'he~ ~Joe~~&@~ 1:o:oc~e!b\;:d~core:oooll'e

0 .) 0 .) .;, 0 .) 0 .) ::::::1 0 ..> .) &"'
~:cr~&cl(l)
" ~
I ohleslacc~hlfl
.)~ .) .)~
~b o~refu~li:@~
.:> .) 0 0 .>
toC2cc4ecPeecol'e:
.) .) . .)
ooo:ck@:de
.) .
.
besGeo2
.
lccik&o~
\ 0
:o~:OC~eiCOocO
.) .) .)
iX!cc:6Qecohl:te:;,:&el!oesn
... ..>:::h..) :1 ucorecohl:k
j :I ..)
- cbooe&esbes
.)
~ ~Gbseo2coes
;:J ..> .J
:beob~:cbco~OCa:>e@hl.
.> e .>
ofiilcco~
.> ~ .:> ..J .>
. ll:oefl ow:oQ:oeco~rebcoG
.>=t .>
:otoesldccte~:cP~l:u:cbco
e e .Jo .> o \ o
:Xo:dfl~e<!oeso~ibceoR,ees
.> .> .> , :.3v
" .., ,
cece~o~coes 11 ~CC<}J'i?~o ~:c
, v cb
r.flfle: , " " i!. 1
coccce~~~:1f:1fes:;>fl:roco
11a 1'
1~j5co J'b
~6\;b:dfl;e:Pee ..Loees&coclb:>e
.> o .l
coto:flcc:cccflli):ob
. o o ~- .>
'o.f:oo:~&:>:2
~ :J .> e
~drocoro
.> .>
u:oQoccow:oeo~ooe
.,:.b :J .) .)
&es:&es ;&,~eesees t!cc~a-(~) a~hGeo2~es :be~b~:dxo~,;x:-ooe~
ncob
.)
cr ro~~
j
.,
L.IS S.UIOdffii M.V1 VW~DH

SlliOdH'tl M.V1 VJArnflH SIS
zg d (::>S) 1:1'1"8: (1S61) (1)
6IS SDIOd3~ M V1 VW~HlH

.
11 a: ceo.; co
,
:.: ...i 0
1r L , ..,. n: ' , r 1 n r~ .. ,
s>C\)(:) ~fl3")?0 g-cmsccJCDeem ltle'B:c,~co:3>:i:5c~e.e.G [;~t-e.Gg:>
nC2cco~~: lrcoe.o 1l,oo..:&xd~eseco
,) .) 0 .)
J<:.Mf)es ~cccc~f:~ -:>Cn b10jC:i-c cc~es~es ~ccckeo0c.cre: 1~iw

.)0 . .) .) .) ;) .) . .) .) .) 0 ':)
n<2ccc.d:D
:> ;) 0
d~e.mc.Pf)Cbd~l:~c.::.M'lees JO.)~f)e.Gtc
Dron l;flco60
...) 0.) 0
fvcbxocFcvoom
0 .) .:>:::1.:> :::J 1, 0 0
SJ.)!Odffil M.V1 y _v.ru[lg OZS
u@cc:2cndbre~@ccGr:;l:iP<"/.\es
.) ;) \..l .) .J~'J 0'
.)~ccocc~:bl:>es
.)
c.ccbes~obl:n
.) 0
:c.~es
'bl:>G o8ccbi3C'Ol:><'ll::lQlC.~hliG>l:>~iX;@a to@CCGQ:Wa&s&?cc~~hl o.f::c.P('ICI.)fees
.) 1.>:J o .,~ '"""'._j~ o .J ,:, .):1 B' .;) .) ~ ;, .)
~b:C.OOCOC.CX>l:>
;, .>
C.tdWCCcotr,flCC
..> .J o
I~O~:CC8
.J
~CCGhl:crawre:k3hl
.> .l~ u .l :.J (w l
I
(c) rs.lc
:J
<'1Gb :korwcoo.;;,ch r:t:;l:c.cofilr5>8 : :xFll:>GQ.cccwc.cnl:>CO:C.accf'lDes i'c@coo~c..!-
.,) .) .) E,'j :.:I..L .) ::::::.1 .>.....J .) . .) .)
CC<" @::d.bc.cowc.lb.:>l:>
0.) .)
o&,wreewc.o:>l:>
.> .. ) . }
~:>:EOli:bcbcoolkuGu
:ie.::l .).) uc.oPecoQ:k
.).):!
lll~._!.:~fc:1l~ :c.ra~re:fc.3g (CO) (C) r9C A~b :?:>?rc.o~OO>~
IZS SDIO&l~ M.V1 VW~OH

.SJ.'HOdtrn MV1 VJ!\niOH zzs
* (cgcbcoe2oro) ~~~cfl4b10~-;cro:3C2hl
0 0 o.)O .):J.) .) :J
r
:Jl
.)
ZS S.DIOd:ni M V1 VW'tiOH
o
"!O?C
C'
~;;Jc
('~('
C[r.o:
('.sro~G~:~.s:comror
C' (' ('
cc:ro
c
QCO::>ro:::n:
\
coro:::ouc
o(' (' 0 \ 0 ('
oeGj
L! u e T J , ul l. ~- -r 1 -1 ~ C.:. l o vL
C"o\')
Sd4)<!)QQUI:::O,:x><J) ('
G?OO:::Oi)JII
n. -- -r 11.
0 C' 0
U::D?~f
c.:. o:lCO:mco:~
~
:~ m ] c
!Y.lQI(l)~<::
C'
o ~ l L 1L .......... Jl CJ tJ J ~
GI,;:;CG~~
c c~ cr,:c- c o c c o r,: c c c' cc c
Oo:>::Offi9J ~QC~::j~:::O~ f\]ffi ~GtJ?G:::O?CO~: 'J:~C"J !Y.ly~!C(.l)~J~C~ :Difl
r,: r;::c r,;:c c r,;:c c c c C\ c o oc c c c c
Gtpelc:ti<!)Gro:>c: tj<l>~~ot ')>OJOlJ(l)OlJCjo:>~:x>~ II C!:?!Y.lOfC:UC. !Y.lft:;;co.:> ~c
r: ~J "
-r,:c cr,:r,:c~ r; 'C:c c r,;:coc c o c o ~ o o c tJ2GCO':>C~
tlcrocDttlc9J Gr:P~elc:ro~: tiiDtc:::o~ 11 ~~c !Y.l:::r~:e~:q ~~m r: OC
~fl,l~CC II
r,<t cr,: c c r,;: c 'I r,<t cr,<t r;:: c c c c oc c
~?:tl~ ~:;Jcr:1~ro !Y.l~Jc:t~<~>'i r:tl:roJctl:elc: G~:>CG!Y.l:>c :::ot:ro"'~c
\0(' ~0 ('
t9oc:~ C>roG.sx~r:>:ro:>: ::n:>:cocororocro~:G :>roG
(' oc C' 0 0 0
-:>c:ro~r co:::o<~r-:>:ro
('
L "'t! T IL U 4 -[ l l L tl l i. ll
0 C' (' c or;::::::r,::.c r;: (' c c
'J:~cro-:>G'Pro::nroG:::o:;J~elc:tl~ coc~p:::n~ 11
coc c ( or,: ) c c c c ( or,; ) o c '
G~-:JCf~f: t'{tJ"( t~ G~:>Co:>CG~?C t'{tr<f 9t:::O~ <Sffi<l>?:
r;:::::: c c c c oc o r,; c r.~ o c o , r,; c ., c
Gret<~>e G~?CGn"d?C::Df:Od\,1~ tJyCO-:>tJ: ::n1roq ~~:>:o:>?l::jCOI:D~l>1
c or,:;:: c o o ' r,<t r;:::::: G cr,: c c~ oc c r;:::::: c
~ffi9et:::Of:?11 CX?~~~?:tj: ~ef:>~ ~QC~~CO?G9?ffi9J OfCo:>~:Ge;j?C:
o c c or;::::: c coc c G oc c ' c
rqro~: ~m9~:::0f:?11 G~?Cfa;{y:ro 2:10y~~ COGf:::OaGr'ff?:<r
c 0' 0 0 C' 0 -~ c c ('" ~ ' 0 ('
Gro:>roo:>o'1QG:D?
il -, Jl
:::ouroro:"n
L l J
G\,I?CG!Y.l?C:::O.S:ro:>a
T 00<-U:::O?:G:::O? :::080)
:1 6 il 0 L
c
-~croor:::o:::n(J)
') c
0
0
C>:o:>c
c
:::oo:x;;:::o:;J::norom:ro
c 0 ::DQl
0 c <::0 0c
c 0 c
cororo:::o:::n 11
0
J 0 ol C:. l 11 U l -1. l C. C!,cJi 6 L
c cr,; c ( or,; ) c- c o c ( or,: c) o c c c c

G~'JCo:>C~~ GftlJ ~~ G(,):>CID::D'f: t'{tjI:S 9t:::Of:? ro;;10m~c:~
C 8 cr,;: C Qr;::::::
~ C' f.;: C 'I G\ C
Gy~ !Y.lOC:ij~ r::::oaro:;k~tliDG:::O? ~ 0 f-:l'J~1~ e C C'
f?'Jet?:Gro:>ro~c
c cc c ~ c or
G~?CG3d?::::::o;;::::o~ :)0 GUl ::>j GO~?CjGt9J 8dGf?CJ:X:? !3:lGS~ GB:CO?
c 0
.:::O::D(l) ('CC\JOXIG
~Q C' C'
?C: C' 0 6
cororo c II OJCO(l)Q"OQI(l)<"'C
:::OiD 0 (' 0 (' C'
~o:>o:>C
' C'
C.. l L -~ 0 l '-' I. 6 L U J .il.. U U
c c r,: o o o cr;:::::: c 'I . or,: c c
<r.>c~c:co:>:G:::n:>Gr:1<-t9 9roe;j~:::n:>O'J~' oxp:~tl :::no:>G~J:>::::oe
r;:: or,: c o _C:. c c o c c c AI c o
-!Y.ltj:>:Go:>-:> ~:t'{tJ O:>ffiG:))(,IJ':>=9tc::ll ~(l)QJff.X:~~r~ W(J)09J 9::0f:?~
c ' c G c c c r,;:c o c c
~9,?'J:::Of:? II 'j~U 2:aiGOO:>f:?l 8dQC:t:}OO:::O-:J G~'fq{" f:?qc:QJC:
c~ r;:::::: c ' r,;:c c G oc c ' co c oc
~?:G"f>ffi9J ~a~~::>ti91D:::Of:? II 2 :0f~~ COOOJ:Df:?~G::D~f'f'3 G~:stC
o c o oc c c cG c c c
~G<?;?9:::0f:?" CX?G~:~c:::o~lroJo<~>oo:C\f:~r=co-:>:Go:>:> G'f<:pGro:>roroa
C' 0 (" (' C' I) C' c C' c . 0 .oo c 0 0
.COe?P5J:::0211 Go:>?CO)O?~roGroJ?~')GC\J?ro~c o:>roG::DQ :::D<{m~:~
c r;: c c o c o r,::;:: c or,: c r,: o c
~<?.?90:>2 <~>:x>t~<: ~~:::o2u qfe~:>~ ~=ro.t:l:::omGO)(,IJ?= Gt~?9:::oa
oc G c c c c c r,;:c\r;::c r,;:c c c c
"lDO'fC: ~:~CG8d?ffi~C COCCOC5j?:~e: [j<l>~tjc:l:I'P' G(,)')CG!Y.l?C:::Of:
0 . C' . C'O C' 0 C' C C' 00 C C'C C'
a:>L GQ::>?C:ID?
0.
~~
~
::D:l:>QOO)::Dn"dQIO):::O:l:>
.c.:. l u. u c:.. G:>OX:::D:l:>(J)
lCT.>JI
(),):::nCl.S ID::D::D 11
c.:, L il.-- . T G
. c C' .
G(,}-:JCGSd-:JC:::O.S:~C
C' C
.--T
0 ('
mco:rol o:>mG:DQI?:l
C'~C 0 C
(,)QC C cD::DO):::O::D Sd~.S l
OC'9
T. J o U ll oL C T
c c. r,;:~ c c o c c.r,;:c~~
f :>::;JJc:gp:ro2:tl....~::nt:? 11 Gro-:>c:~-:>~~:~p:ro2~<~>e~9J "i?1?r
C' 0 .
li>9?00~: ~5)GO II
o o ~ Gc c c ~c c c
0~')~ 8d~~9G~Gfel : e:QCG~?co:>roC: 8dGel?c:~;;.Jo:>~J?:1tS oeli~
c c~ c c 'l c r,;c c rc c c c
OOXDo:>9J o:>o:>G:x>OO:::: ~p:o ro:>CU tli08CIDGO:tJC::x>~ 'tf..g':ffl ~p:~0p: (' ('
0
0)0)') c
IO::>:IO?::;;o: C' c 'l c
roo:>::::OIO):l)(.J) c
OOC O):l)U 0 '" G<,i?CGCQ?c
('
L L l o C:. t. C Xf l
IO~ooco?: c o
G00<-.' ro?: c:~c
c c '" oro::nro
c c~
G-n:x>ll
G oc
::>:10.sros~c
c c ~q
('
Jl 6 J1 0 l:, T t., ToJ 0

~Go:> ?8ft
.Jl J 0
c c c c &;)O)O)(J)
G~')CG8d')CO)S:0).)):::D
0 c
&dOffiGO:>')ffiQ '"'0):-l)(.J)
c rorn:ro 0 ~C'
Tt.C Ito l '!I Ct -r .. O('
r::Jfii)')~CCII
c
ij
0
l
c . 0
::XXDGo:>~I');O):;;o:n::n I! COG
C.:. ~;~t
?Cc '"IO<.>I:GO:>?
'l
o
'"WO:>:::Dc
Cll Jl II. fL
c
~:~:~:~:~:~~~C
ill ill J o
~ roo
c
L l.
'r::::c c r,;:c c c c c c c G oc c c oc c
~tlc:ro~: ljiOOO<fqJo:>2 11 G~')CG&d?C::nf: 8dGf1t~ e:10fq~~~ ~OX)f
c 'l
IO()Ig(Y)') .:0 ""11
'"
c 'l
1.:..:,
~ c
CIO) ::n:G810:>Giffi')C
L..J o
o oo c
COOJCIO)~O)Q
l ot. (! J o
'"''"c: ~(.J)O)(.J)C
t.
c ~ CO:x>:
1l;"'j
c
L.,
~:;;o
o
L
o c c c c r,;: c c o c ' c~
o:>:JGQJ II 'i)ffiO:>eiPOO~: OOQJffi.o:>?I~IDo:>t; II ~'J?qc 'JOO'POfel:
G c c o c o c o A; c cr,; c c o c
e:G~:JCG~')CO)O)ffi G0:>~9 IOIOG:;;o:G9,?1l9JGO:o:>~ 00Cf::lCQJffirr.l9~"3J
0
OO&dQIO)~')
'L U J
c 0 C'~ 0
&;)')gi!)O),. 0ffiQ!OC: IOGO:>')G
I. '"d
'"'r::::'" "
ot:J
')Cco ~QIGO)GIO~CO:>:::D II~:::Do:>OC
l U L C:. C oL
oc c c 0 ("
f.:" r--' (' (" (' (" (' (' (' c:. !:':
tjiOGIO 8dG~:Jc:&dQJCY.X:IJ:l:&d9 10e:10:J:991 c Gg')CG&d:Jc:x>;;=~ DL~
c
QJO)O:>C 'J?C'~8~ j@@
c c C' ( ~ c r::::(" r,;:<" C'
0
:>) CJ?.C &d(J)Jl:OCGOJ') Go:>GIOtlc:ljiOO)f'PGO:>')
c
o <" ~ 1s:Jmuc~ro!c~IOGIOQ.s
romron
L T
c o~ <"
.JL J.:J
<" 8d
1T
c<" o
~ roo
L t.
'c.-c: u o
roG
ot
:Jcc o
o
ooroG:x>GIO
fl. l
c::x>:J
c '10:x>::xxn
c
C.:. - t
m:;;o~co:>::nu
tl
oc
l C:.
c oo
cL
o' o '
c oooo~:~c::~ os~Q
l I. l 6
_c: c ' j ( m) O)C
U
'~'r
' G<.91 14
LJ
C' (" ~ '1 <"A; C' 1,;\r:::::C" .~ C' ~ 0
Go:>? 1)00009ro 8del:GJroJ().)G81,n~ro9J Dl~tlc:~dl:~o:rroo;rSJ ~~.))')
GQIII COG 0 :JC(" c ("

crJC'0:>0)081:1 :::>Oj (j ) ~C
(" ~(" ("
10\:IOOCQ?:GO:>Q 0(" (" c:~c
u oL o ~r t. \ J o JL JJ 6 JJ 0 J
<" c. r,;c c o <" OA; c c c c
'J?C'0:>0)~81J ?09 8d9 tJIO.~OOC~:J:G\'1j9JC '19J~fO)f~JOO:J~otq{:;;oo:>~ II
(" (" . (" 'IO:J:Jd())roc
IOSCID:::o:cnroc C' '"C'
smO>O) :::::x>roo:>roro:x>?
C' c 0
~~e:<D:>:O)
c '
-r e. Jt. ~ L
r,; c c c <" <" <" o or,~ c o
tJIDSCID~9~0:>~ Gf'JO)O)Gi!~C Gf?Croo:>GOO 'J1Jtl~ 8dO)JSIO:l'jg?
. . ("
GO):JC:Gro?C:~.s~.s~c
(" c C' ("
00 8dG:;;()')0)8d8d8dmC::x>
c 0 (" 0 -'.SC\)::nGCOO)QIO)')
co -
C' .
' 6TOTJ o fl. t. ~o OL T c--r J
c C' C' (" '"C' C' 0
C\X.O)'JC!O)G().)')O)I !r.JC\)()O):J'):Gro?C:roG(l)')O) IOG:Jd')C GIOO).S:>CO?:o
IL l T Jl
A; c <" c c c c c c c A; ,.A; or,;:c'
~co2: O:>CT.>'Jl~~~ll G~?CG8dX:x>f: 8dGf1~ 8XjOY~:9J ~~t'JIO~
C' o~ C" C C"C' 0 OC" f,"; C" C" C" C"
90:>2:;Jt ~e:JC:x>C II qj~0~01c:tlC~C &d9o:>GO:>IO:> GO)')O)Q)')!
r.::;:: (" (" (" c 0 ~C' r,; c .
e:J~dp::n~ m9ro~:QC ~Grox:omoo 8delCf'~: Sdt!2t&do
0~ (" (" C' c C' r,; r,;: (" c r.;~ r,::;::: ("
~)elG:x>:Jro~: ~9roro~ro1 OOf>:G900ilJt 100:>t9g Go:>:>roiO:>:tl:el03JC
oo o " o
~~mmm
L L
oo o
~~:~ro
~o~L
oc oc ,
~ros:~CO)
'"
oro10ro
T.
~= roo:>G:x>:>
L
rneoo:>001?~ro
o
I
'C' E3 '" L . T
'"
JL u L
c c~ c o c <" o o c c c o c c
roJil:~fO:>O:>elO:>eCJ?COe: G9i'JO:>~ II <xt~Jil:~roo:>O:>~O'{ ~~0)
c o <"
CI.SI OY.J(.J)O)
c c c C" c c <" c .o " o
8d'):GO!Q.S~(.J)O)G:lJ')C\):::D:
" IOSOOO:>OOQDXn~ COO)o:>GO)')
~IT l. L -IT L C J--TCJ L ooL
0 Cjl (" C' c . (" c A;
~p:q! O:>G~~e8d 9 'f>C'OOOroJil:~f~I:IJ:>~q O)O)f:IO:>:o:>~:OO:l!9J
C' C C" C C" ~ 0 C C 0 C' C C\0 C'
IO::>:IO:>:o:>O)~O)Q.S
t.:. J -IT
~o:>CGQI
o U
II ~:Q:~
ltli!
IOO)ffiSO)U)CD.SO.JOOOO:>~I:>!o:>::O
-AT L -~T-l-o Jt..U C..
o~Sj c o _c;:
cc:m~ SJmUC~V?Qroro
c- o o &, r c-~
1oc~ COGro?c:~:~r:n
c . Be oc c- c
<Dro?a.co:>:nm G ?roc
'
l 4L o -100 l. Lt.:J a. U l C: L ., o
cr,;: c c
G~?8G:J'n8 u;tro9~~(91DGO::x>~ II
c
::)jf: C''l
ro':.OroOI SJG
6 ?C:SJ:>>I())SJ?:ro:ro
C'
U
C' 0
L
0
1. J
0 C'~ C' C' c
~ro:::x>c:~ G~?CG8d?C::D.s:
t u T
SJGU J
.
c
;c c c c ( ) c ~c c o he o c- c~
r,: c J c Of.C 'fC'::x>roqs~ ?0 j j SJ~~ t:~ID~OOC1j?:G?,(.~jCO?:t:JC:<q OillC3Jm9JI
tJ~GOO?C~ c c- r.c c -.. c- ~ c " c c o c c
r,: C" OC' ffiC'::D0008<ol :)QC SJQ lllll)~()) I I[~(\).SQ::D;:D()) G ?C:ro::x>o:>~OXD())OJ::D II
t:lf~?tCCII -r- l \ 7 -, 0 .,L u 0 T ... ~ L J t. c
rc c c c c~ cc c c c c o c c c
!OoD8CID~C oro::nroo <ol SJ(\):J m~:~c GOO?CGOO ::>0 ~ID())IQGIDQ.S OJO)(o)O)
LJ J o .:"J ll l J J tJ -IT f
c c cr,~ ~ o o c ~c c o c- o c c o c c
rojC ())~GO)'Jt:l01 0;?009J I 9SJCJ?C: t:j~Dr~ar.mJ~GID9f SJ(;I~QJ't0:>0{(1)0?~ II
8
r
::,>:;
.:>
(0) wcnese.smecvec.co~~
.:> .:> e e
6ZS Sl'tlOdtni M.V1 VJt'filOg:

. . ., ..
1 ~1! 1 ~
nccccecc :rerDCD::>lg t'1 17 _l
fl :::>ere<ll:mco
171!
<ll esAro reo r "'
ltlO:.'CfJWcoesroco ecce~
.:J \.:J. ::5 .:JO .:l 0 \ .:J' \ ::5 \ .> .
,n ~:< v ....., ~ r. v ,. 1r v J
. rwc:ocoescocc3flW:ccococw wcccoo :::>'lg::Jeccca.ccoo tcce>e>ofl :::>~:::>o
.J ..)
. , 17
e::::>ccoe>cea:
.:J
1 "'
.J
1
w:::>eccca.;ccco:::>c
o\ o.:>
.J .J
.J o.:J
.J
]e>co
.:l
1
o
-
.J
.....,
.J
rccCCGiS'l
.:J
n
c.vree::::>ccoe~
.J .:J
..)
.:J
0 0
ecce~:
s
.:l .:lO
1"'
s-ro
e.:J
c.cco:<'K0:C2<llrocco :cwi-k~e::::>ccoB cd:eC:.oC2ccbeofu :cPA1o6:lec
,;)
v.
..)
a>ccecro
J
'::tL ....., 1
vo 11 ccccwroco
-
1
.J
:reA:
r
J 0 J \.) 0.;)
S :ree~<l><ll
1 1r ~
a.iflffi ~C0CCc.co :)IS'roreroccccre
r n ..., 1
- " .:JO.:J e .:J o .J .:J .J .J .J o.
C2ce,;)::xc~bwibcoowcfroB
..) 0
h;;oc0ro.co .Ja.;ecro~cccoocd:x::
.J .J .J
Mtoa:;~:oe~A
.J \ .
ln ],' _,_ __ rr ....., 11.,
.) 0 -
, ~ ., , ,. n v ot.
<l>CO 'lgaJO re: cc:o:x:o eccco:~oo ~;reelCll<ll;<"t<l><ll c.t...c.ocureroccce~wc.u.<~<:O
.J o .:J e o o - .J .J o o -> " .:>
o1
rooofJ:0 _1 _
e:mc.o 1eecccce~moe>:oc
1 e~ro
rr 1
cc:~A:wc.o
il J. P J b 1 1<
r~ sws ccAes
e " o .) ' o o.:> .J o
11 (f) :oftxece~:2u
.:> .J e
uco&es&be:coococJro~
.:J .:J
1 l.t' 'l
~
II e:OsB:CII
O.:J e
SJ.tiOdtru MV1 VW~flg OS

usocot~
gk~\;ec~
l~ecacroob~a
r .>
5~
()) W<Oe!3e.C
( .;, ~ e e
tD8COOCCO~~
S.DIOdffii M.V1 VW'tlflH

S.D:IOd3:~ M V1 VW~flg: ?SS
~8
J
~ C' C' C' ~C' [OC'' C' C' C' OC' C'
U!~G:O:> :O~:Gm:>c;l r;~C:;)l C'i ~o:>c: l!>~:gJ2:2<JG9~,9 0\) Cf?,G-
" Under no circumstances will a dividend be paid without
'Production of the ticket issued by the Mandai~ Race Club
and a. dividend shall be paid only to the person producing
such a ticket: No other claim whatever will be considered
and the club shall be under no liability whatever in respect
thereof."
.!;; C' c- (;"; C' roC' ' C' c- C' o C' C'
ut:~:;X>:>1::::1 ~::::!Stc~~:o:::: 10~:gJ2:eoGs ~ul3 oo~c-
.. The Club does not undertake to pay on any ticket which

is not presented within half and hour of the declaration of the
dividends on the last race of the da:y."
uC2cc::>ro. .
.) .)
IO~ca::::>cw~
..L .>
c~C2cc(J)hl
.> .>~
::::>t:n;;i:::>eeoC2co
.,:::J\'J.>o .>
tcw:ccca>GMd
o '
C2cc c rof:Jro
.> .>
wre:eJw:C2(1)
.> .> "
ccc~:cro:C.cc:b~
' .
:Xoa.:cccPw~
.> , .
cof:Jwcoco
, . .> e . .>
w&x:G~cc "
b'&J~ bC2cc:o~coh,;~b:;: :::>IEoccck&:::>~hl~co ro~a;ccco wk5~:'c.kc
o .> .> .> o .>o~b " .> e .>O
b:1ro .)~
0
ohlcc:::>~hl:::>co
,)0~.)
wcocm~co:CQe.G
.) :::J IG::>~ReJ:::>CO
~,)0~,)
tuco~ccrod) : 1.;i:ee.G
0,) ,) ,) '
ccce;ctDfuroe; 'te:~cc cc:cam:C2re:eJcc c@:::>cwe; IG&lmoc.o~wroco

.> L .>o \ .> .>o .> ~ .> .> .> e
croec~~ ::::1 .> rC2ccoe;~b ::::1 :dt'l;~t;e :::>Fcoccc~R:;,co
.> ~,
w:cPeJcof:Jwcoco
o .> .>
r~'lX>:::>b
e ::> o .>
C2cc:d~'!lcccce;bE:e
.) fG::>bl::>croe;
~.,:J,
:::>to~):)~te:~cc
.) \,) .)0 ,)0 ,) 1:::>l:ces~ccbco~ '0h> .
C2cc:cco:4-c5hlfGfu
.) ,) ~'$'
CdeJ~co11Jc.o~e.GCCe.G
",) .) 0 ~,) 0
c.ub:1a;
0
toCCCCWOOb;~te
,) ,) 0
::>ito .
.)
c.ccw&hl:::>co
0 ~.)
c.o~wcoccc~bt:e " ::>Co
,) . .> ,)
c .)CO~e.G wre:ew:CC0
,) ,) .)
Cb~:dec.de
0 . ,)
.
;~w:CC(J) ::>towcccPro~ cof:Jc.ororo ccc~Pe::::>Cb~ ccroro:dt'l(:ee:~cc CCC.~
" .:> " " " .> e " .> ' .>o
m::>Pw:~:~ Mc5re:~cc cv~ccc:::>cro~ b:'hro ::>:::>kflS.Q ~occoe;@R
,) e:J .)0 .) 0 .>0 ,)~ .:> .:> :..:1
II cc~o~bee CoCCCC(J)~
,) 0 ,) .)~
:5~5g~S2co ( AI\.~{ JO ~OlOJ ~q~ 2u!AlnJ) .. :':cCCeBG~OC_ suroa;:cPeJ
~:::>1JJ:::>bl
qoj ,)~.)
~ccm::>Pc.o:~:-
.:>
h'J f:J::::>ccro(S:::>1CI:::>~
5::.1 .) \,)0~ .>~ oJ
1~:co~WeJ ,)C2cc:cP~se;o2:C2S.
. .)
.
:2Pfl:CC<J>'l:n l::>hl~cc(J)hl ~bre~ eocccc(J)Q :oQbl:::>~'CcC2co td.ootcc0
.> .> o .>~.> .>~ ~ .> .>~ .,:::J\'J.>o .> o \ .>O
wc.Pw~ ,)0
.)
::>tn~;eJa:eJ
.)0
IO~ro'lX>:::>b
..L 0 .)
C2cc:cPfls~o2:C2~
.) .)
:2PeJ:CC(J)1:o
.> ,) 0
oHb~
.) .> ::::1
'h>coi::o
.)
k~deJ'b::>c
0 .:>
Pcu~ IGoto'lCI:cees::::ccoero
~,) ~ .)
be>:de8eJr:2~C2S.
.>
:2PeJ~OC(J)
.) .>
:5cces(l5~:3'1 Lol5)e;socoro S2cc:cP~l'o ccc~J:c&: tb~b)~:c(J)ro

" 1n ) o::::ccm::>rw:eJ:
,. IneJo::>ol:::> n r .:~ 1r1 ~
n ,,. ~ fl:::Jccesoooi:::J oo
.::::>croe;wcc:c
.> o . \ .> oJ .> .> " e , , , oJ_,
1o :C\:leJ~fl
.. ,)C2cc:dkooo~ 10~ .):::>cece;o~::;,hleJ
,) .) ..L ,)0 ,).""J
:oc~e;
,) ::::1
:>eewcc
.) 0 .)
:ccroof:cPfl~ro
.) .> \ \
o@:;,cwe;
.::> .)
1bes c .>0
c
s'r.es:de8eo2:C2~~2rfl~C2~
.) .) ,)
'hroooocw~
\ \ .:> .)
c C2cc:ci0Ge;o2:C2~oo
.) .) 0
CbbPro:cro:~c3Fi!
0,) .)
d)ccce!G&-!
.> ,) '$' ._j
,;qno ~ql Ol
:)I()A()l U~qs n pu~ OI S;;)ln)I ldpun ppqql!f.A. SpU()p!AfP llV,
, r c GeJo2:2Pt'l:CC<J>
-':>dJ , , ::::>ccm~d
, , , o3.~bQ
, ~ l:::>bccce;
, ., 16&> ':>
S.DIOdffii M V1 VW~ng: 9S
1965] BURMA LAW' REPORTS 537
C
O)QCO)~;(\)O)GO)::JO)
C C o C C 0 C C Co
QO;' O)CX)::Jg:J):n(J) GCO::JO)Q1CO!C G(\)O)::J:)()IO.)O)CJO)
C C
oe(;~
~A l Ct. JlJJ CiJ J
cc c c c c \0 c
GffijJ:JXD~C G9:::n::>:ro::>:G:x>:> 02:~:~:um::n2 eoG88dCO::>:q~ 0)2 ~~<Oro:[. ,G8:
oc \ c 0 c OC'' L li.
<J?1Ct::PJcv~ ~'JGO:JC II C~cu::r.~ooc:
IYc ..
Got'I'[; '1
;oo1 G c o c . cc c c '1 ~
sr.; :>c:'=ll:>:m GCO:>mo roc c ID:):ID:>:::n:nm:;>l l'l'liad~m
J~
0 c.- <:: 0 "
( 9c:eu171m .
t:J tJ L C L.!; C:.Ja Jl. L r,:c C?"'
( ') 'I'D o .$. r;;:cc c c c ):>: ) r:lc:crrc~:
\equtty ~ GQI :;:q_G:x>:> ill'f?:'=jjmG9:C'-l_ G~jll~ :;:q_:ljm9f ::nc;GroJ:>CJi::! :DO)C: " 91~CT.l '10 "
c ' r,<? r;:c r,~c, c r; c c c c c-
CJ~OXD ~~Gro:l&l r:Jc:Dl C~8d::x>C:':ftJLotOCXJ')::x>~ IDE:!:~J2:fc:2oG8CJJ:>: OO':> ro3:~p~:
r;;: c c c c c cr;:c c o or;;: c c ::r.~Jemc ~
8d')OJ':l ~ltj~f' ::D~GCOJ:lgi::!O".l CXlCr:)C<.J;iW:x>t:!ll rolq{tjCD9JC 8d<.J;iQ 9 04 O')i:)C'
. 9 c r;:c r,~c' c c c c oc r;:c , e=arG~':>c
oxp:Q e:o;>::x>t:! r:Jc:Di.C~8d::x>C: CDC:CJJ2: f2:2oG8 8dJ)
tJ 0 L ~ T
.S::JQ00)8dO)C:
T -1 6
CJ'=l8d~COOGOJ')
l -1 11
(l)O)CJO)ffi
J l
O)CCJ
.
~C
l e:orn
G
C
::n:n~::>
C..::.J
CJ~CDC l
C"
.
'I' C"
6
C
Jl
rc
c:~cG8d:>CGor rocroco:>:::x>!<!lc ~a.Gm: 1
0 o 00
~ C~OC\
I.
c~
L 6
C
co 8d:x>c:m
c c o c .. c rc (,<? c ' c c- r:. c c
9c:8d::>: G!UJ::>G~<I.t CJGO:::x>t:!!.:]:> 9c:~c:t1lc~8d::x>c:Sd~m Dl_cqoro::>:::x>~
c c c c c 0
ID2;!:CJJe:t.c:eoGo8d 9 ~p:~c:::n2 q (J~:))')GQJ 11
c'l'[;'l ~c ~c c c 9C c
SdO:YDG<91 t101i!dGt:pc:CJp:GePS G8d':l:U1{C\l'i): QJ':fmG::x>::> ID'jCQJffi
c 80)Q())
~:;
9 9 o c ~oc-
G;}O):TII,) c
~COJ C 00)(910)
c c[9: 8dO):;'IOXO:Q
. :)g(\)ii);:;QGOJ')
9 ' o
J -, L ~ ll u . tl ~- T c JA L
0 C" c oc C" 0 C" c
nd'fc('-1_ OCOO'Jf 8d::l<j!QJ':fO)~ffi:x>2;! II
c C' C' 0 c.- 00 0 C" c
8dl:l8dG
Jt
o c o oo o
6 :>c:Qtc:mCJn:ndo

tJ -L U
ere c
I
8d(,):x>:nm:x>~1 ~CJm m.sm1:x>:n mma
Jl G ot C:. t t. T lJ C!.. -c
11)9()'):'-? (JCJ~ ())J<XjCJ2191D::D2II
r
:)~
~
S.U:IOd!n! h\Y1 VW?IDH 8S

6S S.DIOdmi M V1 VW'ili19:
S.DIOdffii M V1 VWM9: OtS
S.UIOdffil M.V1 YW~[lg
!:::> ]:::>ro!C.t'lC.~:c.cc:o
9 r i!. 9 r1 '1r
0~\>'elW!C<..UC. IWe>:
n 2 lb r l!: o
IOe>~CCt'l\>' '~eWro ::;~CCOB!C it'l
,) ,) 0,) e ,) e ,) ,) o,) ,) "0
:c.cowwcooees:d;;lw ccce~coc.roe>re::.o~ (C!c;"J~b:oQl:echle> cm2~
.:> :::.1 .:> .:> o .:> :::J. o .:~:::lo ~ . e
n .,, ':':'1 ., r 9 1 , . (") r ( ) 1 ~- _ _ .,, v .
C.IWe>!CC.OCCCCWCOt'lCOflC.~!::>CWe> Wi:J:> ~ t'l C ro:o:KJJecoe.e:; OCOCCCC
.:> e .:> .:> . o o.:> .:> o o o .:> " " .
ili!.11
COoCOoCCCO ':"]
ICCOC!CCe>\>'1 117 ':':'1
elC.O !CCOJCO!ft 1
OO:COWCO 1 ':"] ! 1 1 11
a:::cc:c.lt'lOWCCCCCe> l Q
,)
il!'
,)
o:t'l:
0 0
11fil.:>,
'
o e e .:>o o .:>o .:>
. n
.:> J.;
,)
IL .
0 ,) " 0
b n 1 9 '"lr n
,)
:oocoBW~fte>!::>le 1se> OIOJOO Wlerecoco~~:>:cccclwe>: 1:: > w
.:> .:> .:> o .:> 'S e
,)
.:> e .:>
.
a
&:!cc
J.) 0.)
C2ccC2ccco~r:;'brees
,) .):1,)
bw&wre~uJtoccococc
0 .) 0 .) .)
1<i2cc
.)
1r ':')
,)
':l ':') 1 11 1 1 . 1r 9o 11 If1 II
:ccoe
.) '1.
c.occccroo
.)
e .)oc.ese>wc.coe>ecoo
s>oo~cero
.)
.)0 ;)O .) 0
:coocoBG
. .) .)
ccccC01
.) .)
e
~W~X)to
0.) 0
~C.c;Je>:dft:jc.~e>eSC.CCe>:hlehl
.) ~ .) ~
me>ecocoeS d_,\kcccord~c.uto
gh~.J.. .).) 0 .) <)'.)
u~:C2cowc.roero
:5, .:> .:>
:arodwe>:c
e .l
o'ln 1oces&:C!(C)
e .l .J.. o e.
l, (c)tu:Cbcoe<bro
o

na:!ceroa.:c.ib:le~
.J . \ .)
ColoXcet'l
~ .) 0
wro ,)(!Jhlro:dft:ccorococ.coe~roc.cce~c.uroC2t:7J(nocc<.ero
.) ~ ,) ,) 0 .) :::J. ,) .) &:!ccec.uc.coo
.) .) 0
w
wreeew&>~:2bdcoe>:2
.) o .) 'S e .) e
:C2e>.=wwre~w&>~ti:n::>b
.l .l o .) .:> o .:>
~ c.Wle~tolcccchl~tt!
.l ~ o .) ~ .)
W ~QC. Pwe>:C :c;J4e>\5e> \k CCoto::JC ~e>cnQ:dft'&:el~:::;c ~e>::::a;Bd,:oq.:t'l
e 5.:1 o .:> ::::1 .)'~
.l :J.l
,, n !':':! 1! 1
o
" ,o .l1 ::::111 r1
:~: 1coe> o ccccm ccsowccee>fle.G ::>co IOe> e> CCC.Ot'lcc ICCcu;orocccr.o;>
.l
, 1
.l
Q
~CO!
,. ar<..UC.IWe>!
.:> .)
n
.)
':"] n
.:>o .:>
2 O::::CC!C.IftCCe>COCCCO
.J.. .:> o .._j.J o .)
1 ':':I 1
IO::::CC<:eWCO 1 ':"]
Q 1
C.OccCCeO:Oe> 1
CCBe.G
:5 o e .) e .) .) o .:> o .:> .) 'l. o o .lo
:::>1ee>fle.scoce tufl:~t<~ ~f:2[udwe>:2 a!ccto:::>bu C2cc ~~ccto :oc~e>
.) t. .lo .) o .lO .l e ..l e .> o .l .l ::::lo .:> .) ~
1
o~e:ccc 9 l o ~ecce "}
J _l:o1ee.s
ccw(!J ~ cc:ce:cco : fil"' 1 be>ce wco:oo
c.co:::>co: 1 L
.lo'- o .:> .:> .l .l e e .:>o ' o .:>
. le>coe>::>co:flco
.t::::tc. 9o v n
::>':;'m (':':]
ecce ] (!J:CiflWmrocc
n, ..., '::! 1 '1 1
ccccco:c:cc 1 '-)
co:::>o
.:> .) .:> .:> o .) .) o.) e .:> o e o .:>
~c.Ac.~M~kt<~c~~cc.ce>
.) .) .)
~~C.ftQC.be>Gc.cc~
,.) .) .)
w~wtdAlv:cbco
.) 0
ld,tccc~:::ce
':) .:>
.::>C. le>CCCe>!C
. l n
CC!C leJCCGC.OCe.Ge> 1 1
COt'l!~fl~:::>
b :J~
1 r C. n
r 20.: we:a .::>COCC
---> Q
.l .) .:> o~ .:>o 'S .l .; e

o .:> e .l
CCCe>G~:::lees
.)~.)
Wto
o
(~-hlbJ)wAC.e.EJ~coro(!e
:_jo .) .) . .:>
~f (bJ:l1.u)
.:> :,jo
dA~C.~e.Ge>
.)
u8ccrowc~roe>
.:> '\ .:>
w~dwe>:2
.5'~.)
~f:och':l~coeoe.~ CCB::>~flcof,
e .:> .) ~ .) .:> .)Oo.l
, ~ 9"'
1 ':':I ~ n :::::1 11 "::11 ':':'1 o 11 nr ; 1
l::l~::mCOCCCC WCCCC~ :CifliOCCt'lCCCGft CCCC~CI(-')CCCCC~ O!ft Wfle.GCO
.Jo.l " " o .l .:> t..) .) .l o e o .)0 o
fle>e::>re
.)
~QCC~e>~:de>::>OUCC
IGe> .)~
~ 0 .) .)
:JCo!O:e>t'leB
.) .)0
l@ccka..:ro
.) 0 .),
~t)]@cc~ .)CCCC
.) ....J .)
1 obc~ co::>:cc~ro:~
l, .J .) 0
w2(!J~~bPees
.) .) ::J .)
1 .:>CC<e1o~
t. 0
~crt<~::ocrcc
.) .J
:::.~mcce>fle.s
,) .)O
~~
:5
'Co::::tb w11Qccc:~~ I Ge>ICdccCbhl~bewco lb:ccococc :C2coto:::>6ltea;row
o .l ~ .:> ,J, .) .):1.:> .) ':) o .:> o .):::Jo .l II OO~C.E'J~bl
.,)~
.) .,),;1 8~ :::>c~e>flco~ towccoe ~ ~8cc:e;e>w:b ~:hltewro
.)0
iiRccc:H
~ .) ::::J O.) 0.) .)~ o e1o .) Co:::tQB
.)~ ~oc.oo~@hl
1 . 11 ilf t r 1~ r Ill l ~ 1 v ,, 1 9
" r
.., :.J
o
wee o:e.~ 1ee.sc.cce>:fte>~ros
oe l..
flCC<.e:cJt'leW:>CO 1 fl:::> cewooccco
.:> o.:> oo
2co
.:>
Ol:
~ Lo"
.:>.) .)
o ':':'1 1 1 r 1 o 11 1n '::! . r l J~ _feEl
WleO(!JW0WICCCC<:eC.OIO<'lCOt'lt'l
.:> .l o .l o l.. o.:>
CO~CiflO:..SIW ICCCCIOflCCfl ::C.
o .:> .:> t.o.:> .:>
e>:Jwe>:fle
11 1 o 11 1 ..., r 1
.:>
1 IOCb~oc.e.c~
W 2(!J:JC.Cve>!ft fi<:Bele>:::>1e 1 8~ W!C.I<'lO::CC ICCCCIOfiCCfl (OCJ..;CCOe> C " "
.:> .l e .:>o .:> .J.. o o .:> l.. o.:> o .)
b:>:cbcoetoe.s
0
leenc.cce>:os\-bl1BeJW:lll
l, .):_j 0
wllt::lc.co:H
~
IGe>ICCCC~cctcbwto:::.bl
.) .;,; .) ,) 0 .) 0 .) ~
C3tlc
5961] S.l){Odtn! M.VJ. VW~Hl9: 'ltS

uC2ccGhl
.J "~
::)b'l6coto
.:> ~o .:.
mC2CCtOACOh
.:> 1... o .:> o
tm2e C ~CO~ro:cn'le:cbco
.:>
hteeBCCC~:fl~CO:~
l.
,C2ccchl~mfleohe
.) :_j 0.)
:C2roe1ero
.) .} ...
ccc~:M ~cocc:c.Pee:cbco
.)
,!;e;d3ll:ea.:ro
0 .)~0 .)
~ocoh.>:deC2ed :)tocoPe<D0wea; :C2ro:)tocnw llhlccc:H 18~ JCCcc(J)hl
~.) 0 .) .) .:; .J 0 .J .;lO.) 0 ~ .> -.l, .) .>~
hlcw~coa; IG0hl::)n:::m Jewccc~~o~ co:2b.?cPco~:2 lbocotv:c.PeC2ec~
eJ ~.) :5.)~ .> ... \..) e .) e ~.) 0 .>
I C2eo~ bilx:occ :C2ro1:oC2cclea.: Co tolL.OtK.Oefi h.>:c re&. oG:e (() :)ttrr.h.>
.> o .:> o " o .> o.> o e .:>O ., o
'l!Occc:H 18~ ccc~ecocb~ ~c.Q~coroco2G<ll{:;bPea; :)toees &es~~:2to
~ .:> ...L. '--' ~.> .J .>~" .:> .:>o " e
cPco~:2 JCCcc:)~(J)t::l ~c.tLib::)!;b~~ehJ:2 C otu:cbcoelnro :c.l;:cl;::x:.o:::ro
_, e .> .>O.>~ .> ,__) .>.:J.>o'\ o e .> _,
:)toOOCO<llll:ld:>
.> " .> oY .>
ch@O::'llJe;
.:> :J
::)(;kQol:o
.:..::.1 ~.:>o
lb 15le>cofu oh.>:d~C2ero
~...... .:> .:>
1ero
1..
ccc~wcb~ co:::>le~fla;coce C2cc:2b:crw~:2 ::>hl'Co,(Ccc::>bhl :CCC\:CCCC
" .> 1.. .:> o .> .:> e .:> e .> :_jo .:. .:> o .> ~ .> .>
::)Q::>~bro mccto:::>b ~Cr,-;]~~e(lt:nc.rfl:::>Q:IOOhl ~bcobecn 1C2CC:::~ahl
.J~.)...J.) '\ 0 .> .> ~ \. ::i .>~ 1.. .>;j .J .> 0.> .J .>O.)~
S.UIOdffii M.V1 VW)ffHI

S.L"B:Odffil M.V1 VW1!09:
~!965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 545
<'f.": C' C'

EfC'Ooot1croc~
Q (" ('
ooro:::o
T. n B::>;<;IIG>G"'O:>Co
L tJ -;,
G C' C' ([';": C' C' [';":C' OC' ")

2:GffiJ':>~fo t:Jt:?GCO'JC~t:Jt(:)')~CC t oeSj
~C'
( {jC~C9fG~ffi(O')g~
C' C' C' ) ("
~f 00
('
C' j@ 'JC'DA
~c
J
GCJ')CGro::x>.p:
C' C' r,: C'
( t1C~C9fGCD~ 'JffiCO'):Q9 ~
C' C' C' ) *
~ (' .
ljii~O?Jf[!~fG::O? ~CW~J?!
(' (' ('
G'aO?eUGS <{S~
('
Oil
c ( )
C G'a'} l U~?::OCe,:;J"!OOf!::O~~
c-r.::: 0 (' 0 ('
C' OC' C'f:C'

OO?IG41'}f G)fi~:;)J~O>I:JC: II
(' r,:<- ("

G9J"CD<Xl?I:;)'JO(.O':I?: t:JV~iO?Jf[l~fG::O?
"( ) O':I'JI ('
~CtO~J?! :roeOOS qs~ 013 C
(' ('
c:-r.'? (' r,: r,: (' ( (") (' ( ) (' 0 0 cr;:;:
:l)_'lm~t O?Goo:or.coo~p: !Xt:Jc'PS?f mcooo:G<Xl?C ~c o ~ooo:>t>~?::OC~?
O(' 0(' (' 0<" ('' ( 0 eO('~(') 0 (' (' (' 0 <' Q~('f
tx>;;:~t<XJ?:GG>'}f aa',I~'P ~~~p:ro:n~ q_ro:x>i_~o 0c: ~s '113 J ~q~m~0 c
o r;:c o OC" or,:c C'_ c o o o c oc c o c c
~~::Ot:J~ ~O':I~~~tJCOOCSJ~ItG>o:>o:><X)?I~'}f~t.,J'fOO"t0?::02:11
r.: (' c C' C' C'

[jCOOC9fGOOJJo:>00?:~9il~iY.) II
o r,::,:~) G r,:oc
II ( roil?:<;jG~Gf[!:j: e:~~f II
cc c (' (" ('

.[jCOOC9fG:x>prooo?:~9~:33~m II
~ G C' );; C'f,O \ C' OC' C' ~ C

O':l6p8::l[L;l~ e=~JO II ~~~~~ q::n I.>Ol~C 'f>C'OO')J)'P:~e1:'J:I oei:S9
C'~ C' C C' C' C' C'O o C' C'
"t' 'P~J::ne:J:jfT.>Ij::D ~o q:;1 ro:n:n 09 t1)<il~lj m'P::;, G'c>?:::Gro:o:>;;:
C' C' 0 C:: C' G 0 0 r--c C' C'
ro?:t Gd?:::co:x>.s:oo:p~
J T lil
~:nx:m
L
<.Hu:>:J~(.g:::
L llJllJo
m<'!':Da:>os~
T- "
:"l?.a
rc.. ro91
~(' (' G C' C' ~C' C' C' C' C' C' C'
~~fX>:::}j?!Q9Co:>i:;l :Dj908JlJ OlJ'JJ)'f'3 OJ'f':Ol GG'J:::Gro:o:>f:'f? Sdo:>ro
C' : Of.G C' G 0 C' C' . C' 0 cr.:
0 9 ~1)1olJ:D? ~8; 1 IO:D::D~~:~ roJ il:~;;o:>a~ :D:r.>Jq~?9~ OJrotfJ:
C' {;;: (' 0 r;:;::(' C' . ~ 0 f,";i,;C'OC' C'
'9)~ ~.P~'P roGe1?::: ~Go:>:>Gt:j~l tOC:roroJq>'Xj~ l)l[jc~c9'
C' ' C'f.O C' C' C' C' C' 0 C' C: C' C'
ro::nn
6
o:>;in:GI
-~ 12TL n.
o:>CGOJ?o:>::nm
ro:;~~t?: o:>::;ms:G:Dt~:;:roc oco~:Qs
o U
C -1 T U 6 L 1T
r.e r,:c-- c c c. c c ( ) cr,<?
-~OOC:J: ~PjfDJil:~fGX>? ~Cu:>dp: ro:n2:)G8 ~SG :}IS- c Sd')l OXJm~m,
mGro:~
- : c r.:r;:c c) c- c o o c~
Dl~::;'PS'i> \.onro:Gco:>::: qp 3 - ;~mro oc:;?:::o::t:j:>:
r.
0 (' 0 (' ..l. - (' 0 (' (' 0 (' ' (' --
mf:'X>d:~:l:G1)~;;~dj~OlJ~a:>:trr.>o:>~ II
oe; ~;~I 't'e-ooS6;o65is:~~cJ (i~ ( Ol) I;

t oaGc
~ .1
.,:<.131 meo~~~~O':IQ~
T ~ t:1 (So) oof.,,e~G:? oa~<>:~
~ .:J
3~1 G~G~Tol~ro
(' . , ., ~~
:JO Cl()Y<:.SG>OI
-~
&.J
,
IJ"
(' 0('
.1 00::0(')'):;)ClCOJCO'
1'4
!o:l
1.. 4
Jl. J
u T ll
B"
A
'0(' o
:~~~,s (')'):J:q:.l).,~ll
Jill "" .If. ...
l.J I
' .39
u:~cc
"
:ecei"f'l~
oi
"
"
?:@dcoeiC!
;, e
SL'tlOdffil M V1 VWllilH 9tS

. u1iol:torei'S~hlto;MC~:c;J&:c'boocoo.:>cbwcccb~l:oo
.>~.> ~.>~o .>o :;, ~ .J .J
r'lS~~b ro~;eccb
O'J.J .:> t.,;: \ ..> ~>~C
;J
rocoo
.)
rG~~
.)
cl:l~c
;}
c.ccec.ol;Pe:*.o
..> . .)
ooc-vtJ
.
c.oew~~:cceescoo.:>eb
.) \ ..)
r.)Gofe b~:~vc
:1
'
't
nbc-~~ -.fO~c.~socfb:,e~s:cceecsoo.cb '2-f~ C~flc *
11 11 .)c.o~ec:c.Pfllkbe:cooc.oc.rroe4boooot::l
~ .). .) .) .):.:1
.ulPe:b~~:211
I) 0.) '6 '
11 c.o~w:c.rfl&:c.ooc.oc.rcoe4boooot::l
.) .) .) .) .):.:1
L..ts Sl.~Odffi! M.V1 VWl:IO g

~r Lo
oco:oo:ooe
.) .) .)
r
s~
~ w
gs-ra.>,:~
.t;stlc
Sl.l!Odtrn M.V1 VW(I{)a 8tS

nr L<"
:lCOI:lO:OO~
;, " r.)
Oli:
.:>
rl LO
;fi1crcoe>:2
.:>....J.:> e
6tS SLUOcl31I M V1 VW1IDH

ur l?
:l(0;~006
.) .> ,)
~
a!?
~teo~~
r;3ic
S.L){Odffil M.v1 vw~na oss

11.ocrw~:2 11 llwloe.d~cbe:c.oococroos~booeohl
.J e .> .> .> .> .> ~
11 (c) 6>~tc:6211 11 co&,wl!csc.cowcrooe4booeohl

.) .) .) .) .) ~
.),J .) 0.) .)~

c.cc~:>c.co~ "occ
11 2cdkcc Jbcdirewc (J)hlcc
.)
c.cc~e~&>~cG:c~ooo : och:l~echl~:c<c~&~ r!G1!n:6ecc 10~emob olb:>:c~oco
,) \0 .) .) ~ \ ~ 0 0 ":{ """ .) .) .)
aoc.h:l~chle:ccc~ @cc:2coccecocc ol~:d:ebec~ H@cc!=;;l"Jil.&cc oocooc.a
s-~ ' :J .> o ., .) o o .) ~:T"" .>
~cb@~ro
S'"' .) L; wrf!eco~
.) k:cbco4~cc
0 .)
r@~r
.)
oOek:ccoG4hcc
1.,.. 0 0 .)
uoboUecc:Crar.b~e4e~e
.) .) .)
1: oboH~cc:c rfleceCOCC e:cr~:f,~cb:&cc o~oreed~co II II corec.ot:l:l:efGfloco

.) .,) .) .) .> ~ l; .) .) :J. ';)' .)
u@cc~~b:oe:cecli:'al-J
.:> o .>
lo:..J:lbeco&, 1:o4Ae&
~Oo o ~o .> o .>
ooco:2c:.ocoMS
.> .J
cc0o::A4b:>n<n.o
\ :J .> j-5-o
h>:obltecoldhec ,~:x;eohlecode 1:o@ccet'l<.hl~:ccc"lo, e(J)cc@~:2coccecooc

o .:>~o ..J .l ~ .l .>~.l.J o .:> 'o ~ .:> .) e .J
u@ccocc~4bco~
.> .> 0 .> .)
r'>~~:4o::)bW.
J., S' .> .>OO
lcbco4hec ro:dAob~e b~~ COt'ICCC:crfleceCOCC o<ocb:Jbc:cbc.ou ucorec.oiJ:(e
.J ""' .l .:> :> .> e .> .J :1
r
:)lg
.J
ISS SJ.'HOdffil M.V1 VW'HnH

552 .BURMA LAW REPORTS
(o) q~O~oS'GOCO?:Go:>~~Cj6;)Jcrl~ps (ooerO~oo) 4>? r~j~l

{J) .oejC:>. ~t t~::>ci~'l8c4wri!l c-:> jl~on
:SS S.IHOdffii M Y1 VW~DH
11 ~boe&wh>bcoccccsco~re
.> o o e :J
eccoe:~:~&:ebcot'l:cbro!)r,e
:>-.J .,~ :Jo
l'!a:flo:lo :X.o or co~es~~l1best'l:cb'co 10~~ ot~tlc I
OIJ.> .> .> . .:J ;J T
uor -O~a:~~i.'nesco~Cfll~ I?fe bstJc *
uS2flb$~:g>~~co~es
0
o.e:cbco (r) oh>~:cbcoe&es

o
I IG::Xc~co:Xo~es
$' .> .J .:>
0t:leseacbco
.> ~
(c) :ces!)b:~fl
.> .>o
:J..:>o
o
~:_?b co~:cbco~&es ~~~l?ab~} ( ~q8p { 1!2nfuo:> JO UO!l~'!ls:l~ ) ~~
:~:!)IOe~M~lof:ccoa'oQ:c.es:::;;:tJ.co
.., .)\,; '$'.> ~.) :J,.,...) ~......
r~ tee:ccor~ ,Q:cesa>G:::G>
0 ...J..; .)::J .;) ..)
c~~e&cccete"c
0 \.
11 @cc ow'lu .}b!;:d~

' .) .) d- .) 0
corecoccoe
.) .)
ofc:&r~ec&bees
.) 0
bwceod Ji!,,t:Jllil'l:(bCOC~~-eGII
~~.j .
IICOrecot:li'oe
,) ~ :.l
ll@cc~hl:o~cotl:'~obG>
.J .> ~
oHees " ~:o\kw:ccoflOro
.J ~ .> e .) .J .> ,,.
cbooei.'nes
.)
tc:@,:~&:cbco('llcbcoor,e
0 e::::J .) 0 1~: !'!CO{)
0~ .)
OQcco~rco~fl
:3 .)
.)
cok:cbcoei.'nw
0
""l
ncccc:oeco ]es:oees
1
: 0~II
ceco 1'""'1
c.occcce } V99
accoco:ccot'loro IV 19 J~
coawccc~reee:O!'co
,j .) ,) .) " \ .) ,, 0 0 '.
e&w co:ibro'l!,wcese n;:;::tcc~'&:cbc.o

~""o,
J.bnw10e :2roh>coo:ccc
.>.>
::.Hb:o~h>re
.>.> o
r
.
ng~

"
.J
6 r , v , 0
.)O.>
v b
oeff0 <l>~creec.ro~a _?~oo:ro~::>e:ac:.?cces es c.ro-> Ill:~:~ ~~: &oo:>:~>1oe
a , ,. ln 11 0
Jto'.Clt'l:oiJCleS:oe
t,; ~ .J:::I.)
l:ocoo:cccof:ccot'l~:o!)
0 .) ..) ~ .:>
co~:cbcoe&es
0
~cocoes
S'.>
1J.bow:oe
.) .),
tucoo:ccco.fob:
~ .) .) ,)
~o:~ '&a@:c.coe
,) 0 .) .....J
co1:o:cbcoefues
0
~chl~co:~b~cro:oce
~ :::::::::1 \. .)
oGcco
.) :I
re::>f cobo:*~ of~:cbcoe&>es d3ecrook4el'oeso~.oftes~tcbc.oe&es o~ee:~<Cfl'

.> o e .> o ' .>o .:> ..> o o o :;, "o
( ...Lree) .;)ob:~cca
.>0
'&Gt;l:b
.,)~ &
@o:::>!xoe:cbcoe&es
:> .) .
uC2o:ro~e:re~oo1:o:dt'ICC~cocc
.) \. .) 0 .)
C.CCOOO~:cracoreco<:.co~
\. .) :> ..>
I ::>hlw~CC ret'~ ~fles 4b:oCc :x:oc& ree
.)~ .) .)0 ' . ) .) .)
:ces~:cbcoe&cs
0
" 1_,.
:>coo:~cc
.) 0
0
cccceecoro
':":)
11 .)

, .)

.)
ol'seescroreesc.cce:occ-:xo
"' ,
0 .)
0
.)
v ..
:XOflfl:o:KO
.)
]~ ~-
co:0~~~<e:ooco
J~
e:cbcoobco4
.JO.>
1Wioco:oa
oJ..> . J
'h!crococftoelffi
o .> ~
u@ccroe~e:
.:>
:>~:xoc.&cocftoe
' .:> ., .>
IG:ccc
~
:becccwfkc2ro:c.
0 .)
~ee
00
:hl<"lCO:crl'l:::>eeocecoccoe
OJ.:. .JL .)0 ,)
~i;~i;
.) 0
'l:c:~
l
bo~e
.)0
1~corocoo
0~.) .) .)~
I :>\',e:>CCO~::>reoh:oc.co~ ot:::lhes~cc:4cooto ro~w~:cbcoecnes coe:cbcoel'ow
.)0 .) ,) .)0 .:> .>:J .J .> .JO J.; 6-
n:@~R IQ*>O>:toroset~&:lrA~core:c..hl:~~
.) !.]~ ~ 0 \l, .) ~.)
~\, ~~-~'~:cbco'o@A'Cc@a-:ol:l
.) \. .) 0 .) ~::J
owi:o
.) 0
:crl'lcorecocc.O*>crores
:J ..)
c..rokw-:
0
oiJ:L~<l>IJo~:o'!:.oocccso:ore-'t)fl:<kco
.,) :1 .) :J~ .) < 0 .)
ucob
,J
ccro~~
,J
'0
S.L)l0d3:ti M V1 VW"'dOH
11 CC\Jf}lf 11 c.o&ece:dscoe~e.c
j
u@ccoedXJ
.) .)
*'hi
0.) ~
CC~WCC
.)
oc.ecdoo~
.>
:obccc:;,ot:lco
.>o .l .> ..> ::3.>
:obccc:;,oRc<l>
:J .) .> ::3
QCCB~Oro
.> "
roehJ:ob u@ccoe.cro
J.; o .> .) .> o
4b~::f1~
.lc 5':::.1,1 ,)Q,) .)
oe~co@co :croec&:;,o2 .,~cccro2<l>:l'leo:roc.cc~td:o
.) .J 0 0
c.~Jbcohl:k!Gd~
.) .) ~ . 'S' .) 0
toke rbec<l>:boroee

coCoflCC
.) o
ICCOCJ<l>:l'leo:bo
.> .>
a=~:lre&:oreu
:;:,-o B, .:J
ucorecoR:tei'IOOO
~ .) :J ~
0
u@cc:4~@bk~
.) ..) .) 0 0
ftM c.fwPec<J
.)
t)(; '&:ec(lbse .J<>l{lOUll pUll JliUlWV !UJl{Sljll'l 'A np!11N {lldo.linU<>A '{)'A
' .)
IICCb c.fcorec<l>
.3
0 Coec:ro:>b<l>4hJ4b
\. .) t't.> .;)
orcul'l :)of .)co(i)l
,)
OC.fl5
:::::~~
ncCb dwPec.<l> 0 &>ec r:eoob<l>4k4b eoc.C'Ie of ;:4cct~

- \. .) O.> .) .) .J \. .)0
sss S.DIOd3:tl M V1 VW'llil9:

t
;:
[ uC2ccwbxoc\Pe
.:> .> o .:>
bc.oG~<"ro .:>~b:oo ow:c.P<"oe.lecc:crohl
e e.:>o .:> :J..J.;16>~
:Xobcuc
~ o o
bwc.ro2a:<"c.o:b:>'lto:1Pft&:::>Pe
.:> .:> ~ o &' .:> ., o- l~bc.w:n~
CcC.Ofttc ..J ..J
m:ro~e
o
~1J6c.cnft y;
.>
~:Cbcoe&rn
C2ccb:.:dx.ce~
.:> 0
:hire&,
E,j .:> .>:I " ~c.w
roC2ccahl
w :c.cnft::lro w~es c.cc~ooib'e~c<'le> e:cbcoe~ro c.o&roAccc.ro~
' .:> ,, 0 0 '1. .:>0.:> .:>
S.DIOdErn M.V1 VY'rnOa 9SS

r;:;oc o c c c _<: o r,::e c ' cr o
'8)~1,) ffi~~os.:p~:; <JS ~(g!l()~')~G~Gft'2:J: GC\~j'):DC',/O)CI:JG:Xn n;}Q0) oet$j
0 r;:::: c r; c
SdU[Q m~~:l':::t:l~Jm;)p ;~p-- Q OC'
2:0 ::x>t:
C o :) o C'OC' C' o CG:)OC"
c-
(J) GBd'):J)~~m m:~QoxpgQ G~')::;Qtco:>e; 3d~:o:><>p~0:?2~0o:>f:
&;C
J
coc-
GIJ?cClC II
'T' 0 \ ooc c ~ c 'T' '1 c ~ \ c L
3dGOI 060S,CC'I,S m:;;lm-:>:::;;GOI
(.l)~Bd -,J:D
c:J
LJt.:.6t.L-fl
G:JIXOI~(I)i(J)
ti
r. \ or c C: c c r,: c c r;:::: c
. oxp:~;;o.l_9c!!_Cf:x>e;::Dtjt:;, cy-:>:~c:Gepc~l
(J) Gm-:>:-h~:m
I!
~m~o:>~
dl . .~ 6 m~:m:n?:IU~
t. ut::n o:>~r;G:x>-:>
t1 Q0~:o:;~'il:
It Ut
O<:: o C" C C" C o C C
0:>~1
ot
co:o:>~:02::D')'~')
l J
o:>:n:;;o:>J.>~'.JJ?0):'Y.> o:rocm-:>Groro
] 6 ~
c o c
co:n;;o r c~ c ~ o o c c c
c::x>-:>'~0Cif QJc:ro:J :m-:>lCD:O) rom.s-:>mlco:>::x>:x>
o
6 t. t.:l :"'1 lJ U. t oL l T Uo l C.!,
c c oc \ c . ,'il 0 _<: 0 <: c .
e~G83dro?; o:>e;o:>~1C~GO)') QJC:CI?,_gdl:o-_-ic;n cxt:o:>~:>:020:)')
C')\ c 0 0 <: G CC:. co c
(,l(.J)::J.)UIJ.)(\)I(J)
L U
ffi;,):U
Jl L
CO::D:'
L
Y .>G::Do:>2:o:>:'
C
l">:Cll C0(J)60Qj(J)::>.;Q
o l U -,
roro.s?~
oc ~ oc c
;;o: o:>:x>:x>~? ~-:>:o:>c:G
, [c
m-:>c:
l T L I:.:.J ; (.)
O?c~~~ll
~ c 'T' c ~ c r;::c c c o
2JI8::l'ft~C GUI C\.2CG::D? 3dG~~pc:l::lc:'P~S ::DmG::DQQJ())(,)J?gffi91
o o C'OC" o 09 o 0(" OC' C' OC' CO
mJ?._QJ.>~:OJ G:n::pn ffi~OJO)q>::\{2:'D::D'fg3dC:l~C G-f<XtCCDJ~iG::D?
e oc c c c o r;c ~ o ,.-. c r;:;c c o r,: c c c:.
e;;: ~ :n.p:9:::f~ ::o-:>1cm:-q t:lf9J9 ~Gig?:::: t:l0:x>e;~ G9,?'J::DtlS <;c:en
:mn?t>-;'DD c c r <: 'T' o c c oc~
JJ?:!~::; ~:..n::>:GOJI (1)(,)1 o:>.S:x>:m?: S go:>?:m .SCI GOJC::x>c:
'1 c c
JLJ W" LJl Tt..-.. L T.:f
.o ( l . h ) r,;:c- cr;c-
at'[ .. RestttutlOn of COnJuga ng ts cl~::D~~p sc:<:JJ:x>?:Co:>CX{_
c _<:. c 0
~<: ~ c c 0 ( ) J,'.J: ~ c 'T' c c
t~r9J CD:nG'IJ:U'J~~ custody of the child tl""Gt::j?c: Gol ~co:>~~
cc
:co::; c
CO);;x)::D:'l">
lt. c II
o or,;:c c co<: c c c g oc c ( )
<X[:l?,_tj0cqJC m<-;10Joo'P:Q G<,l-:>:::1c::o~ <ic:~e;;: (,l:xJt~9::::m-:>: J
o r>C C C C ~ \ 0 C: C . 0 G o OC .
mm:~m~0
-- -l- L:J
m~:ncco:x>-:nc:c;:n
Jl ll u. A cl, . 0609~'::
4) L TJ
ffi(.l)Q:UCOg(l)
ll -- T '
e:0::o.s:m?:
T .
c _<: e oc c c <: c:. o ~c c c e
"9c:c:net: g~r:9c.~2::! c;:::~ro~ t:lfg~?Gm?c G~:G;;o?c~?~Gm '?ce:!
'r;::c- ~ c . r,;:c o r,;:c .c <:' o c r,;:c r;::;: c .
tlc: DI.~G;;~mGftl::; qm~:0Jmt10 co~~c:~~9t _t}0Gu-::;c:
:G~T~Go:x>~ II
' 0 C OC 0 <: o o C OC C C ..C:. _ G
.
m:;~n;;oo:n::x>:n
... l a mooc:;;oro1c
.
L L :u
mmQmm:Q
. IL ~- T Gg?cOJco:>.:ncc:c:nes:
l c 1 r
oc c c .<:. o ~c c c o c cr;::c ~oc c .c
-~:x>r:'l-:: ~c:c:nco~ tlrro-:>Gm?c -~~q;gJ G;;ox~rotlc: DL~cge:! g~oo
. . o . 0 G o OC . C _<: G . <: c:. o 0 ~C . c
~~J !1 ffiU[OJO)'P:'X?_ e:0::n;;:m <JS:c;!ef:m-:n <JC:<:liOOJ?L tjf'~')~'Jf
~ o c c c c:. e c o ~c o . -~c o c c r;c- o
ct:P~::qJcro~: c;c:<:JJe;;:ro c;c:co~ t:lr'X?.ro t:lfGo:x>~(,l~l <:>t:Jrotro
f,~ OC 0 C C G OC C 0 C OC C C 0 t:;:;:: -c
.:Gf~ J.{C: GfGO ::Dd.g~ 112:0::D-f:ro~~~(,)JO)OO~Cg~ ~900GQJ ll'?t_Gel ?<?
"1"~' (" 0 (" (" 0 (" (" (" c Q 0 (" ('
oeS:J GOI C:j~O)~~~: GQ'JCotC:D2 '1c:~e;;: IJ:Df':9C3d'J:
OOU?too:>ep~<;>
SJ~:n:noo
c- '" ~
c- c- ' oc- ~ c- o <: x:
co:n:nc:~<;O c: 9.s ruoooc;;
c- Gm:>c:~?GOI
C' c-
'T'roc:n:nc-
0 0(" ;-.C.:, UAAl LT l 6 A c 11
214>:Df: oc- ' c- c ( ::>) CI)()C(X):())C
c c 3d<D::;)Cf)CJ):QG~nCO!ffi
o c- c
<: ~:.s:~ ~::::
l A J .
~W?C~I
Q
~, I. A tl---L~
SdillO!OXO:ro
n. --T -L
'to<:
~~'X:<tCtl
0~ ' (" (' ~(" ('~ ')C" (" (" ( f
Q::u;;:~. ~:>: '1c:~::; C:jfro~:!l GOJc::nc:9;; SUit tor restttutlon o
conjugal rights\~~:n~u
(" ('~ (' (" (' ( ) Q (' (' (' 0 ('
o:l<'fl GW?C~<.O~q ()<Y.>JCI j ~9ccxt:~cro2:1 ::OU?tO!OO'f':C\z GQ'JC
~C" C"~C:.G C' C' C"<:~C' C'~ ')C C"C"(.
~illm '1c:ene;;: ~JroJc:n2 9c:~~t::jfro~~ G01c::nc:9;; sult for
restitution of conjugal.rights) ~~:n~ H
a\& V. G. Venugopal Naidu v . Lakshmi Aroma! and another
G c- c- o c- c- ~c G c:- c- c:-~ c- c- ~ 'l C'
( \') ll'"JC<Xt:~c OJ'f':CI.1CQCGill'J('))J ?:OXJC:C';IIC'f:o:>29 c:~S,t:Joyro2~GOJC:
s
<: <: ' o C' 'l C' c:. G o ( ) r,;:c c:- c- ' o~
:n~:9;> ~oq:n2iro0111 CJC:~'ef:<i.{ ::> m'f?:Ols:lt'l~ ooa~c:~oq:Jll
G r,;:c:- _C C" C" C Q C"[.:C" 0 ~c:- C" C" C" c:-~
C'f:ti~~<:U O':>Ol~~'J: CJ::<:JO)IJ: C\JCti4)~(X)~ t:JfC\J'J9f'~S, OOJ:DO)SJ
(" 0 ~('~(" ~ c:- ( ) (' (" _c;:
~J2~~ ro?:~::~4>oct~J0t9 for InJUnction order 00~ 1 9c:c:t
<: o r,;:c c- c- ' occ- ~ c- o c:-
o:><;>COO'J: qro<.XXJXP:O!OOtlt> co~~:~oqBc:Dl:n~CJt G9,?9:D~II
!;; (" 'T'~' Q c:- (" 0 c (" !(; ('
g)JOOI tf~O)~ 4>9C<Xt:Qp:tr.91 ~QOJ'f?:OI GQ:>CotC:D~ g)j0011_~
c- _C:. G oc:- c- o ( ) r,;: C' c:- c:- ' o ~ o o
9c:<:~e;;: ~J:n;;:9c~ ::> oxp:;;,SJtl~ oo2i~c:~oq::D1 roO(ooxp:rol
G 0 C" ( C" _C Q ~C' C" c- C~S f.: \ '") 0
e=q)::cf:~:>: qc:c::JC'f: tffC\J'J9'fi G~O~~mt:J"':Di'?C9JC qtTJOJOJCP:~
cc c (" ' 0 (" 0 C' ~ (" 'l' c (' 0 ("
00(9~ OO~~:~~f "{~Gt:jJC: GOI o:;;;:nf!!Y? ~9G00211
o 'I c-oc- _c: c- <: c _c:o c- oc- c-
<Xt10JOI:I ~~;;,oxp:Ol G~J? :otcca :D'J:Cill::U~ <f:eK~~ 1J:Df9C
c- o o c- C' o or,;:c c- c- .c. <: o o o o ~ C'
C0;6 5)GtGO:l.:l"!IJ~I <Xl,0;{tJ~'9JC CJC:c:J:D'J:Cill<i.{e''f:OJ':f 90?tO{G:))'JGt:j'J~

( Guardtans and Wards Act ) eoGn~n(J
c- 9 ( ~}
.\ ( ro) 0091 G c-oc:- c
~'JC<{c~q
0 c:- ( OC" r.:,!? ) C" \ O~C' ~ 0 c:- C"
m"Jm:>5Jo:>~<iJ: 01~cro'P:~J ro'P:O?te1:'il: ~c~:;qtjc: rr..'JGO<X~ IJ211
\ _0 ~Joo:>:GO!'T'
<.l:>O!.m::o 0 c:- 19'"
t ro~JI m.s:n:m:>: c ~Jill'J:m:>:
'".sro::l."'GOtc:::oc:cq'=>
(" 'lC" (" 0
~ I. 0 LJL TC ~ T ~ '-JL 0 .
f _1f h ) [.:C" c:- c:- C" \ O~C" 0

( Rest1tut10n o conJuga~~ rtg ts ti4>G:D'J3d11_qc co~~c:~ooloc:n:t
'=>~~&G;::,&: ~~'It (JoTcqc;;o:n~u .
C"
Qlc:roG
U . n.
0
:ro
t.
&
co:ro~J:~:>ro'J
L [i
C' C" C'
ro.s:n:ro"J:
TC.:.
'"c
o
C
Qlcgro~J :en<:~
IJ n. ot
& O_C: GGroco:o o
o o
1.
OOC"~aC"C" o o . o C"c:- C"
0001
,
OOQ.mrom.S?Cl
JL L L . T ;'I
ro:I. OJCI.S(J'J
IT J
CO:DG:x>:>
L L
co:o:>~J:4>2C\J'J:D:D
t. G
eoGn
(' ('0 (' ' <: .
( ::> ) 'J ~ ~fl')C ~ll tl'l~ '( .I ~?~Jo:>~? <j~::> II
<: ('9 <: ' <:
(J) 'JfCJtfO'f~: I a:xT.>6 OO':>I.IJo:>~? <j?O 11
<: ' ('
f
( ) WO'JO ~~ :){!C?WJo:>f> ?(!JII .
BURMA LAW REPORTS 559~
o o C OC" C'
G';l(.))Qaxn:Q G(;l')CQC:::D:D
lL -- ..- t G
(Guardians and Wards Act) eo~SSd'JI

r;;: ('
~ (' (' 0..;; -rr,; 0 ('
t:JIDGel:>C: COOI:ISJ G<.91 (jt:qGO:::D~II
(::>)
(J)
n (2cc<P,..,l~bePw wet') h>:cPec:oboPw~h.> ll:)roee :::>ro:de:&wcroe>
.:> .:>...J.:> o oo o .:> o .:> Yo oo .:> .:>
~:~~ S2a:::de~cd~cs Jbro:decb:5~:1cle>a.~ro S2cc~~_L')e>
11 C2ccwb:c:oMe~ftro
":.. .:> .:> 0 .:> .)0
~bc:o~Pe cde:::>bo
.:> .) .:>
~~~b:oee>
.:> & .:> .)
~cdnh>:c rew Pea: ca.; e> CCC e>
~.:> 0 .:> .:>
:hl~cccc
61, h>&cturee>
00
~~cro~
.) 0
(C)
s~t!Odmi M.v1 vw~ng

J965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 561
1:
roeooo~o:>~CJ
l IL JL
oxp:~3:;;mJ G!l,~(.))? Gl}_,gG'<J~ G~o#
Q
e:~~ 0 I
0 (" ')
r (
Sd~~O)'f>:9_'=>JJ:
0 0 )
t oeti:l
g._.:" ('
J GloiCI:Ijj 9m11
~ (" c ~c 0 c0 (Sd~~m'f>:Q
0) *
t12GOO')C~e:l'f'=>')~CC
cpeo~Gt:j?Cf
~ r- ~ 0 ~
a>cp141<JCG'II-3)~<Jft:j?Cr:CJI~
. s ~r- C'.!f.~
~G()J 0)?
" .... ~
4141G;a:II'JGo:l?~~
,ll
I.I<Jl:-spi!':O>t:jl t{31.1
~r.:::! ~ r.A "C:: ~ (' .... (' C! ~
?"'7-:IJO)c:JO')'JfG~I Gro?c:lp!OCIII
o ~ r~ "" o c c- 'T' '1"

:Jd0.,1;;!00'{'1~J?It:Q?I G~X0Ct:jl9?~ ~?o:l?174>elfl{ O~CSj 'iiCI G~G~I OJ')(.\)
(.' c-r,: (' (' .... (.' (' (.'~ ~ c ~
e'lc:>?G~ro :I)O')tiO'XjfG~I G..O?C~?Io:l~O::, G9_?~ro? '{'I!':I)O')t:j:<p~ \'1!19 ~')GOO?C 0
~ ('0 (' (' . 0(" (' ('

$(1) j ~t)G>O)J~GC')f Gt:Q?ro'JIO)t:Qc.I~~J~o:l~ll
.C:: ~ " S ~r-~r'vfL~ ~ .,. c- ~ ~ o
~"c:JO>~JOO II lla)~df t:j ~CJ~~ ~GO I 0)?00G;;()I'JGo:l?~J?I5 ~foxp:~
0
=J~?
....~ 9 ~ < 0 ~ ~ (' ~
G()l"'f"'"':!J C')C~IijOO')f ~~~:~11 :I)O)Go:l~OO?O)t:Q00?19J?I
c:: ('
C'
OC'
Gro?C I'<J.SC?~C(.\)~
C' C''
t:Q~.JC>~Qo:l~u?:
~
C~O) I ft i(.\).S~
~\
0)~(1.)
C' .
ro: OOC\:IIC
C' C' C'
g,sm.s
C'
614 C. &. J 6 6 l iL A c.ltl 4l C.:. &. L JJ JT--~T
. CY.>'f?IGOCI:I"!'<Jtt: II
o~ ~S: Q
OOeiOOGOO::lO)~GCJ?tC.
~ r;: C' ~
t:ji~?IGo:l?tJC~fl{
r;:e 0
ll "'C
O)J ~~~t:jo:>~Of
<'
0 ~ ~(' C' 0 (' ("

G~ro? t:jiG(.\)IGO-:>?~C:j()!l(8)0)l GOI')f~OOG~JII
e <" <' o r;:e e ~ 'T' c-
~G:~t:Q~Jro~p:~'l ~O)O')'{'I~J-:>1 CJ()iO)JI[I~:a~ I}GOI "iC
""J;:, C' C' OC' r: C'
~ oxp:c;~(J);,It~J~:ll~ll
0 0 (' 0 ~ Q (' 0
m~~O)~I~I.IJ?I!OlC'I)II 110~?~ ~~~f~: e:~y:~ll
0 ('
m~~o:>sp:~!~CT.> II II
(' "l<' (' (' IIgj840)00

:'l.
. ~
rom::
~ u
c~c
E3 :~llO
u G!JIOOOO?
c
.
c
.Gioi?CGW?C Q
., C'"l ,~ cr;;:cA;
~ 4
~ .
.
r aJ
r;;: t:
QQ') 84
Ge~:>~:~c:'P ro;o:n:::r.>2:':f ~orro~ : ~e~::u2t:::l~91 84~e~:>:p ~:tim

C'C' C' 0 . . 'T' (' \ ~ 0 Q
84WO> m::n::o<JI?.: 84~01 roc .oa>: 1 smw 84oo:rocn::n :ro
@
. 3
Q.s ~::u:n n
IT C::. IL L l Q . l> ~ L L IL T IL
C \ 0 C C' C'~ Q OC' C' C Q C' 0 0
G]l:I.>JC 'lS"P~~CI ~~?:;ose~:~p~ e:~yOy:;q e:or:a;> ~p~~ro:>:
o~fiJ ~;~I ~OG~To19ro e 9c&t~& . ::uoS~t GO>T;;;~.,~~:>:::u2
oeti:l ~~$ ~~~~ e<i~ e~u
--
.: ~ ('~ c-. ~ ~ . .. c (" .... '\0
t oe~9 ~tCJ <pe()(Y,)e:JI~~OO ~ ~ ~J~G:? oe~j ~fCI G<JG()J_OI'JCI>
(.' \ 'l ' ~ 0 ~ .C: 0<.' 0 .
Q 'JroG.SCOII ()~I I 30000~00:ooco;o;> l~t:QI}.Ii(7)~00~'-JII
C }. 6 U. L 1., IL 11 -r . Jt ,L tt, , A
40
SJ..CI:Od.ffil M.Y1 vmns: Z9S
, ,m:cccto~berecoco
. v ,.rca.:
.,
co ~owe. }~coe.aco
, . , ~ 1 gl:ce "' J_ ,.
~cccoce
0 .) "'.) .) \0 .) 0 \ 0 .) 0 .) 00 .) 0
v
'"'"J lf
ucccetos-ft f'"'"J .,
cftecceerecoco 1'"") ., ..
meccere:::>coro .:f>J~, (I
c. ~C()CC:C.t~::>e ,
ccore
<>
11
.)
:s-m~e:
l-.)
2 cococcr.~
.) \o .> .
r,,.,
:reroco
.)
':']
'
11 ecce toe
c.ccco~
e
r111
. '
r n1
.>
.
:rero C('):C,I(')ce:e.o
o
.> .>o e .> o o .) l- .) .) o .>

li:!&tu:..o~<:P:2 @ce:toft ccdooea<Des. ::>eCO CO':Q II @ce:c.EO]c'~lb
~' o .) . )0 e .) o e:::J .) \o.) . .) .) __, ~
~b~~b~h~ lk@o ohl::c.Q~cJ.Rol~co coPe:::>tncofe c.ce~:Q:bees @ce
e.:! . .)
11
0
.. 0
,
.) ::.:1 .) ::::3 .) ::.:1.)

.)
r:l 1
.) .)
1~s-~a~ice~a.:ce
i Ll
:0
.)
eCO(')
\ 3 ce~:Dce co:::>le~fte.GCOre ~ C.Wi~CO II :~c.
.) 0 .) 1., .)0 .) .) __, 0 .) .)...J .)
CCC~
:Q:b~w a:!ceocooc.M>h> oltch.:C2cee:..cooto IG ~~~h:@e.es~:2 e:cbco

~ .) .) .> o .) .o .> ' .) .>o ~w. o .> ~- e
c
co:::>1e~~rococe
.)I., .)O .)
co:toft
o
. :Xcco.-ft
.) .) .
~~coa.:d~
.)
:bleRi::>Pees
&J.)::.:J.)
n:::;c.h-1~.
.) ::::J
11 r 1 J... 1 1 r'::l ~ -
eco(')X~:Oce(')COXC\J:oxo
\ . .) .) 0
CO::>CDOC(')~CO
0 .) .) 0
:::>1e~ftroC\",()3
.)I., .)0 .)
Cft<.\,;ce
.)
:X.0
.) .
... l'"l lV ']
c.ucc:s-co:c '"") 1 V 11
ueccerewc:o ;ecro .ow 1mcce ft s-owe co:JeCOI(')c.tecft
.'""") ~11
If 1 '""") 11. ...1 .
o '.> e .J O.> l- .) .J .>O .J .) 0.)
.r
o~g:cte>'XJ:co:o
n 1 _1 _ 1!
ecoro ~
Heccerea.:oo. .::; cce -:-J . 1 v
:~c.
]~:S"CD:)CD
l 1 ~
t; ~~~
.) 0 . .) .) 0 .) . .) . \ .) .)0 ..J..,
toe2ftw~;2
e
c oo w2e:~cooto wCb~~c.ec co:)CD::>C(')~:2 :o1ee>fle.scr.re
e
o .:> Y
t:::>c } . ecroxc.co~
o
r
.J
11
.J .JO
cece(')ecftro:c ro'""")
.:>
~
o~:c
.J
r ..,
.J
J.. ---11
c1 1o:::o::<:..CJecoes ':']
11 ecce
.:> t.. .:>o .)
.J .> o .> . .:> e o .:>

v. 1 -:-J v v -:-J 1 rt . ( -' ) 1
b::J)e> o .:>
1
coecec;ccorewco
o .J ceeccoco
e .:> o
L
o<gcoaro~::xJ
.:> o .:> Y .:>
-:::1
ecce
.:>
\.: oro. :ccft
o
~~~ft~o::oo:de> c.ccc.d:cS.~
.:> .)O 0
cc::>coftm<.U OIL'OOOCD ~ ~~~ 1wecf)es~:o

1 I If'""") o ~~ 1
o
OS"~ .:>O ..L o .:> Y .:> .) e .:> .:> oo
n , -:-J 1 1 ! __ 1 1 tb
'.'J
IHe~coCD~ecceoce so :ro~soo cc:S"WOCD :occesecceso(') o1roreecceo::~
1! 11" , ':::1 v
.:> .) .) .:> .) 0 .:> .:>0 .:>0 .:> .) .:> 0 .:> .)
c.oPeoto
.)
IGwcb~:cec &ck5b
.:> 0 ~ .:> 0- \
1:C2rocce~h.:
.) .) 0 er.::J 0 CoC2cetoaRS.~es
w:Qt.Gh.> .:> 1., _;,;:j.)
c.f,:ofJe<li3eB oro:&:h.:ccd~ II @cc:IO<PR cce:dft:::>Qchl~~ Jbwc.Qe>

.;,:::Jo.) .:> o o .) .:> I.,' .:>::.:J .:>:::J ~ \ ~ .:> :::3
r 1 n v r n ,
'"'"J ~ 1 '1'J ,_'J 1 t< _.., , '"'"J L !'
CftCDWieWco
o .) .:>
O~WieOCD CO::>eCO II ecce S'ec Wcc:soco;c CDeccetOIXO~
.> .:> .)O . .:> .J .:> o .:> e .:> 1..
:@rohJ@ce:c.cohl~ toC2tc10bce toCCCCOe>
.:> 0 .) ::.:1 .:> "' 0 .:> .
rC :te&J browrechl~:tcft
.:> 0~
~%
0 .
e1ees ccee>:ree><te:cbco tuce~ct.Jce u@ce
.:>'-' .:> ~ ..J.., .:> .)~ .:>
':")
0 .)
v. 1 ':'] 1 1 :-::~ <:> 1 1 r 1 '] r
robroe>
l-
c.cecoecce:cco
o .:>
:s-co::>co :; eccc0
..) .:>O .:> .J
ecce~cce te~
..) ..L
wcoro:S"o:c
o o .:> e
o~
.J
2 -:-J n 1 'I
1 1 -:-J ,, -:-J , ., .1.,.
:S>o~e: ecce:c1ft~reto uwo: ceft oCDtoec~cc.ecft :eco::w:o:ft ::ccmce
~11 ':")
.:> .>o e .J o
':'] b 1 co:coft
11 ecce c.uroo
1
.) o o
r ':']
t; .:>
ft~ 11 eccecrococco~
rc :rero::>oceccco
.)
, 11 1 1 .:> ewe
..) o o
_,_ . ~
.:> ..)0.:> 0 .:> .:> 0 .) 0 \ 0 .:>'

eLuo~ c.oPe:o~:oroce e.cx:io edc5b~rccg~ :::(o~~cob Cc robto t~en~
.>
~
1e r.:> :d .:> w: <CC.O
~:~e;c
.:>
1 , :-J
11ecce10C ~
.:>
eJ Gce ~~..:]_ ':-::1 b 1 v.
IX!Jecce ,
\.:>
11 J r
WCCCD~ CO:CDft ce .) e\...w
;::J e o .:> L- .J .:> o . o .J

:-J ~11
u1cee>:ecro ':']
om eccero bc.uc-ccoe>ot=l
1 tlo ~ 1 p 1 11
c.o:cre~:rero
1 1
::>cocow::;;oL
IIIOC~fl
6~ .:> .:> 1., .) 0 .) 0 0 .:>0 .:> 0 .:> 1,
:oc.Q~e>cof, IG&lro@ft'&:@e> w1-esto:8~ 11C2CC1oh.:wto l:DC2ceco<bec<X!

.) ::::3 0.) ~ 1.,.) . .) .:> .:> .) "'0 .:> .)
01
~e;c
' ] ~~ , '] r
c rcocoft:c"'
1 11 V 1
:rero
0
11 1 Q
::>cocoa.:rerea.:co woeco
'"'"J bOo.:> 1 ':']
ueccc1o co~ a.:ecce
.:> .:>
e e o .:> o.:> O.) .J :;, l- o.:>
:ccoh.:wro fGeoW ::>&>@ceeeaaro co:ci't,\;Cbesb @ccce~wccl[l) e:crB
0 .:> ~\ \ .:> .:> \ .:> 0 \ .:> .) ~ .:>
9S S~1IOdffii M.Y1 YW)l[)g

SL1IO&I'd M.V1 VW1IOH t95
1965j BURMA LAW REPORTS 565
C' 0 C' C' 0 ~C' ~ 'Y' r,~. oe~j
q(ttJ
~ T.>~~~ If
')C'
SJQI~
C'
U:>QCO)O)OO! :1 GU:>'XT.>
~ T.>G~:T.?_
0 , C'
CjfC0~9JGQI
C'OC' ') C'Q 0 ~ ') Q C'
(I):T.>~U01CO'=l!CO!C\ 81 :"l!o.s:ro
<OU'=l OVGOO:G~')
OC'
8d'=lO)'J!())
~,.
Q 0 ('
. --.
'I
c:J ti.L\ l::"l C.TJ
J
J
2:G>~ 01 ?
~ [ C' C' 0\ ') C' 0 C' C' C' ') C' C' "('
G~: (I)')G 'JC: CO:T.>OOQUI~~II ~CO(J)C g())O)'=lg.soll G ')())~ C
('. ~<: ('
. 6 l o C L -L 6 t. JT . o
C'O')
CO:T.>GOOI~~a:>
C' 'Y'
G81 (I)GQO) :;n~xn n
0 C' r.:
tj~t;CO')C~
6 L C.l JAIl C. ~C' OC
aoc . c <"r,;:c c . o C' c c <"r,;:<" C' oc~ . I::Jfi<I?~CCII
2~4>"~~:~c roJ'=~!t}S rooo~3 <JC!~~ m:;>c:t}o~~G~m <zroeJ:
C' c.. C' 0 (' (' ('~ '1 (' . ('
Q::;Grn~!c. COU~'):gpu~ coGf<"X[f CO'=lC!QJm9J G~!Gfom211 m~!S
C' O
Y::x>::x>'=ll
C.:. oL JJ
C' C' ')
'=l()J)~T.>O:.>III
-1
~r.?~j
!.;.
C C' C'
Q~O:DC
I.J 1:1.
~
11.
g: ~C'
l
CGO!~
til
~

OC' \
OO~CQQ(.Y)Q
L -~ o J -r
't:U') ('
~
<"\C' 0 (' 0 C' (' "
SJ::>i))')J)::O')!~ g::xx:mO:>t> c: ~~~II ())(I)G'=l')C()) ())QCXU.S~C
.
GJtc:~~:;o
') C'
.c
C' 0@
t
: cc:m
t
-- T
C'
~
ll
6
g 6
:roG.s~c
T 1
C' C'
C..
'"I~:G~.scoo::ccoooc:~
1 T t ~ L
L J
C' OC' C'
r
C'
L
0
-1 I l lT J o
C' 0
oo:u:n:o1
~ ll
''l
C' C'OC' C' 0 C' C' ~ C'Q Q 0 C' \ 0 C'

~~~~ GtJ:T.>~c:3 ~O)lGY'JC~~ Gtl<.DJG())~O)~ <JC!())GO~~~CJ?
o oc c r,;: <" c c c a <" <"r;:<" '1 <" a OC' c
<;qm'J .<J.iCCOf:~tjS, CJC:~~ G'=l!OO:QJ[UGf'JC~C: Q9~:om~11 ero;;o;;z
C' C' . C' . C' C ') G C' C' C'~ C' ') C' G OC' C' C'
1iC.<JC:~~ Y~coC.Ulll e:o;;:O)lfSGCO? o:><:;tjCOUI~~Il e:ofof:~~
C' C' C' ')C' C' 0 C C' C' C' 0 C' OC' C'
m9c~J.p~c Gorc:~~m oom'J ~el.'lo Q~om oocouq{qc:m o:cmp
ll LC' J C' O l (' l Q O (' . ~J (' . L C' L
::n:u1~.:nm comoou1~:nu
0
:1:o'=lm cc:c:1i 8d<.DQCO'J:DC Gr,:U:>
1!. CL C.o I 6
IL.A6 l c:1
C:,
C'G G cc . a <" c 'Y' . .<:: <"-c~ o <" oc
G())?'do:>OC 0~ :"l:COGY'JC~~1 G81 (I)GC\~GY'JC 0~ ())(I)GY')C()) mmc
ILC J C. J.iil LJ L
OC' C<" 'Y' C' C' C' C' C'') C' C 0
Q :;:.:o:.gc G81 O)GQJ.> U:>QC
...:Jo J.Al
~OG())I'):T.>
tJ
j Y~o:>Y:DOI
C".a.C:.
O):JJ::l)'J!Y.S!
JT
Y~
L
OOC' C' C' 0 C'
G~'J ())0.S'J~:~c mu.s:CIXDeJI 8d'=l0)
J
0 _<;:. 0 ('.SGGI ())')
'Y' C'
CC~C
C'
A
C' _<;.
CC!c;)l~')!
l T I J o l T J L Jl l T I. J o -J
C' C' (' (' (' C' 0 'Y' C'.\ C' C' ') C'
00::0.S!G8d'JC~C GY'JCQIOGY'JCCOOOGUI yo;ro: 000 C!Y') COCC\'):UI~:Dil
J 6 T J U oL T.. 6 ~ J Jl C
'Y' _c:. C' . C' C' 0 };. <"r;:"(' C' C' (' C' 0
G81 or~~ ~:D~J())~~ Sdell:a>J:~ ~m~c:Y~II ~OJ(I)U~')SJ~op<"'q
OO:T.> c:
1>
(' C' ('0~:'11())

. C'
c; L
U~')C\
C. }I
0
m:x>:mro:~
IL "T
B
IL
:m
.
C'
L
C'
~!O)UGOG.S
T
('
CO'J!~:DY"')
C. J
. C'') C' C' C' 0 0. ~ Q C' 0
t,)'J:o:>c:ur~~m OOU:>Qro'J coc ro~u O~'Jo .m~:CJGC\G.s : :1:co.s:~
J
ro::o:n: '=II())
6
('
C.:.
.
U
C
l
. ('C' . . C'
tl
C~:T.>G~ ~OD!o:>
. J [, L
.
.A
C'Q ~
l
C.:,
Go:>'J
C.:. . JI
GY'JCOJ
C'
l
g ('
l l
:~C
J o
6]1-T
ga;:O>
0
l
t:, 6T C-L
0
L
<:
CC())
6
0
O:OQI.:"D:nm y .
(' 0 0 -~ c
:n CO:J.>YQW
(' ('@
o<.D :core
C' 'l' _<:. ('
:Gsr roGo~ OO:J.>Qirom~'l
C' 0
L If ~ l l C. L JJ J .AI 6 U L
ill
C' 0
~:n'J: T.>:~
OOU:>Qmro:ro
'Y' "(' ('
:1 :1!mGUI COC OYCOCC\')3
0 Q C' 0
GO")QCO'): c:
C'
l L..:. l . 1t. ! L L \ [, o A Jl 06]
r;::c
C' OC' oO C'
0 ') C' C'J;":
o:>~ ~c :qo:n:;>J9~c: Y~UI:Jt coed~~~~
G o <" cr,: c c o c~ c ( r,; ) _c:.
e~0"1.0) COCt:JGO)') o:>:T.>Go:>YJ':>:m;;m <zroeJ~ QCGOO! Qt:::f~O ~
c c c : cc;:c c .QOC' c c c, c . c c
~ DQJ J.> ~C 8dQlC:jjOo:>~~:T.> e:o~~~ 'lC!fS ')GOJ~p:m::>: G~'JCUC
~ c c cr,: c ~ r,:;:: c . c c r,:n ~ <"
L:2:~p3 COOC:QJ())DtC09JG~:G~'JC!I ~f_OJ:T.>~C~ . ~'.XJtlf~Gtj'JCl)
C' C' ~ C' C' C'\ C' . ('~
. :.G,P:T.>~~c - ~J.'~O;(m~dl ~~m~c oc~Ol"J:o:>~CJ? o:>roc:t:j'J:'l.
.6 x::
G
C' . r.: C'
o::n~::: comaoco'J:~:n II
(' 0 .C'
o')oo.s:coomcoc
Q. 0 C' C'
mctc~osYI-:>:
C' C' 0
0010:1ro
C'
U o 6 L C AI T l 6 . - I tL. LT IJ l t:,
0 r,:;:~ 0 . C' C' (' C' (' 0 C' C'
1JGret9J m'l:9m G~:T.>OCcqJC ~<{;;m . G.pmm:x,rm ro~:')~UQJtUG'):
u~of.aore
.>:::J.>
ll:.u:Jh_,ti'!CS .:>:h'J&rcbco
:)--o.::J O~CO~e .>OJ
olblroc~~
. .;) IO~hco b ('C OOCCC~CS~
S'.>'!lo.>o
n L -::1
IG~e ::>l:lllC
.J ;:)
GCC~COAICOCO
.>
r n "
.J
(
.> .> .>o
A ) r
C COI'!CC t)OO::
.)
Y
.)
r
.)
r '
t...'\ .>
____ 1_ n
o.>
L -::1 f
ooo;>CO i GO:e Ol:lllC
.) .) ;)
II (e) Cllc .)~~oooohl~-

.) .>!.1..>
I.)e'fb b~:~llc ....
;) . ..,.,.
, n 11 .-:~ 11 ~ ~ 1111 ,;v~ ~

CO!CiftCC CCft<CeOO CO! <:eft ICCCCIO!CCCCCCOOCC~ :ceft::CC6:eG ICCCC
o . .> .> .J o .J l.. .J o o .>" - .>
~:cecc.olucco~ co;~ c~:~-1af C2cctc~ 1o~ec~G:2 okccc~~acd ~ f
:::1 .J o :::J :::J .> o ' l.. .> .>o e .J e.J .>
c.ob~rro:2 ~be :ca:x:ccfro~ll II oC.<'I~OC.ft~ c.c.oc.o1G~ olre:h.'I&:Cbc.o,
.:> .> e .> .> .> . .>I, .> &.::1
ut2:~&:2 : ~~~~~b:~w
o .J e ~ o
oc.o:~&:2u llco&>ec&:be:ccoc.oc.rcob~booeohl:
.> .J e .> .> .> .:> . .:>~
11 (r) ()e>b::2e u uco~ec'l!c:c.coc.cc.Jh,~46;,ceohl

.:> .:> .:> .:> ..:>~
nC2ccr~~@bwtb-----
.> .> .> . o o
..-bC CCII ~ 1ec:;, .>~cbw~ob~
1cctlc 1cec 1..,o .)
o~ 4ecwl;
.> .)
11 ooo CCII :kcro 0fllc rcec 1oh: 1ec~ ,..,chco~ob~ o~ :o~S.oecc

. 0 .>o :> .> .l .> .>
110oC c. G (fl)oc-10oc) udA:&>~bcKahlcA4b:lcoc.ec~

~ e.> ~ .>~.>
l:h.l:4ooca~
o::::l .> ., .:o~ b:hec
o
ucocb:I~~GQ
.) ::.1 .>:.:1
bee oo acb:h'Jcocc..,cb
.) ~.)
"ochJ::"J'1:i::
.> . :::::10
ue2cc:dh:o
.) .)
c.~@cc
.)
Ghl:ol:le4~cxx:ecocco~A
.>:l .)::h..J 0 .)
:X.od,cd:occo::'J
.) .) 0
bcc:cr..,coroec
.)
....
~
hlec&cu 11wPec.oc:l:k
.) .) :::l .
11 @cc~ol;:cbco ccOCOAwre~ cb:x.oCe~cbco bee (c.o)

.) .) 0 ;, ;, ' ;, ;, ' ->. 0 ' .
boc Acb:h':lcocc.:x:b
~ o.::l.>
h>&be:cc:oax.16~
0 .)
IICCccbto~cc.bPwro
;, 0 ;, '
::>00:.)ACOA:~ro~
.) ;,
~~wPec.ocbwcco4cce
~.) .) .)
::>OO::>te~
~ ;,t.,;
: .)C2ro&cc::'J ud?ccbh'JC'o~
.) ~
h>C2cc6:-c::"J~:XC@Pco
0.) S"..> .)
W:e~h> u@cch,.Qoccotx:o:e~ccl;od,~ &wPo ccaXo~Po c~OC.CO::'JCC~CC
o o- ..> o ' B ' .)!:);, " ..> , ;, o..>
b
.)
" _o _ .1.
..)
.1..1IC.CCcorocCO~
.)
n:
__ _
b
r
.)
.-,
~
..)
o r
.) '
L _
croax:o :x.cx;oweoo o co~::"J wee e:C.CXXOC.ICO::"J o~oax.cccc.cc.rowcoA<X>Cco~ . ,.
. ..) ..) ..) ..) .:)
~
v , .., ... II' " ,,. 1l
~COt>CO 0 I~ CCCCCDIO:OIO~CC e:CCXXOC.IOO::'J WCO~CCCC~
.) .) o .) o-li ;,t. ;, . .>
ucoc.C~.,1;ol:::lb(G oo .,EJh:h'Jc.occ..,cl,-:ol:l
~ ~ .>!1 .) Ll.) .,)~
:c.oococ~~~oococ:l
.) .) .>:.l .l:c.o~o~:d,oo
S'.) .) .)o&~~!t:cbco
0 '
bm (w) bod ach:h'Jcocc..,cl,
.) LJ.)

(&be:ccowclb:>~4b~re~hl)
:> :> :>
wb~Pw:2
:>~ :> :> e
- ucob r
.> -
::;~
-
~- ro~!> .
.>
c3 ~c- ~ (&:crowclb:>~4b~re~hl)
:> :> :> :>~
~co~coJ..,r s~ :>~~ct2:4m2
:> :> :> e
r:~@:2,
:>c e-
.)
o&~~OC.A~OCAOCCOCOIC~
:J :J .)
olre:h.l&:cbco
.) ll .) O,j
1f
ft::>ce::> ~ COO.o>CG
. J
.) .) .) .
,95 ,- S~~dffil Mv:J NW'Ml~I' [596J

eo!cco~~~ :!rooFroce&1 eo!ccM~ro c.w:oc.hl~:oo:> IG~~oohJeeco
.) .)0.) .) .) .) \.) 0 .) ~.) '5'.> 00
cccoeo~ @cc~~cowlkoh, hJo~~G:2 <X!ccce@Pw bwwPeesto 11C2cc
\ .) .J .J 0 .) O.J 0 0 .J .JO 0 .J .) .) 0 .>
etewbJfS~ooo
\ 0.J ':).,
- .J.~~b
~hl@ccG <X!cctO::>Q:)oo
.J . l.. .):J.J
oltoc.ccfG&,@ccc.ro~:O~eGGWW
.) '5' .)
<.cc~bwoowhJ
. o .J .J o
ctlo::>~:o~~wreoblooo1:o@ccc.ro~ t@ccc.ro-'l::oc.Q~:~a:-
l.. .Jo .J '5' .J:J.> o .> .> .J :J .J
ceC2rw w~ocbce
.) .J
tC2cceoroo
.J \.J
hJ~ocei:>hl
. 0 .) ,:J
c.wwhc.cc~
.J 0
:oeoes&ro~
.)0

ll:occ:koooo
'5'.) .) w:df)wmrowrew
0 .) .J
@cc:~&:dxo
.J 6:1 lk@o
0 '
Jea;c.cc'd~wcb~
l.. 0.)
@ro4hl &,if,a; b::::@d;w@ wd~:hlw~oc.ce~ d:oesto ,@ccecoMe~~es
.:. ,:J , o , , .) e'h .) .>o o , ,, .Jo
:@ro!GC'o G~:ce~oo co:2:2co :~&:cbco:c.!Jes ccc~Mcol,:~&:Cbco
.> '5' .> e .o e:l ~ l.. e:l
CCC~e:ce~GGCO~ turoreroto aXoeG~bG~(; &c~il::~b t@cce1)~hl W~W
\ .J o .J o .J .J o 'S'oo .J \O.J:J o
C.WWbc.CC~CC
.> o
eo@cc
.,
toc!b~b wtowreoblooo
o ..:> o o ..>. .,:J.,
~:~4odx:e
:>.,
C.CC~e:ce~aG
' .,
twc~:hl:Cecc~ o~4G:2 w~es~bo~occ:k c.~~echlbb lh!wcccoo
.J e'J .J .J 0 e .J .J .J 0 .J .J :.::Jo 0 '5' .J .J
~~:oo:>th:cttC2rw 'tc'to ,ca~o~cohf:h: c.~rwco R:!"ftb ~(') t;@ccG:o!Je
.> .> .J o o .J .Jo.> ~ . o 'S'oo o o.> .>~\
:c.w:~bt:..J:Jec.Pro~io~ kur..cwbrw:2 c.ccl,1:c, @cch>eccohl:h::ce~aec~
.) 3'~" l.. .J .) .) 0 6- .J 0 0 .J ~ .)
4w~bb hx:orees~cceec.ro~GQ @rwccc~4&:o c.w:oc.hl~:<"'.ro :hl~~co
", oo o , , o , ~, .) o .) :.::~ , c,'J, o
lueeco
0
coCo~Cc
.) 0
ICCD~CC@Q :"Q~~~w'to @cc@rw CCC~~ftro
..:>~ ~.) 0 .) 0.> 0 .) . .J .) 0
:ces
o~4G:2 w:~&:cbcoo~wG!;.cC2ot@cce:c.rowc.Fro~GOO ':~oceohl tc:&
.> .)06 e.:! .> .:> .:o ., " .> .>.) ., .,:Jo- .
o~wG::>~e~b.Jlrw ~wcctcoro4G:2 &:h:cc~~hlcco4rw~~ <.u~~to
.> .) .JO 0 I) .J 0 .) .)0 6 .> ~ .> 0 .)0 0
. II @ccd:\)COtu ol!);cbcO CCOCO(")Wre~ !C.eG

.) .) 0 .) .) ' .J .) \
wborw:2 ?.>c~~eo,@ccC::cohl:h: eo@ccbM~co~cc~ .b:::m w~w~ccM~
.) .) e .J ::::J o .J '\..) ~ .J .J .J o '$ .J .J \
c.ro:c&:::&:&.> J 4e>~ecbbeccc:coorew:be~
.) .J 0
:ces:'::>b
.J
c.ccw::>~4G:2
. .J .)O 0
&
:eecc~ ~~~:::>!Jeoh>'JIJ:flbe.c :o!JC.rroe>ioe> ~wccwborw:(l,@ocbeGhlccc
o .:>~'.) :J.) .:>~ l.. .:> .> .:> e .> '\.)~
cecoccoe>fl @cc:oiJe:JoG~ etees c.cce>:hl:eee>eG ~es4wes w:dflcc~cccc
.) .) .)~\\.,.)~.)~.. e'J .) .) o .)
hlro:cbco
~0
@cc:Q&::d:xo
.) e.:J
lk@o,@cceh~cobe~
0 .) \ 0 .)
o~:~:~&;:dx:o
0 \ .) e:J .)coooth
wccCbcoc.oh
.) o
,'!&1:;,2Jroc.(')~
w.) o'J .) bes(co)boc flElbcocc"<h
.) .). eo@ccbe:tecce>
.) "
::>Co4G:2
.:>
~~~ob:>!IJ
.>o e :J .> ~
c.~:cw:flb
.)
cotofltc
.) o
tc~H~do~
l..
:cwwborw:2
.:> .) e
II CCCC:c.oc:tecc~ ~~chwcco4cce>b:> @ccoCo4G:2

. ..) .) ~ .) .) 0 .) .) .)0 0
1@ccb&>e>h>@cc4e>rwro o~:<"',cofl~~~(')~hlr,
.) 0.) ".).) .) .:>::3:5"
'reco CbwGco4cce> :Xo:ote~
.) .) .) .)\..
:@ro1ooro4o:2'
.:>
o!nc.coe ,@ccbhJJ"-~
o .) .JO e .:> .:>
w@cc4~~ '5'.)
:::T""' o .)
ll:bcc@r~w:~~h>
.) o o
ncccc~(J)Q ::>c.we>co:ee -~cci;:xh~e.c(c(ol\< cccctof'JPo c~-::;cw~es
.) .)~ .) .:> 0.) o , ~ , .) e .)
~cccrowoo
.) .)
dx.oeeo
.) .:>
wwb::>rw:2
.:> .)
::>booro @ccc.rowd::,
e .) .) .) .)
ocw~Po
.) e
Lees1o t~cclc.ro ~socJ~ccoe>w:dfl&socJe>cco~ c.w:o~:crored,4~
69S
s~1loaffil M v1 wnma Ol.S
o c 'C C' r,;: C' C' C' " C' o r;::: C' C' C'
se~j
<DCJt~a~::n? BD::O~<J? co::5l?:OI:D~I <llGei')~ 'Pe~~y 00 9X}
(.
0 (' (' (' ~(' ~ (' 'l (' \ (' 0 ('
e:mJC9:n~:; tjD~~Gt:J":"DOI~ G:qj?"D::\l:D~I ::P~:~m?:Yp: ~Gf1q
0 OC'
e:2~=
(' (' (' (' c: () c c: c (' (' () ('
~;;lO~;;lOc : 1~ ~9c~m'Pe~~ J ~q ~m?~f1q ~'lc~m'Pe!:nj{ ? 2'' 0

t=ep
en:n
0 0 C'
'J;x>:n.s:o:>,::OIC03:)Cl<JI'):=>
C' <:
Gen?O:T.> rom
0
COC))C
C' C' 0 ('6 C' 0 C' Q ~a~sToo8
-r o Go:>?roro:nene:ro
J
L L _.(AT
<' C' r.: C'
...__
1::::
L Jl.. lJ
g
~
o o C'
l
or.:: c- C'
-L IL
r;::: C' C'
.coc}
on01ro:na:: me~?:~::n2:qco:r;; mp::1XJ 9~e~c:::n~ ooGei-:>c:ooQIJro :;.a
~C'
C' ~ C' 'l C' 1::::<' 0 r,;: C' C' 0 0 ("
Yp:oo9 'P~o:n;t~i~p:n;;:n:> G:>!q:on9~:ro?: 0c:Y~~ ~:t::1enco-:>:::n~ 2DJC9<"11
Q C' 0 ('~ C'
e:~~:~:T.> en::C;j:>:>~ II
g C' C' 'T' C' C' \ 0\ c: 0 <: C'
o;o:>ICO:D::P<;OI
lJ \1 J
en:;
A
Y:O:'I:=>
1t.
():;x}QID2(7) oxo:::o:;nroy
i ;:) A l -~ T L J
:nmG:x>S':)()1.
C' 0
::P:U::roL
en:;COC'\ <:
~CQI:l)"'f)l
l C
D:.l.o1:'Po:>C
<:
l\
<: 0 <: "\~ 9 Q \
roO)()ICI
-.. :'I
e:mQIG:D')

0 C'
y:;o:~cenro
l L J ~
C'rC' C' o" C'f,10<'\ c c o .c: c- o c u oc c
YJ:Y.>.=l :::x>:nq::O~J":O{OI en:;\'j~C~0:>2?1 qc:~~ ~:T.>~OIJ(7)0091 e:~;;~c
\ ('
G::O:;()!QIC:D:D<J')
C' cc
YGen')C)):;D'C1t>G
c c <:
?C:I CC!O'):J.>Ya:>:D:
(' "\
GOIGC\)I')G
0\
QQI
t. . -. l:,:,J t.:l , J C.:. lJ JL Jlo
c C' <: r,~ r"C' c 0 C' 0 C' C'. . C'. <:A;
<.; ;~~p :::I CO::1)?1\'j:3D ::02?1 CO~OOQIJo:>~ ?:0{ IDm~c'J:o:> CO:>Y::l.1:o:>o~ .
o c c c C' _
c C'~c <' o c o<' _o ~C' c- c
CI.1G:Dl:>:>2ttl3:x>2t :;o~ot~::xx;~:~cQIJo:>~ Gen?c:~m? oog~CT.l t1croc9t
Y:OI o <J:l)::;(J)
l
C'
ro: enc8: c

():l):DI
t.
c CO:D
l
B c c.
o o ()ffiCICCI:O:> . <'
QIYO:>G:D? c:,
oc
::P<J.S:l):D
I. t.
c
. - J1 11 tJ J ~ c
cc c c c o c 9 c c cC' _o c- c
W;9DJ;l:lfD<~J?l~~q::;l 2Jq3~':. <jC: qro~:x>~l Y~~YJ ':f?:~:~ro
<'r;:,C' o ~ c r,;:c ~~. c o <' o c C'
GQIJ?l9C:Y5}~ ~'J:o:>:x>~: ~ro::olj~ ~t1'"'00C:CT.l OCOOCI.irr.>:D~ II .
(J) ooo1 4f1oo~(9')r OeJ'l' ro~;~? o~

(?) 0 001 #r oo~(9) oero ~~ j<ill .
11 ::>t:II'JoMco@cottS>c.eeco
.):::J\'J.JO.l .> ~ .)
o~:c.C"::l:
~.) ~
:>c.C"::lew
<lCCei C.OOIC.CC:be ohlc.ccc.c.c orouw-:@4cceCl@cowte(G~CC@" @ccc.eeco
.l ::J .> o l .):J.> L .) .> .> ;,
'9
.l
., ] ]
lri
0
C. :~c.
.,
eW..-!:lOC
~ ,)
1
I'IGOGOOC., : :>
. .) ,)
IOC.~ oro:cceo-~oee!JI)IC.CCLeCOOOft
v .....
\. .)
,, " l l " " "
0 \,) .)
e
ncob,)
rr 60
S.l~Odffil MV1 , VW~ng ZL.S

Gten _1_ 11 h s
1 -~ r 11 n
tG~e:cocoecoro : Wt""'o cos-~ro c.cceco~te:l!a:c.ece> cc:
.:> ..L . e .> .> o .)0 .) .) . .
11
e
_,_
cc:wco
~:Cbco ~&elX.C2o Cb::oelloro
.>o o .)
l.b~:Q&:Cbco ~:Cbcoq~e
o e.::~
,1&12rea:c.rw~
ob . .)
n
ISO.,e:oxoecoes
_,_ __ 11 o' J,
.>0
rnot ll
~
ln 11r
.
os-twe~
.)
WGte
.) . ,J, .
~
.)_
cca.;a::cc~tese.es
.) 0 .) . .) 0 .)
s-cc:a:o
.)
a.;ees
0
c.cce>k~Gre teo e:cbcoe~es t:hl:cee~cG

e1 .) ixm:.Pc=:ccec.c;cc ~cd:o~mc.P~Kc.:Pe
~.)
. o \.) ...t-
wc.co~
.
1
c.ocoororo " ,r
~~ro co:
o
~1! .
.) .
_,_ __
cc:cbco ~:axcms-
o .:>
If ':'"] c.
~c:c.u;o:a.:c.e.se>
1m
.> .)0.) e .>oo o.)
u<2ccreOO:Jhl,()e~ 1:::c.Qe~cdol')
' .) :,jJ.., .) ~ .)
. ,,c..,..,
GGCO.,1g c.cc
.) 0
.. ...., becse>oc'J':":l
~,
~esccccco
.)0.) .)
cccc-c.Gaco
.
~ro oo;cccca e.cca::es
oo .
.) ' .) .)...J.) .) .)
,~cct:Joe.wc.cce~:o~:
tr L 2,a::reccecr.e.s
J_ 11
a.:c.aaco lg ~c.J:::c.1~ro ccce~r.e>
, ,
.> o .:> .:> - eo o o . o .> .
e:Cbcoe&>es
.
t:::c.~;~ft
.) ~ .)
-~b:c.&fb,~a:&>
.) . 'S'l. .)
l,..Lto~blea~:::n~e.s
:_j .) ;:] .) .
li:coPo
~.)
1 1
COC')e.GLC">C:ee.s ...., ,. bn
ccccco:~
~~
:::5ccc n 1
a.;tees-occco 11':":1 . cb
ccce~a;u;~:c:e::: e~ :c.es
~ .)0 10 , .) 0 .) .) 11 0 .) : . ) ' ,o o,. .) , .)
co:ob coblero coe:dxoecoe.s ~R~ccac:J ::::Qec:a:a:c.ree> a.:e.ro ccc~
.)...J.)
0 .) 0 :_j 0 . .,~ .).~\.) .) 0 .)0
kco ooo'1;1
o
be> bescore2&c.cce>cc ~e:Cbcce&ro
:>
o&> tr.~e> .:>.....,.>
a~:::rees
.:>
16 1.:> 1 e1
;:;
:~c. 1oocc~S' Wt">cc:ccs.co
, ,-,
e:e.c.a::ro .>...,
.:> J... ...J
::.!i>,CCa.:a:a:m, 11 L n .- 11
~aa:tecca::c.cce>cc

.:> .:> .> o o .:> .:>o \ o .) o .:> .:> e
_,_ _ _ 11 1 tr "' ~ o n ......, ,. b L:1
~e:cocoecoro we:esco ccc~c::co toe> e>. C!i>;::: tero ccccco:::. 1:~cw1 ~
;) 0 .)0 \ 0.) ,J, .) ...... .) . . .) 0 .) .) .__j
ccot">~rcc~
.)
ea:>fl~
.:>o .)
4brc;e:c.ese:cbcoe&:e.s

IGGQ;hi;oe~ ott:b::c.e.c.ea:e.es
'S'.> ..... e:l .)0
cccc&:~b o.lc@~:4cc IGe> :_~:::co:~cc !Gel IC.CCe:::~:2lx:ctco dx:e.s

.:> o ::r o .> ::::1.:> ...t- .>.) .:> ...t- .)' .) eo
lS
.;~:>pou ;)t[l .Aq p'unoq _<>q in.M
lU\'1U~l ~t110f l<>l{lO <>ql Ul~t{l JO ~UO UO p;)A.l<>S pue SlU\'1U~l
ltf!Of _ <>1{~ ne Ol ~SS~.lppt1 S! ~~nb Ol ;):)~~OU ~t[l U<>'t[M,
-~&:roob0(c)
~ ~ e
olree:l6~c
~ :>
. ,;,:Joo:Jc.c.o~
o,;,
Mooc.oo4c.o},
~ ,;, ,;, o
.
ucccd~re~ tn<2ccohlcccces IC'i~c.cce::f. :C tt:c:hcce&es
~ ' . ~ .:t::.:l~ ..J.. ~ ~ e o
ecce
~
<.OJCO o ~
~ 0
:c. ~:~cc:;Jee.c~cb .c.u:~eC:Oe.cc.c.:c.e.c~
~ ~ ~ .:t 0 ~
~ ~ '\0 .:t
c~ccere:~R"'.!
cc~e.ocro
'\ ~
h.Jroa;c.o ~ccroc.oaco ~ :c.~::c.~ero c.cc e:c:ect a:~~ :: b a. c.cce:::t'I:C
a ~ o .:t \, ~ o ~ ~ ~ o :> ~ .:t .:t e
~~hl~ccahl<2c.cts
..):.3~ ~::.:l.:t
c.oaco~
~ 0
:c.~: ::c.h'Jeecc.cc~tc~re
~ ~ ~
r ~ e:cbcc~&ro
~ ..J.. 0
..Lo~ecWJ:~cc lG~ :~ico:~cclG~ r~lg} :&:~~~b &.c.c&:~~

:t'lb:r~ ::>&,t'les~ore rc~ e:dx.Oe&-,es
~ \, ;) ~0 :> .:t ..J..
C2cc&C2h:J:~cc
~ 0 ~ ~..)
rc.~ ~~:c.cdcc
..J.. ~ ~
rc~
~ ..J..
ic.cc~:~t'1:2 to:Cbc.ce~ro !i:::2rccc:o :~c.orehi::Jc.~~w e~wf'lso
..) ..)60 'S'~ ~ .:t,;, :.3,;, ::::::1
Sl'dOdffil M V1 vw~ng tlS

..9or s
.t~pun ~::>pou lU~pwns S! l! p;mnq~l
ss~yun pu~ p~U!W~X~ lOU S! ~WlSOd ~ql q3noql U~A~ ;))U~pJA;)
U! ~!q]'SS!WP~ S! lU~UI~S.topu~ l~lSOd p~SS;)lpp~ .Ap::>~JJO) ldll::l1
p~snp1 , lU~w~sJopu~ IElSOd ~ql ql!.M. p::lUlnl::ll pul? :}sod
p;)l~lS!3~l t\q lU::lS 'ldpun d)!lON 901 s
'(zggr) l::>V "d"J.,
- :J&i:OO:::bGe
~ o .,
~~:crflwro cho5cc.crorch.> ::>hlb::>

~ 1.. e 1.. o ~:.:~o
ir<2fto~bceib to2cca6!2c.cm
~ ~.... ~ ~
c.0Gco~ :c.~:::-c.~ecr:; :C2co:Xo roees c.cc~:~~:2 ~b:ccaG,C2cce.G

~ o ::::1~ ::::1 ~ ~ ..L ~ ~ e ~ ...... ~ ...... ~
C.<<KO~
.) 0
:c~:~c.~ees
::::1 ~ ::::1
rOeeBCcCC~:4cc
..L 0 ~ ::::1 ~
ICeJ ~~~CO:~ !Gel ~~~b:J1"
..L ~ ~ ~ ..L 'S' ::::1 ~ 0
SLS S.UIOdffil M.Vl VW~ng

S96I] Sl1IOdffil MV'1 vmoa 9LS
LL,S . S.L){Odffil M.v1 vmng
578 BVRMA LAW REPORTS [1965
c
'PeooomG ' c
~:so~GroJ ")ro~ J
~ c 'l c C" C" C"

OO'['I~t::JIOIJlO 10!31(7)0)") Gli?CIO~X G~~
t oelij. 9
i?,:G8d')C~~
c- C' c~ c c- c- . <:
tjcro~9tG<X3J ')(DOO'):~
)
c ~ c
~;;ro J'Hlrou tilt
J
~ C" C"
tj2:;GCO')C~~t~?~CC t~~C'PeOOJO)'f:~e:Jgl
~C' OCc C"OC" C" ~
O)')QJCDO) ,
~ 0 C)
( tlcr.c,c9tGcqJ
~ c- c c- c *
?mco?::;,9~
0 )
cpe>:l)t::JI<tO~J
e~ c-
000 0)9 r;:c " o ..-~c PC c- .S
~~~OOC,?I~'JCI:ICI-~'JC'i ~ro~ ~?I~
1 c-
Gf?CO)Oil'?lC
'l er
0(" t: 0 f:C" 0 ~(' (" OC" (" C" (' .
Q'JCO)~CI~ ~?ICI)?l:ICIO~OO?Ij:l~::l:lei0311~-cpeoooroJc:~: <{0~ <f@O 00~
0(' (' C'
q)loltQJO)~Iol~ 11
. c: t: ('
~l[jOOQJCDtl
(" C' .
lliOCI3J-:>0000":>10?.o:le ~OlJlU~G~XOlGf~~tJ!t}"Jo:l? C&JI~:ro cpecm
C' (". J:::C' ,...s. ('
c: C" "\ o \ c- r: C" c r,::c C"
roJc:ot=<to~o~ <teo ot 0)-:>rn-:>c.~p:ro, ~~~roJro '1c:~-:>: ;;,Jlot<:pcoo?:l:lc : o:>~
c- e c (' o C' c- o Q c,t C' c oc C' cr,:c- t:
e~a~eaoo::oe ~o~eaoo:l)e~ ooe~~GOO?IOo:l?~~QJ"JJO'JftJI!lo:>eu
I
r,:c c c c c g co ,'il
tlcooc'lf'""1l"'moo-:>t~!r.l~mu II2!'Xf<t! Qdl II
r,:c c c c c 0 -~ g c
tlcroc'lf'"roJ?moo?::il'j:lj>LOO~mu 118:>~!9 G;)Gt~: e:or::oc: u
~ C '\C C C C g C C"
O?Cifl~el!:ilJlU G!llmO?') G(.)')CGIJ-:>C II IIG~:>ma>:>:-l?t 2!GIT.nCelt
c~ OC" c c:
. O:l'J~ f<.pr~e!Q)'JC 8:>G~5j<:>:tJ~f(.))l O)')Q)d(\)())l!Y.,I f<..l:XtC'f>C'OCY.> oxp:O?t~:
c c s 0 erR coc c ~
c 1::::: c c ' "l g c <: ocr.;: c c c S o Cf.<?

oe\:$9 ~I e:{(~ ~:J 'JO?Gt~l..!i O'JCQ)JO)~Idttl~ qc:~~ OJ')Qd(I)CY.>&l,~
('J)
o c c oc~ o o <: c~ c ' '. c G:>cc:p<="
m:sm:>: ::nr ~mooc L~ros:>uG~:>Q)c QIO)Id9:nm:.J):>!Q c:G
c J
\. C.:, L .L -l : o o L U it. A o
c c c c c o <: c c
~OJU81d :)()() 8:>Cll OldOOCCl:>: ~::n()) GOX1m:> 8CIDGC 000 ffil() GU:G;o:>C
l l A Jl C.:, L o J1 .\:\ U '
. c oc C\ c o o c . <:\ c c c c
GOClS 8;)~.SQIIdOJQ~::D II C0~8C~')GC Q)IGOJQ~::n S:l C 00 Qm s:>o:>c: .
-lT lo U J C 1.. t 6 UJ o ~ t 6 .
oc c ?:QC\Cid
oc c c c oc c s:>OJC:o:>
c o
~
'l ~ "l
O)')Q (1)0) S(.)) COffiQ I~'J:C\ GS')CcrdQIO)C QC\CS<.DG
T 1J T 1J 6 J tt o A :1 T o l
~c o r,:c
<: o c c c oc o c 'l <:
~:>:ro:>tjc:~o:>):r::lq)O)q! 8:>1d~Oi(l)2! CY.>UICY.>2! QJ~OJCXfffiGQXD~.rr
lit oe~<f -tt6L ~~~10o:li.~IOCI3J~-:l~~ J?ll . .

r' (' . (' ' _t; (' C" ~ . (' ~ ('
t ~\$<f ~till I
c ''l
'['C'OOfO)Go:ll~iO)~o:> JO ~COIJ<.J())Go:l?
"J::: 0(' (' ~ C" (' s 0 CL'? C"OC" ('
oe\$<f
!;:!! _<:
~71llle3<p.l<
Oj 'lro<Olt~OI f<.OI:J?I~'JC I ~~[jef~ l 0)')0\JC\)O)IJ..I t<J:X{C~'('IO?.t::J:;~

0(' or;s.s ('("
~~Oftn'~ooc c~n
..., ,
IICCCCOO
.:> 0
co~~:x:.es~:c
.:> .:> e
toe2cc:ccococfb:>~
.:> .:>
~hlcoPe"JIJ~u:>
.:> ~.:> ~.:> ;,
db eld'l
.:>
:oo8Pa.icooo<h
.:> .:>
wctDcoclb:>~
0 .:>
ICCcc:ccoc.Ucir:D~
.:> .:>
&:1',10
0 ':) .
~CCCCio8cc:o~cor6)mO
.:> l_, .:> .) .)
w~ees:~b
0 .:>0 .)
~ch'J~& 1CCcc1o0hl~fles ccc~co~Pe IGcPco~:li Pco tucce.c~eestt:>:Qi:C
.:>::::lo .:> l-.:>:bo '1..:> ~.:> o .:> .::>~
:Cbco .)coo~d:d-;m4
.:>0.:>
~ccco&:!ceoo~en 1:ccoi!, c~~oo~:cco ccce)lfJfl:~Q
0 .:> .:> .:>0.:>:.:.1 ~ .:>:::1
c.ro:c&:. :>to:::Xowb1oco4
.:> _, ~ _,
~6e:cQm4coroPecco
.:>o :::~.:> .:> o e
:)tolee.cx~~
_, l_, .:> :)tocbcc
_, o
.
1-,;jfl!:)QCOCO COGW~ lhleccft WOO!:)Qbe oco;~(])C M~:)@be~co~
~ .:>:::1.:> 0 .:> 0 0 .:>:::1 .:> .:> .:> .>::J 0
:C~:)(X)~hl bee Q(.)C {')COCOCC~Cb 8cEOldn ICCCCee4o wccccecro:c~
.:> .:>~ .:> .:> .:> ::::1 0 .:> \. .) 0 .:> "
)!o:w ccb0COPe11J~ O::cocccchl:cms:to cccc::)b w~&bces~:c
" .:> ~.:> o .:> .:> ~ o .:> .:> .:> .:> e
6l5 SL1IOdffii M.V1 VW1IflR

sso BURMA tAW :_REPORTS
,
II OeJ.OC([)f)
J
'=I , '::)11
CQf):::>'Ncc;CO
jOE)
.
go~gces
.
,. , Is:
COCOO\:;':CO
0 JJ
,
co: w }J
f):::> COCDeJCCD
0 j J
,. i!.~f"'='
CC:o W
0
,
cwcec :')
0
J
C0 ~ IOS'ro
, 1-;, 1~ <r If 1r
<;; e::>cocrococtro~f):::>_ce::>
1~10s-ro
1'-'
s-1~e:::>oecocn
1: ,. o ~
cc:Cif):~cocoro
e L. J J .J J . . J J e L. J . J J o . J
sraod3'H MV1 VWWJS:

'582 BURMA LAW REPORTS
CIVIL REGULAR SUIT
Bejo,.e U Kyaw Za11 U, J.
D. N. PANDAY AND TWO OTHERS (APPLICANT) .c. c.

t965
v. July
BABU MADAN GOPAL BAGLA AND OTHERS

(RESPONDENT).*
Code if Civil Proccdtn-e, s. 92-suit under- substitution of co-plaintiff irz
place of the two dro.tJped ()Ut--whet/,._.,- application incompetent and not
maintainable in late 'V;ithottt a fresh consent f'rom the Attorney-General.
Suit under s. 92 of the Code of Civil P1ocedure is instituted by three
plaintiffs who claimed interest in a trust with the consent of the Attorney-
Gtoneral against the defendants. The 1st plaintiff applies for permission to
drop the 2nd and 3rd plaintiffs who have left Burma for good and to substitute
two persons in their places as co-plaintiffs. An important point has been rdised
in arguments as to whether the application is incompetent and not maintainable
in law specifically withou t a fresh consent from the Attomey-GeneraL
Held :The original plaintiff No. I (applicant) and the proposed plaintiffs
in present suit are suing in respect of the same cause of action. A formal amend-
ment of the plaint or the adding of a party, which does not alter the cause
of action or the nature of the claim in the suit does not necessitate a fresh consent
Raja A11and Rao v. Ramdas Daduram and others, (1920) I.L.R. 48 Cal. 493;
Syed Abu Mahotned Barakat Ali ar.a others v. Abdur Rahim and vthers, A.I.R.
(1925) Col. 187 ; .Mt. Ali Begam and others v. Badrul-Islam Ali Khan and others,
A.J.R. (1938) P.C. 184 ; Chhabile Ram v. Durga Prasad, (1915) I.L.R. 37 All.
296 ; Faizsuimessa v. Golam Rahhani, (1935) I.L.R. 62 Cal. IX32 ; Pomziatha
Kathoot Parameswaran Mzmpee v. Moothedath Mollisseri !/lath Narayanan
Natnbodri, (1916) I.L.R. 40 Mad. no ; Ram Gulam and another v. Shyam
Sarup and others, (1934) I.L.R. 55 All. 687; M.I. Kadri v. Khubmia
Mahoml!dmiya, A.l.R. (1931) Bom. 388; Gobinda Chandra Ghosh v. Abdul
Majid Ostagar, .(1944) I.L.R. r Cal. 329, referred to.
San Thein for the plaintiffs.

'Aung Min (2') for the ~efendants.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is a suit under section 92 of

the Code of Civil Procedtire by three plaintiffs who claimed
to hav:e interest in the trust known as The Satyanarayan
Temple Trust at Churu, Bikaner, Rajputana, India, whjch
Civil Regular Suit No. 27 of 1964.
42
~-~ 'is said to be a publ.ic trust for the purposes of a charitable

~ or religious nature with the consent of the Attorney-
n~~~~!~o Genera.l against the four defendants, who are alleged to
oT~Rs be .the present trustees of the said trust for amendment of
BABu MADB AN
G OPAL AGLA
the scheme framed by the High Court of Judicature
.
at
AND oTHBRs. R4ngoon in its Civil Regular Suit No. 78 of r923 to be
consistent wit.'l-t the present changes and circumstances
prevailing in the country, for accounts, for appointment
of a Receiver and for removal of the defendants as trustees.
The parties are Marwari Hindus. .The defendants have
filed their written statements but before mak.jng replies the
rst plaintiff applied for permission .to drop the 2nd and
3rd plaintiffs, Wh<f have left Burma for _good, and to sub-
stitute Ramnarayan Panday and Raj Dhari Singh in their
places as co-plaintiffs as they have consented to be implead-
ed as such inasmuch as they are Hindus and have interest
in the trust. The 3rd defendant at present being unrepre..
sented the remaining three defendants opposed the appli-
cation. They contended that the proposed plaintiffs have
no interest whatsoever in the trust and this Court has no
jurisdiction inasmuch as the idol for which the trust was
created is situated in India. These points, of course, were
not taken up in arguments as evidence will have to be
heard first on them. The proposed plaintiffs being Hindus
and the scheme having been framed by the High Court of
at
Judicature. Rangoon and since the late High Court had
also admittedly acted on the said scheme this Court pri~a
facie hc:ts jurisdiction until the contr-ary is proved by
evidence. . In the plaint it is alleged certain properties
belonging to the T~ust were situated in Rangoon and they
were sold by the rst defendant. Since a scheme had been
frained the present trust must be taken as a public Trust.
An .iniportant po.i nt however has been raised in the
arguments and this is the only point on w4ich I have been
asked to -give a decision, and that is, whether the applica-
tion is incompetent and not maintainable in law especially
without a fresh consent from the Attorney-General. There

is lack of direct authorities in Burma ; in India where the
law on the point is the same as in Burma the decisions oAYANoTwo
D.N. PAN-
were rather conflicting but the majority of.the High Courts oTHsas
are now of the view that no fresh consent is necessary BAau YviADAN
relying upon the observations made by the Privy Council ~<>;A;:~~
in Raja Anand Rao v. Ramdas Daduram and others (r) so
long ago as in 1920 thus: "111ere was also point that a
one of the persons who originally raised the suit and got
the sanction having died the suit could not go on, but
there does not seem any force in that point either, it being
a suit which is not prosecuted by individuals for their own
interests, but as representatives of the general public."
Following this authority it was said in Syed Abu Mahomed
Barakat Ali and others v. Abdur Rahim and others (2) :
"Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of a public
right or of a private right claimed in common for themselves
and others, all persons interested in such right shall for the
purposes of this section be deemed to claim under the person
so litigating."
It is . thus clear that the two proposed plaintiffs in the

instant case shall be deemed to claim under the two
original plaintiffs. Technically the entlire publiC interested
are parties and as a matter of general expepence, they
leave it to the plaintiffs t:> conduct all the proceedings and
to take various steps necessary for its successful prosecu-
tion. Under Order r Rule 8 (2) of the Code of Civil
Procedure an'y person on whose behalf or for whose benefit
a suit is institUted may apply to the Court to be made a
party to such suit. Another Privy Council decision follow-
ing its previous decision referred to above said that when
a suit under section 92 was " once validly instituted it is.
a representative suit subject to all the incidents affecting
(z) A.l.R. (1925) Cal. tS7.
586 B!lRMA LhVv REPORTS .
c.c. 'sui.ts in general and representative suits in particular."
6
1
9 5 Mt. Ali Begam and others v. Badru1-Islam Ali Khan and
D.N. PAN~ others (3).
DAYIIND'lWO
OTiiERS
BAsu K.iADAN Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure says, " .

<GoPALBAGLA
ANo oTHERs. Attorney-Genera1, or two or more persons h avmg
an interest in the Trust and having obtained the consent
in writing of the Attorney-General, may instit.ute a suit
." It deals with the institution .and not with
the subsequent stages. of the suit. There is no denial in
the instant case that the suit was properly instituted in
accordance with the provisions of section 92. The present
application relates to the subsequent stage, that is to say,
to substitute two new plaintiffs in place of the original
two plaintiffs after the institution of the suit so I do not
think the defendants can now legitimate}y oppose it. The
learned Advocate for the defendants argued that the pro-
posed two plaintiffs must have obtained the consent of the
Attorney-General before they are added as plaintiffs. I
do not agree. Since the two orignial plaintiffs having an
interest in.the trust had already obtajned the consent when
the suit was instituted it is not necessary the two proposed
plaintiffs should again obtain the consent at this stage.
Disagreeing with the decision of the Allahabad High Court
in Chhqbile Ram v. Durga Prasad {4) the Calcutta High
Court held in Faizunnessa v. Go lam Rahhani :(5) that in a
suit instituted by a certain set of pla:intj.ffs with the consent
of the Attorney-General under section 92 c;>f t:he Code of
Civil Procedure, the consent of the Attorney-General to
each fresh addition of a party is not necessary. Following
the Privy Council case referred to above and Ponniatha
K.athoot. Parameswaran Munpee .v. M oothedath Mollisseri
Jllath Narayanan Nambodri (6) it also he}d that such a suit
is not prosecuted by individuals ~or their own interests,
(3) A.I.R. (1938) (P.C.) I84. (4) . (I9IS) I.L.'R. 37 Ali. 296.
(s) (1935) I.L.R. 6~ Cal. II32. (6) (1916) I.L.R. 40 _.M ad. no.
but as representatives of the general public interested in

the endowment, and the Court has power under Order
. D.N PAN-
I, Rule ro, clause (2) of the Code to add other persons DAYANDTwo
interested, because they had become parties to the repre- oT~~
sentative suit. It said the Allahabad decision (4) disregard- GBABu MAD~
OPAL BAGL>'l:
ed the fact of the representative character of the smt and AND oTHERS.
did not lay down the correct l~gaJ position . . As a matter
of fact this decision (4) was held to be no longer good law
by the same High Court (Allahabad) in Ram Gulam and
another v. Shyam Sarup and others (7) where it was held:
" All that the section says is ' two or more persons . . .
'may institute a suit'. Where the suit has been properly
instituted according to S. 92 Civil P. C., there is nothing in
that section which says that the suit cannot be continued
'if one of the original plaintiffs who instituted the suit in
the manner laid down by law happens to die."
It also made reference to the decision of the Privy Council

in.Raja Anand Rao v. Ramdas Daduram and other~ I have
cited above. In Mt. Ali Begam and others v. Badr-ul-Islam
Ali Khan and others (supra) the Privy Council also held:
" If the three persons join as plaintiffs and two of them die
pending suit, the suit does not become defective or incom-
petent: 48 I.' A. I2l.. There is no provision whatever in the
Code for recourse being had . to the Advocate-General or
Collector during the course of a suit or of any proceedings
in appeal. As sub-s. (2) of S. 92 sUfficiently shows, the
consent in writing is a condition of the valid institution of a
suit and has. no reference to any other stage. vyhen once
validly instituted it is a representative suit subject to all the
incidents affecting suits in general and representative suits in
particular."
The'Bombay High Couit iri M. I. Kadri v. Khubmiya Maho

medmiya (8) also dissented from the view expressed by the
(7) (1934) I.L.R. 55 Ali. 687. (8) A.I.R. (1931) Bom. 388.
c. c. Allahabad H1gh Court in Chhabile Ram v. Durga Prasad
1965
(4) and said:
D.N. PAN-
DAY "AND TWO "!f however the previous parties are dead, or are colluding
OTHERS with the defendants or negligent in applying, it would be
f>.
B ABU MADAN p~rmissible for the Court to bring the applicants on t:h,e re-
GoPALBAcLA cord under 0. r, R. ro, and think for such an application the
AND OTHERS.
consent of the Attorney-General is not necessary."
The original plaintiff No. I (applicant) and the proposed

plaintiffs in the present suit are suing in respect of the
same cause of action. _ I am also of the opinion that a
formal amendment of the plaint or the adding of a party.
which ddes not alter the cause of actjon or the nature of
the claim in the suit does not necessitate a fresh -consent.
Lastly I may refer to a fairly recent decision of the Calcutta
High Court in Gobinda Chandra Ghosh v. Abdul Majid
Ostagar (9) where the head-note runs as follows:
" . . . . Once such a suit is validly instituted with the
required sanction, 110 fresh sanction is necessary at any further
stage of the same suit. A fresh sanction is also not necessary
if the plaint of such suit is merely amended or only a party
is added. . But whe1i such amendnient or auililion of party
ch9-nges the nature and the scope of the suit a fresh sanction
is nece;;sary .''
The learned Advocate for the defendants in his last

hope to knock out the application tried to make a fine
distinction between the word '"' substituted" us~d jn Order
r, Rule Io (r) -of the Co~e of.CiviJ Proc~dure. and also in
the application, and the word " added" used in clause (2)
of the said Order and Rule. The -distinction is not really
important. _ To "substitute" is to replc;lceor to exchange
while to " add " is to join or to increase the_number.
_Since there was _no ~oubt as to the institution of the suit
in the names of the right plaintiffs, or, that the two original
plaintiffs. who have now left the country-for good, were
(9) (1944) I.L.R. I Cal. 329.
not wrongly impleaded vye are not concerned with the c. c.

I96s
word " substituted " although used in the application per-
. d d . h clause D .N. PAN-
1laps ma vertently. We are more concerne Wlt DAY AND TWo
(2) which gives the Court pm~:er to "add" a plaintiff o~s

whose presence i.s necessary in order to enable -
the Court GBABu MBADAN
OPAL AGLA
.
effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle AND oTHERs
.all questions involved in the suit. Since the name of the

ISt plaintiff is still on the record the impleading of the two
proposed plaintiffs is a case of addition. If the Court
however strikes out the names of the plaintiffs and bring
:on record the name of another as sole plaintiff then, of
.Course, it will be a case of substitution.
Following the authorities cited above, .l hold that no
fresh consent of the Attorney-General is necessary under
"Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the circum-
stances of the suit to add the. two proposed persons as
plaintiffs in the suit, and accordingly I direct that they be
added as such under Order I, Rule IO .(2) of the Code of
Civil Procedure. The objection is overruJed with costs.
Advocate's fee five gold mohurs.
CIVIL EX~CUTION
Before U K yaw Zan U, :J.
c.c. DAw THAN (DECREE-HOLDER)

1965
July 20.
v.
RAMNIRANJAN LHILA (JUDGEMENT-DEBTOR). *
Civil Execution-whether s. 3 of the Union of Burma Revclu.tionary Council Law

No. l3 of 1962 applicable-determination of the jurisdictio11-attachrnent
of a garden land whether permissable.
The decree-holder sued the judge.ment-debtor for recovery of K 6o,ooo
as damages for breach of contract, but obtained a d ecree for K 33,ooo only with
costs and on appeal this amount was raised to K 42,900. The execution is to
realized K 46,654---made up of the amount finally decreed and costs . . The
decree-holder has attached a 'freehold garden land ' in Thingangyun ToWn.
Held : As the suit was valued at K 6o,ooo-s. ,3 of the Union of Burma
Revolutionary Council Law No. 13 of 1962 has no application to the present
case.
Held further : It is a well settled principle that it is the plaintiff's valuation-
in his plaint which prima facie determines the jurisdiction of the Court and
not the amount which may be .found or decreed by the .Court, whatev~r it may
be. Since an execution proceeding is the continuation of the suit, this Court
has jurisdiction to entertain the execution application.
A.K.A.C.T.V. Chidambaram Chattiar v. A.L.P.R.S. Muthia- Chettiar,
(1937) R.L.R. 214 (F.B.) ; Balvantrav Oze v. Sadrudin, (x887) I.L.R. 13
Born. 485 (488) ; Lakshm~m Bhatkar v. Babaji Bhathar, (r884) I.L.R. 8 Bom.
3 I, refened to.
Helli further : There is nothing to show that the judgement-debtor is an
agriculturist or a tiller of the soil of that the land is occupied or ordinarily
utiliied for purposes of agri~ulture for livelihood Gr for purposes subservie_nt to
agriculture. In the original 'suit the judgement-debtor is shown a8 a Marwari
textile merchant residj.ng in the city of Rangoon. Moreover,. the land in
question is situated in town and therefore it is attachable and saleable.
Ram Nath Singh v. Chandrika Prasad and One, (r963) B.L.R. 370 (C.C.)
referred to.
Wan Hock. forth~ judgement-debtor.

H. M. Fisher for the decree-holder.
U KYAW.ZAN.U, J..-As per diary dated 30th April 1965
the Deputy Registrar ( r) of the Original Side has now put
Civil Execution Case No. s of 1965.
up this application dated the 23rd March 1965 of the c.c.

I96S
judgment-debtor to return the execution application of the
DAwTHAN
decree-holder to the Rangoon City Civil Court for action as v.
this Court. has no jurisdiction to entertain the said RAMNIRAN
J.o\N LHILA.
application. It is also contended by the judgment-debtor
that the.land attached being a garden land is not attachable
and saleable in I<iw.
In Civil Regular Suit No. I r of 1959 of the late High
Court, the decree-holder sued the judgment-debtor for the
recovery of K 6o,ooo as damages for breach of contract
but she obtained a decree for payment of K 33,000 only
with costs on 2rst June r96r, and on appeal being Civil
First Appeal No. 62 of 1961 of this Court by her this
amount was raised to K 42,900 with proportionate costs
thereon in the trial Court on 14th June 1962. Executions
had been taken twice in this Court without fruitful result.
This is the third application filed on 22nd February
1965 for execution to realize K 46,654 made up of the
amount finally decreed and costs. The decree-holder has
also obtained as stated above an attachment of a " freehold
garden land known as holdings Nos. 16, 17-19 of 1950/51
in Thingangyun Town, Block No. 33(A), Jnsein Township
(Greater Rangoon). II
Under section 3 of the Union of Burma Revolutionary

Council Law No. 13 of 1962 " * * * all suits of a civil
nature pending before the Chief Court of Burma the
amount or value of whose subject matter does not exc~ed
fifty thousand kyats shall be deemed to have been
transferred ~o the Rangoon City Civil Court under section
24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for trial or disposal II.
The suit was valued at K 6o,ooo vide paragraph 9 of the

plaint. Hence section 3 has no application to the present
case. I therefore hold that this Court has jurisdiction to
dispose of the case. It is a well settled principle that it is
the plaintiff's valuation in his plaint which prima facie
determines the jurisdiction of the Court and not the
c. c. amount which may be found or decreed by the Court,
1965
whatever it may be. A.K.A.C.T.V. Chidambaram Chettiar
v. v. A.L.P.R.S. Muthia Chettiar (r). Since an execution
RAMNJAAN-
JAN LRru.
proceeding is the continuation of the suit the value of the
subject matter in this execution case is K 6o,ooo and
therefore, this Court has jurisdiction to entertain the
execution application. Tne principle that " jurisdiction
continues in all matters in execution '.' was followed so
long ago as in r887 by Sir Charles Sargent, C.J. in
Balvantrav Oze v. Sadrudin (2) following the authority in
Lakshman Bhatkcir v. Babaji Bhatkar (3) where it was held .
" What prima facie determines the jurisdiction of a Court
is the claim. or subject-matter of the claim, as estimated by
the plaintiff, and the determination having given the
jurisdiction, the jurisdiction itself continues, whatever the
event of the suit. "
The next point that arises is whether the Court could
allow the attachment of the garden land situated in
Thingangyun Town in Greater Rangoon. If the judgment-
debtor is an agriculturist or a tiller of the soil his garden
land cannot be attached under section 6o(c) of the ~ode of
Civil Procedure. Under section 3(b) of Act No. 75 of 1953
(Land Nationalization Act), a garden land whi~h is
occupied, or is ordinarily utilized for purposes. of
agriculture for livelihood or for purposes subservient to
agriculture i~ axn:.n:i;;; (agricultural land). Such a land
cannot be _attached or sold in execution under section 37
of the said Act. It does not include land-even if it is a
garden land-in posst:ssion as a house site in town or village.
Ram Nath Singh v. Chandrjka 'frasad and one, etc. (4).
There is nothing to show that the judgment-debtor i~ an
. agriculturi.s t or a tiller of the' soil or that the land is
occupied or ordinarily utilized for purposes of agriculture
for )ivelihood or for purposes subservjent to. agriculture.
(t) (1937) R.L.R. 214 (F.B.). (z) (1887) I.L.R. 13 Born. 485(488).
(j) (~884) I.L.R. 8 Bom. _JI. (4) (1963) B.L.R. 370 (C.C.).
In the original suit the judgment-debtor is sho\vn as a c.c.

r96s
Marwari textile merchant residing in the city of Rangoon.
DAWThAN
Moreover, the land in question is situated in town. I v.
Rt.MNIRA-
therefore hold it is attachable and saleable .. JAN LHILA.
In the result the appiication fails and is dismissed with
-costs. Advocate's fee three gold mohurs.
594 BURMA. LAW REPORTS
"':~ . .,.
CIVIL REGULAR
Before U Kyazu Zan U, J.
c. c. DAW THIN HLAING (PLAINTIFF}

I96S
July J, v.
G. GORDHANDAS (DEFENDANT).*
Suitftn' damage.~ for breach of ccmtract-Limitation Act, applicability for eitheY

Article 65 or Article ll5-Ci-cil Procedure Code, 0. 7, R. I I (cl), rejection of
plai11t.
The plaintiff file a suit for damages for bteach of contract to sell a free-hold
land altogether, K 25,000 had been paid as advance according to the terms
of the agreement, but the defendant. has failed to comply with them. The
defendant contended that the breach of the tel"m~ was committed by the
plaintiff and that in any event the sUit is barred by the law of Limitation.
Held : In the circumstances of the case, either Article 65 or Article 115
is applicable, because whlchever article is applied the time runs for 3 years from
the date of the breach of promise or contract or the happening of aspecified
contingency. Since the target date was set at 2nd March 1957 for the defendant
to make out a good or absolute title to the satifaction of the plaintiff's advocate
the suit should have been brought within three yeazs from this date if the
plaintiff's advocate was not satisfied with tl~e title.
Held further : Since there was a delay of over 7 years in filing the suit the-
plaint should have been rejected under 0. 7, .R. I I (d) of the Civil Procedure-
Code.
Khtr!l Chand Motumal and another .v. Bhentmal Cularbari, A.I.R. (1955)
Ajmer I, referred to.
Chan Tun _Aung and Choung Po for the plaintiff.

Aung Min (2) for the defendant.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is a " suit for damages .for

breach of contract to. sell '' a free~hold land measuring
2.396 acres with all buildings and outhouses standing
thereon kriown as' Nos. 3. 4. 5 and sA in. u San Pe-R,o~d,
Thinganyun, Greater Rangoon for K I,45,6oo as per Exhi-
bit A unregistered agreement, date~ 2nd February 1957
$ Civil regular suit No. 12 of 1965.
BURMA LAVv REPORTS 595
signed by the parties. The plaintiff had paid altogether c.c.

x96s
K 25,000 as advance made up of K 15,000 paid on the day
DAW TP.~N
of the agreement and K ro,ooo paid on 2nd July I957 HLAING
!1.
The plaintiff's case is that the defendant has failed to com- G.
ply with the terms of the agreement. She claims for the GORDH:\ N-
DAS.
refund of the advance plus compensation at K r per
cent per mensem on t.h e advance making a total claim of
K 43,6oo.
The defendant in his written statemen~ contended inter
<Ilia that the breach of the terms was committed by the
plaintiff and not by him and that in any event the suit is
b~rred bY. the Law of Limitation .
. Of the six issues framed the issue No. 3 runs as
follows:
"Is 'the suit claim barred by the Law of Limita~ion? "
The plaintiff and her three witnesses had been examined
by the learned District Judge of Insein before the suit was
transferred to this Court for trial. The learned Advocates
for the parties have agreed to argue this issue No. 3 quoted
.above on the pleadings and evidence recorded so far and
J have heard thejr arguments. The learned Advocate for
the defendant submitted further that he would not adduce
.any evidence for the defence as the defendant has left the
Country for good.
The breach of the -terms of the agreement, ac<;:ording to
"th~ plaintiff, is that the defendant failed to make out a
.good or absolute title to the properties. The relevant
...
terms are
.. *
(5) The vendor shall be bound to make an absolute title
to the property to._ be conveyed. .
(<5) The vendor shall . deliver to. the purchaser's ,Advocate
within one month all documents of title to .the said property
and any other documentary evidence in his possession proving
his title and the _agreement is subject to the purchaser's
c.c. pleader being satisfied as to the absolute title of the vendor.

I96S
(7) The purchase shall be completed within four months.
DAw Tam * * * * ,,
HLAING
v. According to the agreement the defendant ought to have
G. made out a good or absolute tit~e on or before 2nd March
GORDHAN-
DAS. 1957, i.e., "within one month" from the date of the agree-
ment, and. if he had made out the purchase would have
to be completed on or before 2nd June 1957, i.e., "within
four months " from the date of the agreement. For the
purpose of limitation the first date viz., 2nd March 1957
is therefore very important. The learned Counsel for the
plaintiff has all along maintained in his argument that the
suit is well within time and no exemption is claimed in the
plaint from limitation. The law is clear on the point ..
Under Order 7, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure the
plaint must show the ground upon which exemption is
claimed if the suit ipstituted after the expiry of t he period
prescribed by the Law of Limitation, and Rule I I (d) of the
said Order directs the plaint to be rejected where the suit
appears from the statem~nt in the plaint to be barred by
t he Law of Limitation.
The point for determination therefore is whether fue .
suit is barred, and if so, what Article of the Law of Limita-
tion is applicable. The learned Advocate for t he defen-
dant relies upon Article 65 of the Act while the learned
Counsel for the plaintiff relies upon Article II5. Both
the Jeamed Advocates, however, . conceded ~hat the ques-
t ion of s~ccessive or continuing breaches is out of the point
in the suit. The Article 65 is as follows: .
" 65. For compensation When the time speci-
for breach o a fied arrives or con-
promise to tio tingency happ_e.JlS.'t .
anything at a
Three years.
spedfieq time, or
upon 'the happen-
ing of a specified
contingency.
Article I I 5 excluding the irrelevant parts reads thus :

" I r5. For compensation When the contract is DAw T'HtN
for breach of any broken . . . . " fuAING
v.
contract, express G.
or implied, not in GORDHIIN-
Three years. DitS.
writing registered
and not herein
specially provid-
ed for.
Article I I 5 is a general and residuary article for suits for
compensation on unregistered contracts, and will apply
only when there is no other specific article applicable to
the case. Under Article 65, we have to determine the
" specific time " at which the defendant promised to de-
liver all documents of title to the satisfaction of the
p:aintiff's Advocate. Under Article us, we have to deter-
mine the time when there was a breach of contract on the
part of the defendant. The period of limitation is the
same under both the Articles. To me it is immaterial in
the circumstances of the case whether Article 65 or Article
IIS applies because whichever Article is applied the time
runs for three years from the date of the breach of promise
or contract or the happening of a specified contingency.
Both the learned Advocates agreed when this point was
brought to their notice. Since the target date was set at
2rid March 1957 for the defendant to make out a good or
absolute title to the satisfaction of the plaintiff's Advocate
the suit should hav~ been brought within three years from
this date if the plaintiff's Advocate was not satisfied with
the title. The defendant has all along maintained that he
has a good and absolute title. It was the plaintiff or her
Advocate who is not satisfied. If the plaintiff felt that
the defendant had failed to make out a good or absolute
title within the specified time .she must take that the defen-
dant had broken the agreement or promise on 2nd March
1957. The learned Counse~ for the plaintiff has touched
598 B.URMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. upon "social justice" a term, so far as I am aware, now
x96s
here defined, but in vogue, and which has now become
DAW THIN
HLAING quite a popular term in view of the establishment of a
v.
G. Socialist State by the Government and also on unjust deal-
GORDH.o.N-
DAS.
ing or moral obligation in his argument. The performance
of moral obligation must be left to the good faith of the
individual, and it is neither within the province nor . the
policy of the law to apply a metaphysical standard of
morality to the conduct of men in their common relations
<>f life. The general rules of law established for the pro-
tection and security of honest men will sometimes prevent
men of different character from performing their parts
which they are bound in fore conscientiae to perform.
This may be a drawback in all human systems of legisla-
tion. I need not dwell upon this subject ad lonauin. The
law of society has Jeft most of such obligations to the
interior forum aptly called Tribunal of Conscience. It
must be remembered that all-whether he be brown or
white, from the plains or the hills-are equal before the
Law. Since there was a delay of <?Ver seven years in_filing
the suit which was instituted only on 26th June I963 the
plaint should have been rejected under Order 7, Rule I I (d)
of the Code of Civil Procedure- which is a mandatory
provision. Khem Chand Motumal and another v. Bheru-
. mal Cularbrai and others (I).
The learned Counsel for the plaintiff referred to certain
correspondence passed betWeen the parti~ to show that
the suit was fil~d within time and these are _Exhibits No. 9,
~~ 01 and ro . The Exhibit N_ o. 9 was a "new arrange-
ment " between the parties in respect of the suit proper.ties
and- has nothing to do with the presen.t contract. There
is neither distinct acknowledgment nor recreation of an
eXisting liability. It is a letter dated: 5th January I96o
from the defendant expressir1g his intention to sell the
properties to a third person. as agreed upon between him
(1.) A.I.R. (rgss) Ajmer -x.
and the plaintiff if no objection was raised by the latter c.c.

z96s
within three days promising to repay the advance received
from the plaintiff from the sale proceeds. The plaintiff of DAW THIN
Hl.AING
course denied such an agreement in her Exhibit " o " tl.
G.
letter dated 7th January 1960. Even if t his letter is taken GORDHAN-
DAS.
.as an acknowledgment of liability on the part of the defen-
dant under section 19 of the Limitation Act still the suit,
which was instituted on 26th June 1963, is barred. In
Raja of Vizianagaram v. The Official Liquidator, Viziana-
garam Mining Company Limited, Vizagapatam (2) it was
held " If a claim is barred the fact that there was an
.acknowledgment of liability .later on will not resuscitate
a barred claim because under the law an acknowledgement
can be only of a subsisting liability ". The Exhibit " ~ "
dated roth. November 1962 is a mere letter written by the
plaintiff after over six years from the date of the suit
agreement to comply with the terms while Exhibit " o "
dated 3rd April 1963 is only a lawyer's reply that the
<lefendant had applied for Letters of Administration. The
Exhibit " ro " dated 7th june 1963 (written over six years
.:~fter the date of the suit agreement) is an ultimatum from
the plaintiff to the defendant for the return of the advance
paid with compension within seven days. The Plaintiff
said that should the defendant fail to comply legal pro-
ceedings both civil and criminal would be instituted against
h.im. This letter finally put the matter to an end. These
Exhibits mentioned above are not acknowdgements and I
{}o not know. how they will help the plaintiff. Under
section 19 the ackno:wledgment must be made before the
expiration of the prescribed period of limitation. Putben
Veetil Karuvankandi Unichira and others v. Karanora Raru
Nayar Karnanvan and others (3).
The exhibit No.4 dated 7th February 1957 shows the
{}efendant did deliver all the decuments of title in his
possession to the plaintiff's Advocate within t.i.ffie in accor-
(z) A.I.R. (195Z) Mad. 136. (3) A.I.R. (1951) Mad. 674..
43
c.c. dance with Clause (6) of the terms of the agreement but it
1965
seems no steps were taken by the plaintiff or her Advocate
D AW TmN
HLAING
to complete the sale. Hence the Exhibit " oo" letter
v. dated 18th October 1957 from the then Counsel for the
G.
GoRDHAN~ defendant (Mr. Venkatram) to the plaintiff's Advocate to
DAB.
complete the sale and pay the balance purchase money.
The plaintiff's Advocate then showed his dissatisfaction.
with the documents of title jn his reply dated 3oth Octo-
ber 1957 Exhibit " ~ " to his letter. In this connection
I may remark here in her application for attachment of
the suit properties be~ore judgment under Order 38, Rule
5 of the Code or Civil Procedure the plaintiff admitted the
title of the defendant. Maintaining that the title. deeds.
were good enough the Counsel for the defendant.by Exhi--
bit " ~ " letter dated 2nd January 1958 asked the plain-
tiff's Advocate to complete the transaction within one
week and for return of the title deeds with the warning_
that in default of compliance steps would be taken to have
the properties sold by public auction. The tilte deeds.
were returned to the defendant only on 7th January 1958.
It will be seen that the plaintiff's letter dated 7th January
1960 being Exhibit " u " through her Advocate to the
defendant first put the transaction to a close. In that
letter she called upon the defendant to comply with the
terms of the agreement by producing further documents.
of " to refund the advance along with a reasonable amount
of compensation" within seven days, i.e., on or before 14th
January 1960 failing . which Jegal proceedings would be
taken against him for enforcing of her rights. Her second
and the finaJ ultimatum was given in Exhibit " c;.; ,; dated
7th June 1963 as shown above breaking the contract on
or before 14th June 1963. U Mya Tin, the Advocate wh6
acted for the. plaintiff depose9 that the 'defendant never
told hiin that 4~ wquld not sell the properties. .: He said'
he advised the piaintiff to sue the defendantwithin three
years but she was trying to get the properties only without
filing a suit. In cases where a specific date is fixed for c.c.

1965
doing of a promise the demand for compliance or fulfil-
DAW THIN
ment of the terms or for performance of a contract after HLAING
such date is of no importance as limitation begins to run v.
G.
from the date fixed. If the title deeds produced by the GORDHAN. DAS.
defendant were not acceptable to the plaintiff's Advocate
on 2nd March 1967 which was the date fixed, then the
plaintiff must take that the defendant had broken the terms
on t.h at date and the plaintiff's demand for compliance or
fulfilment of the terms or for performance of the contract
after that date as per exhibit " o " and " OJ " is according-
, ly of no effect as time had already begun to run from
that date 2nd March 1957, and when the suit was filed
on 26th June 1963 the suit was already barred. The issue .
is therefore answered in the affirmative.
In the result the suit fails and is dismissed with costs.
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION
Before U Kyaw Zan U, :f.
c.c. KASI NATH RAl (Shri Kasi Nath Rai) (APPLICANT)

1965
July S v.
DR. s. L. LOOMBA AND ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Contempt of Courts Acts 1926-publication in a daily newspaper <m the conduct

or status of one of the parties-matter sub-judice.
The object of procee~s in contempt of this nature is to ensure that
every litigant in a Court of justice has a fair and un-prejudiced hearing at .
the trial on the merits of his case. Public confidence in the ability of the
Court to administer justice must be maintained. The article complained of
is a reflection on the applicant who is a defendant in the suit. If the effect
of the publication of the article is to create prejudice or to interfere with
the course of justice absence of intent is irrelevant. The publication of the
resolution in the instant case does create a real tendency to interfere with
the due course of justice and does create a substantial prejudice against the
defence of the applicant in the suit. .
The William Thomas Shipping Co., (1930) 2 Ch. 368 (376), referred to and
followed.
Ba Tin for the applicant.

Kyaw Myint and M. Jaffer for the respondents.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is an application to take

action against the respondents for contempt under the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1926.
The facts leading to this application are that in Civil
Regular Suit No. 64 of 1963 of this Court the thre~
plaintiffs named therein claipring to be the members of
Arya Samaj a registered Society sued the respondents who
are defendants l';los. L and 2 along with 17 others 'including
the applicant, who is defendant No. 13 for a declaration
besides Otl~ers that the respondents and 10 other defendants
are not leg~lly elected office ~arers and/or members of
the Managing Committee of the Socie.ty and as such.. they
Misc. Application No. 12 of 1965.
have no right to handle the affajrs of the Society, and for

. c.c.
1965
accounts against the respondents. The Ist respondent was .K.ux NArn
duly served with summons on 3rd January 1964 while the RAI (SHRl
KJ.si NATH
2nd respondent was served on 6th january 1964. The RAI)
tl.
suit is still pending and it has been set for fixing a date for DR. S. L.
hearing. It was alleged in the plaint that the respondents AND LOOMBA
ONE.
and others wrongfully assumed control of the Society and
collected rents and profits of the same and that in view of
these alleged illegal acts, 42 members of the Society
formed a Care-Taker Managing Committee consisting of 5
members to take control of the Society and to hold an
election of members of the Managing Committee. It was
further alleged that in spite of the formation of a Care-
Taker Managing Comniittee the respondents refused to
make .over the properties of the Society to it. The plaint .
stated that the rst and 2nd respondents were never elected
as President and Secretary respectively of the Society
lawfully. Tiie rst respondent claimed that he was the
lawfully elected President. Both the respondents denied
that the Care-Taker Managing Committee is a legal body.
The points that loom large for decision in the suit are
whether the respondents were elected as President and
Secretary of the Society lawfully, and whether the Care-
Taker Managing Committee is a legal body. The presenc
applicant, who is the 13th defendant in the suit, supports
the plaintiff. He now claims that he was the President
when the responden~ took control of the Society. .
The applicant now states that pending suit the
respondents convened a meeting of the Managing
Coiillllittee on8th January 1964 and caused a resolution to
be passed to .suspend the 5 members of the "illegal Care-
Taker Committee" and to call upon them to explain why
they should. not be expelled from the Society.
Another resolution was also passed " to. suspend Shri
K. N. Rai (applicant) for his various anti-Arya Samaj
activities, off and on for a long time, and also s.uspends
c.c. Shri V. P. Batra for his anti-Arya Samaj activjties in various
1965
KASI NATH
spheres and insulting behaviour and calls upon both of
RA.x (Smu them to explain why they should not be expelled from the
KAsr NATH
RAr) membership in the interest of the Arya Samaj ". This was
tl.
DR. s. L. published under the signature of the 2nd respondent as
LooMBA
AND ONB.
Secretary in the Guardian a daily English newspaper dated
1oth January 1964. This publication to suspend the
applicant for his various anti-Arya Samaj activities off and
on for a long time and calling him up to explain why he
should not be expelled from the membership of the Arya
Samaj is now the subject matter of contempt of Court in
this case.
The point for consideration is whether this publication
of the opinion on the conduct or status of the applicant,
who is a defendant in the suit, and which is sub-judice is
likely to interfere with the due administration of justice.
Will the Court be influenced by the publication that the
applicant is an anti-Arya Samaj and that he should be
called upon to explain why he should not be expelled from
Arya Samaj when it has to decide in the pending suit
whether the applicant is the duly elected President of the
Arya Samaj at the time the respondents forcibly took over
the Arya Samaj claiming to b~ the President and Secretary
of the Arya Samaj? l)ndoubtedly there is likelihood of
the court being influenc~d. It is very probable that this
publication will tend to prejudice the defence jn the suit as
well. It is well established that .all proceedings in suits
pending in a Court of justic~ are privileged, and any
comment on the subject matter of the suit and .any abuse
of or adverse remark against the parties are not aliowed.
I think the observation of Maugham J. in re The William.
Thomas Shipping Co, (I) ~s apposite:
" I think that to publish. injurious mis-representations
dir.ected against a party to the 'action, especially when they
are holding up that party to hatred or contempt, is liable to
(t) (193o) z Ch. 368 (376).
affect the course of justice, because it may, in the case of a C.C.
rg6s
plaintiff, cause him to discontinue the action from fear of
public dislike, or it may cause the defendant to come to a .: :;1 ~=
compromise which he otherwise would not come to, for a . KAst NATH
like reason. " R.u)
fl.
DR. s. L.
No one has a right to prejudge the case and to state what LoOMDA
AND ON!!.
he regards to be the true facts whilst the case is pending.
The object of proceedings in contempt of this nature is to
ensure that every litigant in a Court of justice has a fair
and un-prejudiced hearing at the trial on the merits of his
case. Public confidence in the ability of the Court to
administer justice must be maintained. The article
complained of is a reflection on the .applicant who is a
defendant in the suit. If the effect of the publication of
the article is to create prejudice or is to interfere with the
course of justice absence of intent is irrelevant. In my
opinion the publication of the resolution in the instant
-case does create a real tendency to interfere with the due
course of justice and does create a substantial prejudice
against the defence of the applicant in the suit. U Kyaw
Myint the learned Counsel for the respondents in his usual
frankness admitted in his argument that the respondents
had done a very unwise thing. Their act is no doubt
blameworthy. It is contempt of Court and I am bound to
protect the administration of justice. Cases of this nature
are however rare so I do not consider a severe sentence is
called for. I therefore ask the respondents to tender an
.apology now before I pass any sentence on them.
(The two respondents . appea.red today sth July 1965
before the . Court and tendered their unqualified apology
which has been accepted by the Court as well as U Ba Tin,
learned advocate for the applicant.) The two respondents
having tendered their apology they are hereby discharged.
. No costs. .
CIVIL REFERENCE
Before Dr. Maung Maung, C.J., and U Saw Ba Thein and U Chit, JJ.
c.c. PLASCOL SYNDICATE (APPLICANT)

1965
Aug. 12.
v.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BURMA
{RESPONDENT).*
Burma Income-Ta.'>!: Act, s. 66 (r)--income from undisclosed source--inclusion

in the assesS71lent--whether in~lusion fustified.
Plascol Syndicate was assessed to income-ta.'<. for the assessment year

1955-56 on a total income of K 1,36,688.ss as against K xz,o20.3o, the amount
returned by Mr. B. Ghosh, the sole owner of the firrn. The difference.was
due to add-backs of two sums, namely K 8o,8ox.zs and K 37,000 as receipts
from the undisclosed sources by the Income-tax officer, Group C.
The assessee contended that the first sum was put in by him as his daughter's
captital in order to provide for her future. He explained that this sum accrued
from an inheritance left to him by his mother who died in Calcutta. As
regards the seco~d sum the ex-planation put forward by Mr. Ghosh was that
it wns in fact a surplus retumP.d to the capital after he had, at one time,
withdrawn a bigger sum from the original capital. The Income-tax officer
did not accept the explanation, and i~stead made the assessments. Thereupon,
the assessee took his appeals to the Additional Assistant Commissioner of
Income-tax (appeals) and to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal without success.
Hence this reference.
The following q"..lestions have been referred under s. 66 (x) of the Burma
Income-tax Act, at the instance of the applicant-
(x) Whether in th.e circumstances ~f the ~se tlte Inc~me-tax Officer
was justified in treating the sum of K 8o,8ox.zs as income from
undisClosed source.
(2) Whether in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Officer
was justified in treating the sum of K 37,ooo as income from .
undisclosed source.
(3) Whether in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Officer
was justified in in~luding in the assessment for the year 1955-56 .
the sum of K 8o,8o1.25 as income from undisclosed source:
4
* Civil Reference of 1965 against the order of the Income-tax Appellate
Tribunal of Rangoon in its Reference No.7 of 1964 arising out of the order
dated the 29th dav of July 1964 passed in appeal No. 28 of 1963.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 6Q7
(4) Whether in the circ\l.lmtances of the case the Income-taK Officer c.c.
was justified in including in the assessment for the year 1955-56 1965
the sum of K 37,000 as income from undisclosed sow-ce. PLASCOt.
SYNDICATB
There is sufficient material on record to justify the finding that the two
sums of money represented income of the assessee from undisclosed source. THE COM- "
As the assessee was unable to offer a reasonable explanation for the two entries MISSioNER OF
the Income-tax Officer was justified in adding the two sums for the assess- INcoME-TAX,
BURMA.
ment in the year 1955-s6. Each of the four questions referred to is therefore
answered in the affirmative.
The Bank of Chettinad Ltd.v. Thf- Commissioner of ltzcome-tax Burma,
civ. ref. No. x8 of (1963) of the Chief ~Court; Vishnuathamk Chetty v
Commissioner of Inunne-tax, Madras, (1958) 34 I. T. R. 678; Lafwanti Sial
and others v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal,
Nagpur, (1956) 30 I.T.R. zz8; Daniel v. Commissioner of Income-tax,
Bangalore, (1961) 43 I.T.R. 119; P Kuttikrishnan Nair v. Commissioner of
Incom?.-tax, Bangalore, (x96x) 41 l.T.R. 597 ; Kali Khan Mohammad Hanif
v. Commissioner of lncome-ta.x, Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal, (1963) so
I.T.R. t , referred to.
U Paing for the applicant.
Ba Kyaw (Assistant Attorney-General) for the respondent.
DR. MAUNG MAUNG, C.J .-The following questions have

been referred to us under section 66 (r) of the Burma
Income-tax Act, at the instance of the applicant, Plascol
Syndicate:
r. Whether in the circumstances of the case the
Income-tax Officer was justified in treating ~he
suin of K 8o,80I25 as income from undis-
closed source?
2. Whether in the circumstances of the case the
Income-tax Officer was justified in treating the
sum of K 37,000 as income from undisclosed
source?
3. Whether in the circumstances of. the case the
Income-tax Officer was justified in including
in the assessment for the year 1955-56 the
sum of K 8o,8or-25 as income from undisclosed
source?
c.c. 4 Whether in the circumstances of the case the

1965
Income-tax Officer was justified in including
PLASCOL
SYNDICATE i!l the assessment for the year 1955-56 the
'V.
TliE CoM-
sum of K 37,000 as income from undisclosed
)dtssxoNER oF source?
INCOME-TAX,
BURMA. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has in its succinct
Syndicate was assessed to income-tax for the assessment
5tatement laid out the brief facts o.f the case. Plascol
year 1955-56 on a total income of K 1,36,688ss as against
K r2,o2030, the amount returned by Mr. B. Ghosh, the
sole owner of the firm. The difference was due to add-
backs of t\vo sums, namely, K 8o,80I25 and K 37,000 as
receipts from undisclosed sources by the Income-tax Officer,
Group C.
TI1.e assessee contended that the first sum was put in
by him as his daughter's capital in order to provide for
her future. He explained that this sum acqued from an
inheritance left to him by his mother who died in Calcutta.
As regards the second sum the explanation put forward
by Mr. Ghosh was that it was in fact a surplus returned
to the capital after he had, at one time, withdrawn a
bigger sum from the original capital. The Income-tax
Officer did not accept the explanatiions and decided that
the sums of money were made up of receipts from undis-
closed sources, and that he was justified in adding the two
sums back for purposes of. assessment. The assess.ee t ook
his appeals to the Additional Assistant Commiss~oner of
..Income-tax (Appeals), Rangoon District and to the Income-
tax Appellate Tribunal without success. Wben the
assessee made an application to the Tribunal for a reference
to this Court, the Departmen.t al Representative argued that.
. . the finding that the two sums were income from und:ls-
. closed sources was a findi"Iig of fact and that no question
-<:>f law arose to invoke the provisions of section 66 (r) of
the Burma Income-tax Act. U Paing, . learned Advocate
for the assessee, who appeared before the .Tribunal pointed
BURMA LAW REPORTS '609
-out that he was questioning the sufficiency of evidence for ~9f;

the finding and the Tribunal which had entered that finding. PuscoL
in concurrence with the Additional Assistant Commissioner Sn.'DrCATE
of Income-tax, would not be the proper judge as to whether THECoM-
there had been such a sufficiency. The Tribunal generously r~~~=A~~
agreed and referred the questions to this Court. BuRMA.
The jurisdiction of this Court under the Income-tax
Act is merely advisory and the decisions of the Appellate
Tribunal on facts are final and cannot be assailed unless
they are " unjudicial and capricious." Complete absence
o r gross insufficiency of evidence may render a finding of
fact unjudicial and capricious. However, in examining
whether sufficient evidence has be~n adduced to make a
good foundation for a finding of fact, this Court must
exercise due care and caution to resist being involved too
de~ply in the assessment of the evidence. Unless that is
done this Court would find itself in the role of another
appellate Court, which it is nQt. This principle is
expounded with his usual learning by U San Maung, J., in
The Bank of Che.t tinad Ltd. v. The Commissioner of Income-
tax,Burma (r).
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, from whose
decision this reference has arisen, has dealt thoroughly
with the question of the add-backs made by the Income-tax
Officer. In regard to the larger sum, namely, K 8o,80I25
the Tribunal has found the reasons giv.en by the Income-tax
Officer in rejecting the assessee's explanation entirely
adequate. After finding generally that the assessee's
accounts had been inaccurate and irr-egular, even on his
own admission, the Income-tax Officer has found his story
that K 8o,8or25 was part of an inheritance and put into
the firm's accounts to provide for his daughter's future
unworthy of credit. In his eXtensive remarks on this
. queStion the Income-tax Officer has pointed out that the
assef.'\~e was unable to produce any evidence that he did
(1) Civ. Ref. No. r8 of 1963 of the Chief Court.

receive an inheritance in his mother's estate. His memory

was weak on how much his other brothers and sisters
s~~~;11 received. He said that the distribution of the shares among
THE CoM- the heirs was done in the presence of the elders in Calcutta
MISSioNER oF but he could not name any of them. The assessee, the
INCOMB-TAX,
BuRMA. Income-tax 0 ffi cer remarks, h ad two ot.h er ch"Jd
1 ren f or
whose future he did not seem to show any concern. The
firm was also a sole proprietorship.
After going into the accounts of the firm from the
assessment year back to 1946-47, the Income-tax Officer
came to the conclusion on the hard facts and figures drawn
from the assessee's own books that the sum of K 8o,80I25
must really be made up of receipts from undisclosed
sources.
U Paing, learned Advocate for the applicant,_. relies
heavily on a passage in the order of the Income-tax Officer
in which he seemed to say that the sum must really be
the assessee's own capital put under the disguise of a loan:
(~~teo~:~ G~'jf:q1 G0J:~~~~~ ~'XY)~ft(;lp)') ~~(.)10)~)
U Paing argues that on this finding the sum would not be
liable to income-tax, for be it capital or loan it would not
be assessable.
We have given careful consideration to this argument
but we find that while the passage, torn from its context,
might make out that the Income-tax Officer regarded the
sum _of money as assessee's capital yet, on reading his
thorough 'di~c.ussion on the matter, we find that the passage
only marks a trend of thought, not a finding of fact. The
finding, simply pu( is that the sum has accrued from
uridi.sclosed sources.
Regarding the add-backs of K 3i,ooo,_U Paing argues
that it is on record that the assessee withdrew some sums
of money from th.e capital,deposited th~ sumS with f~iends,
and later returne'd K 37,ooo . into the funds of the. fum.
The sum, therefore, he argues, cannot be held to be income
from an unrevealed source. The Appellate Tribunal, on
BURJv1A LAW REPORTS 611
the other hand, ha_s concurred with the Income-tax Officer c.c.
965
in the finding that the sum must represent income from [
undeclared sources. The Income-tax Officer has dealt with S PLAscoL
YNDICATE
this matter at some length. Before him, the assessee at v.
. . K d TH~; CoM-
first explamed that he had Withdrawn 72,400 to a vance MissxoNER oF
a loan to a friend in need. The assessee later changed his IN~o;:~~~x,
position and stated that as business was dull he withdre\Y
the money and kept it with him. Yet a third explanation
was advanced, namely, that he withdrew the money and
deposited it with friends to provide for the children's
future because he himself was in poor health at the time.
He spent K I I,6o6 on medical expenses, K 2o,ooo on
jewellery for his children and K 3,8oo on household expen-
diture and later, when business looked up, he returned
the remainder, that is, K 37,000 to the firm. The Income-
tax Officer was not satisfied with these conflicting explana-
tions and concluded that K 37,000 was income from undis-
closed sources. With this view both the Additional
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the
Appellate Tribunal were in full agreement.
U Paing refers us to Vishnukantham Chetty v. Com_mis-
sioner of Income-tax, Madras (2) to support his argument
that when there was no evidence to support a fin<llng that
the amount added-back for assessment was income which
accrued to the assessee in the relevant accounting period
it could not be assessed to tax. The learned Advocate
also dr:aws our attention to Lajwanti Sial and others v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal.
Nag pur (3) in which it has been held that where an assessee
proves certain sources from which the money relating to
a credit entry in the accounts could be drawn such money
cannot be regarded as money derived from an undisclosed
source, even though the assessee is not able to connect
the money with any particular solirce. If the assessee
offers a reasonable explanation, U Paing argues, it cannot
(:a) (1958) 34 I.T.R. 678. (3) (1956) 30 I.T.R. 228.
be rejected on mere suspicion or on imaginary grounds.

The principles enunciated in the rulings cannot be
PLAscoL questioned but the test is whether the assessee is able to
S YNDICATE
v. offer reasonable explanation regarding the credit entry
M~O~~~F which is the subject of scrutiny. If there is evidence no
IN~~~~x, at all to support a finding of fact entered by the Income-tax
authorities, then again, of course, the finding must be
disturbed as unjudicial and capricious or perverse, but as
we have observed at the outset, when we put a finding of
fact to those tests we must constantly bear in mind that
we do not function as a Coun of Appeal.
U Ba Kyaw, the _learned Assistant Attorney-General,
who appears for the respondent, submits that adequate
grounds exist for the tinding of fact recorded by the
Appellate Tribunal and the authorities below. Also, he
points out, the onus is on the assessee to .prove that a
credit entry does not constitute his income. If the assessee
does not 'discharge the burden to the satisfaction of the
income-tax authorities they would be justified to draw a
presumption that the credit was from a concealed source
of income. U Ba K.yaw refers us, in support of this
state~ent, to Daniel v. Commis~ioner of Income-
tax, Bangalore (4) P. K.uttikrishna.n Nair v. Commissioner
of Income-tax, Bangalore (5) and Kali Khan Mohammad
Hanif v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madhya Pradesh and
Bhopal (~. Some of the authorities cited by both U Paing
and U Ba Kyaw befpre us were also placed before the
learned Appellate. Tribunal by the Counsel who appeared
for the parties before the Tribunal. The Tribunal made
its decision in full and .correct appreciation of the principles
involyed.
we.consider that there is sufficien~ material on.record
to justify the finding that the two ~urns of mon,ey repre-
sented. income . . of the. assessee from undisclosed sonrces. .
(4) (rg6r) 43 I.T,R. ng. (5) (xg6x) 41 I.T.R. 597

(~). (xg63) so I.T.R. t.
As the assessee. was unable to offer a reasonable explana- c.c.

z9fis
tion for the two entries the Income-tax Officer was justified
in adding back the two sums for assessment in the year PLASCOL
SYNDICATE
1955-56. Our t;tnswer to each of the four questions referred v.
THE Co~
to us will therefore be in the affirmative. MISSIONER OF
The applicant must bear the costs of :this reference. IN coME-TAx,
- ---- BURMA.
Advocate's fee is assessed at K 170.
REGULAR SUIT
Bej()Te U KyatJJ Zan U, J.
THE STATE COMMERCIAL BANK {PLAINTIFF)

July v.
UKHIN MAUNG THAT AND TWO OTHERS
(DEFENDANTS). *
Civil Procedure Code Order 1 Rule 1 0 or s. 15 I -application by a stranger to.

the suit to implead as a necessary defendant- 0 34, R. 1 1elated to mortgage
suits.
A stranger to the suit applies under Order I, Rule IO of the Code of Civil
Procedi.Ire or under s. 151 of the said Code to implead her as a "necessary
defendant in the mortgage suits to avoid multiplicity of suit; on the ground that
the mortgaged property is her OVI'll by virtue of a registered sale deed and that
the had been in possessiou of th~ ~ume. The plaintiff denies that the defendant
is the owner m possession of the suit properties and th at she is a necessary party
to the suit.
Held : Order I, Rule 10 of the Code is general and has no application to the
present suit. Nor s. 151 of the Code has any application, when ther e is an
express provision . of law.
The ordinary rule is that a plaintiff-mortgagee cannot be allowed so to frame
his suit as to draw into controversy the title of a thi;d party who i~ in no way
connected with the mortgage and ha~ set up a title paramount to that of the
mortgagor and mortgagee. Order 34, Rule 1 of the Code relates specificalfy to
mortgage suits.
Jaggeswar Dutt v. Bhuban Moha1; ]11itra, I.L.R. Cal. 33 425; Mmmg San
Myaing v. U P 011 Gyato, i.L.R . 2 Ran. ~o6; M . V.il.L, Viswa11athan Chettyar
v. Ma Aye and three others, I .L .R. 2 Ran ..21 4; U Shwe Kyuandjour othtrs v. M a
Tin U, (1948) B.L.R. 6o6 at 6o7 H .C. ; Ma Tin U v. U Shtue Kyu and fou r
c tl-zers, (1 950) B.L .R. 128 S.C. ; N .A. A nnamalai Chettyar v. Mohamed Yaya
and two others, (1954) B.L.R. 86 H .C.; U Maung and one v. Ma Hla Yin and
even others, (1954) B.L .R. 264, refen:ed to.
Than Sein for .- the plaintiff.

Hla Pe (2) for the defendants Nos_. 1 2.
Maung Maimg for the d~fendant ~o. 3
Dr. Ba Maw for the .applicant.
iJ. Civil Regular Suit Np. 6 1 of 1963.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This js an application filed on 4th c.c.

I96S
February 1965 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil
Procedure or under sectron . I5I o f t he sa1'd code by Daw THB STATE
CoMMl!RCIAL
Khin Khin a stranger to the suit to implead her as a B~K

necessary defendant in this mortgage suit to avoid ~~:
multiplicity of suits on the ground that the mortgaged THAT AND
. . h TWO OTHE:RS.
property (7I Wmdermere Road, Rangoon) IS er own
property by virtue of the registered sale deed dated I 3th
July I96o in her favour executed by Daw Yin Yin and
that she. has been in possession of the same. She denied
that the mortgagor (defendant No. 3) is owner; she
stated that he mortgaged the property with the plaintiff
Bank at the instigation of the defendants relying upon a
false document. She alleged that in Civil Regular Suit
No. 43 of 1960 Tin Tin Oo Brothers also filed a mortgage
suit in respects of the same property against two others
viz. U Sein Kyaing and U Kyaw Sein from whom Daw Yin
Yin had purchased impleading her (applicant) and the
present plaintiff as defendants. She stated that there is
still another suit being Civil Regular Suit No. r62 of 1961
wherein the defendants Nos. I and 2 sue~ for a declaration
that they are the O\~mers of the suit property.
rae plaintiff de.J!.ied that the applicant is the owner in
possession of the suit property .and that she is a necessary
party to its mortgage suit. . The defendant No. I stated
that the defe~dant No. 3 is the real owner.
The !aw is settled. Under the old law i.e. section 85
of the Transf~r of Property Act which bas now been
repealed all persons having an intereSt .in the mortgaged
property must be impleaded but now under Order 34 ~ule
I of the Cod~ of Civil Procedure " all pe.rsons having an
interest in the mortgage-security or in the right .of
red~p:>.ptio.n shan be joined as partieS ". This relates
specifically to :n:lOrJgage suits. Order I Rule ro of the
Code is general and has no application to the present suit.
It applies .to other kin~ of suits where a party is
44
improperly impleaded and it is necessary that a person,

whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before
cTHB STATE the Court may b.e necessary in order to enaple the Court
OMMilRCIAL d l l .. d' . }
B&"'K effectually an comp.ete y to adJU ICate upon ana sett e
u K"aiN all the questions involved in the suit is required to be
~AUNn added. Nor section 151 of the Code has any application. .
....
~nAT AND
TWo OTHI!lls. When there is express provision of law inherent power .of
the Court has no place.

The ordinary rule is that a plaintiff-mortgagee cann9t
be allowed to so frame his suit as to draw into controversy
the title of a third party vvho is in no way connected with ..
the mortgage and has set a title paramount to that of the
mortgagor and mortgagee as laid down in ]aggeswar Dutt
v. Bhuban Mohan Mitra (1) which is one of the leading
cases on the point and followed in Maung San Myaing v.
U Pon Gyaw (2) and M.V.A.L. Viswanath.an Chettyar v.
Ma Aye and three others (3) which was follo~ed in
U Shwe Kyu and four others v. Ma Tin U (4). The last
mentioned authority was confirmed by the Supreme Court
in Ma Tin U v. U Shwe Kyu and four others (5). I may
.also refer to N.A. Annamalai Cb.ettyar v . .fv!ulwmed Yaya
-and two others (6) where the Appellate Bench agreed with
me that third parties setting up a paraJ?lOUnt or
independent title to th' mortgaged property are not
-n ecessary parties to the mortgage suit and confirmed my
judgment w:hich was pronounced when I :yvas District Judge
at Bassein. .
The facts. in Maung San Mjaing v..U Pon Gyaw (2) are
very. much the same as in the present c;:ase. In that case
also a third patty was in pos~ession and claimed to be
Qwner. H~ challenged th~ mortgagor's right to mortgage
the property and it was held he was not a ~ecessary party
to 1:he ?iortgage su!t. In M.V..A.t. Viswanathan .Chattyar
(1) I.L.R. 33 Cal. 425. .(2) I.L.R. '2 Ran. xo6.
(3) I.L.R. 4 Ran. 214. (4) (1948) B.L.~. 6o6 at 6o7 H;.C.
(S) (1950) B.L.R. 128 S.C. (6). (1954) B.L.R. 86 H.C..
BURMA LAW REPO.RTS 617
v. Ma A.ye and three others (3) it says what Order 34 Rule c. c.
I96S
I means is " that persons who have an interest through
the mortgagor anal are t hus mtereste
d m
t he eqmty of THB STATB
CoMMBRC
redemption must be so joined. The title of the mortgagor B~K

to the property which he has purported to mortgage u KHlN
MAUNG
cannot be investigated in a suit on the mortgage. The THAT AND
decree when passed wil.l be effective only against such Two oTHBRs.
interest as the mortgagor had at the time of executio;n of

the mortgage, or has since acquired so as to render that
interest subject to the mortgage under section 43 of the
Transfer of Property Act. On a sale under the mortgage
only such interest will pass to the purchaser and any
interest which a third party ho_lds adversely to the
mortgagor will not be affected. Such thj.rd party has,
therefore, no interest in the mortgage security or the right
of redemption and should not be joined as a party to the
suit either by the mortgagee or at his own instance. "
Moreover where the plaintiff does not seek any remedy
from the applicant and against whom there is no claim
whatsoever, she should not be added as a defendant.
U Maung and one v. Ma Hla Yin and seven others .(7).
This was a suit for eviction and for possession based on
title and the application was made to implead a party
under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
In the result the applicatio~ i~ rejected with costs.
Th~ applicant shall pay Advocate's fee K 51 to the
plaintiff.
,.
-
II cccd~oroo o8:cec:ccl.:cra.;a:; ecx&a.;~~C'Je ~~ccoet'o to~ft:::'Ch,leec
.) \.) .)~ .) .) 0 .) .)~ 0 .) :::1 .
4bw6x.o~coCbe.:x>
.).).) . ) . ) . )
lwde>:8i;cccct.ucd~e.c
e:J.:> o\
u~:~cocece>
Y.:>
co:h,l~bcbco
e.:J
o~0l;cC2o
.).) 0
1cbeococ&x:cdb;,e
\.) . .)
o&,
.)
c co~e.c~ooeoFlcoo.c:>Cb
.) .) .)~~1.:>
1
e Cl:ltlc
;:J
In:>
::?~
:~&:cbc.o::-l;ru<J> cocccco 1~~ccdrcoee~ a.;cco1c co~fte.c:oco u.)<Ccceoo:o
6.:J .) .) 3 .) ...J .) .) " 0 .:>0 .) \ .)
i:uc&wc!t."O::;a..:to:2
~ .) .) 0 E>
bm C(f ~dx;ec:2
.)
:ecorcr~cco"cb
.) .)
:.c~eccce>~ft~.....Q
.) :::1 0 ~
:c.ooG.dj,
\ .)
cw:db:ocn<Bcd[u:llitu
.) .) .)
L~h'ccce>:c.oore~
0 .)-i 0 \
C2cce:cbco
.)
o&,
.)
'::.>feeooro
.:; .)
~ccom
:y .) ~
lco:~&:ct>ecccco;>d::d
~
cr,S.
~0..).J._
n
~
.. de.in6-
uC2cc:oee~<J>n:!
.) .) ~
'J.Cic&:G
!j
:beG ooJ f:ch~~:,ib~coo~J,
"' .) ...)
~~ O:OIG ICO:h.ltc~cbco ccooeb~.aA
~ t., ~0 .) ~0,:)
llcdv:~:-:.;c.lb::~C!..~:):2:::eo
~ \. .=> ~ o e.:>
cRl woed1Gk.ccd~
;:, ..>
1b b1.1~c
~
tJ_.J
"~~~:hJ&:d~
:> e::J
.:.x..c:>cbo&:n<k
:> :>0.)
I~!Wcccco
OJ 3
ttb:o:oe.&d~ee.~
_ l.
:be..-: (c)
\
0c ~hc~a:; v v
:<.~~;c:c<J>Pc:~;::.; l_t'">:?ies (~~dx.oc.:x~) ~c.&ud, (J;-e,) f,d, ~c~~c.w

5f-!c.ltoe> ICO (~:~o:~) ~oLd:t:cccS'x.lb:.e>n u~Petg :~l!c:chco_.
;t ~=.~1
.~ ,.:,...!,
t9~13e>b:~u
6":::1 0
uw~oec&:bezcoococ
.) .) ~ro~<kboceoQ
.) .) .):.:1
u:<kcc{J):2u v rr booeo ~
uwcoeccc:c.oococlro$<!
11
:>O e .) .) .) .) .)
II 1 o
noccaocccn
11 I 1
: G~ee rGec
())
c 1 '1
vc acoceoccoec 1111
IC.Incc:c.G>re:cooe
.) ~ . .) .) . 0
r
::>~
.)
5~6r] S.l)1Qd31I .M.Y1 VW"HOH 8l9

':":1
11 ccccec.ucoc.uc.coa.:c.ICC~fl:>ce:>
1<7 11"1'
:> .:> 0 :> :> .:>
nC2cccdocoePe~<'le.G
.:> :> 0 .:> .:>0
4b:o~2roM::l oo:~&:dxccc~<b~~e
.:> C:> .:>:J e.::J .:> .:>0
coc.ccco g,b:ce~oocococ.uce~es ,&oo:2:2co:~tbcbcocoo~cba:cccb ecce-.
J. .:> .:>.:> .:> oo ee e.::! .:> .>
cco~:;cc:c.f;;les ,oa;f,:~&:dxO cco.o>dd-:cokcc~:ce~a~~eco ~~eslf'R
.:> .:> :::J . e.::J .:> .:>0.:> .:> .:> 0 ~
tbes ::.J~cb <'loh:bo~Pa.:cco~cb
.:> .:> .:>
lbc.uP001o
';S'.:> .:>
h.>:c.rfl~f'les:~wce.G~ ~c. ~e&
0 .:>O o .:> .J :::::3 0
ncccc:>~oo~ko bes f\c) 0c floh ~Glccb<h~fl ~=~61c.u~:>c.ce~ob:>"JCJ

:> .:>00 " " .:> ..J 0 .:> ~ .:> " .J :J
beo(c) Cc flOh~eJo2cveo:cP~:c.ooPe:to~eJ
.:> .:> o
'ba.:cccoo~~~ b :>olPec.M8c;:::J
':5' .:> .:> .:> e:::::l
c.cc~:4-rt!C2b
.:> :>
JOeJe.Gflctecflcb
..J., 0
(..J.,e~) f'lcb e:cbco :>~b:x:.cleeooeo 0.:> 0 0;}
l9c.&cfl:)c.oo
:.J
o .:>~~c.(oa;c.
Y .:> 1.. .:>
~rooo.:bo:2 1cbco:0JeJ~~es ~Heeso~IC.o
.:> o e o .:> .:>.:>
u ~:~:c&dd:.o
;)~ .:> 0
C2cc.m:::eo:cf,
:> l, ,)
beooeo2
:.bcQ c.f,::>t:lc.u~oo:o
.:> ::::1.:> o .:>
beo cor f'loh:bo~Pa.:cc.oo .:> .:> o .:> .:> o e
COOIIJ IC.U~~:2
II:)
Y.:> 1.. .:> e
:~g,eJi5eJb:~eo lkcco CCCeliOCVCD f,a;ccb:lJ>ro
&:1 o o l..:>o .:> o
u~:~:c&cx-ccc~cx-~ tcCCf11ob
y '\..) :>1..
:ceeJootd=leo :hlcucoa.:ce~~ lbPdcgcc 4bco:tecc.oeJ:~ oeese:cbco
.:> o e.J:> .:> ':5' .:> .:> o .:> o .;., o .
roca.:cc:hlea;roE,j .:>
~c~c!N~<ito:C!
o .:> .:> o e
beo (c) Gc eoho~<":2a.:eo:::ib.
.:> .:> .:>
~~~ccccc.uwflM:c P<'lc.uPe:ckShl,c) (c) Cc flooceo2cces :c.r~&:cQPd:o;e.
.:>:1 e .:> o .:> .:> .:> :.Jt., .:> .:> o
,:,c.~eccc~~fl::>t:l:c.oo:~&:b~ :>ceo~&~@ c.uf'lc.Cecfl<h ( 1e~) f'lcb &
.:> :::::3 0 .:>::::1 .:> .J ,) ..J 0 ..J.,
:c.~re:to;~ b~:>to:>~Q IC[,:c.PfmlPecaeoc;:::J cccet;::;&;}:O ~r ~~

0 .) .:>O .) e'J .:> o e:::::J O:> 0 ::.J .:>
cr .br
.rr c.~Pflc~ toCc . co[,ro~:~cca.o> . .:> e.::l.:> .:> ::; y e.::J 0 :>
~:~ t 6'J
,)wcccb ::; ~coc.ccco
3
'bwcccoo~~~eJ
':5',) ,) ,) c.cc~:coo:&:re~
l,
~ooflcb a.:ccoo
.:> l, 0
::>eo~eo~co H IO~c:cc:tc<'l4-o~
:> . L. :::::3 .:>
c.Mfw w:cPA&a.:ceoeJ
.:>
IW:c.Pc:;cde:k%1
0 .J .:> :.J
II~CCet'lcb
0 ,)
ll!)Geo2wro :cPelc:c~re:to;eJ u,)C2cc,o:~eo:c~ C2ccS.~eoccceccb:cc~Pe

(,Le~) ~cb ;)~ ,) 0 l, .:> .:> .:>0 ,) 0 ,)
r
y': w:b::0:~~ik:ce.se Jc.u:4ccG:2 :~4d5~~c.C2o ~:>&:coowci'"C\J~
o.:> .:> :>ooe e.::!. o Y .:>
C.OOG
~ 1,; u,)C2cce::::&:>co c.&a..:c~a:-d~::ce::>Fil beo db ~mh:bo~rw
" .:> ,) .:> .:> :>...J :J .) .:>
coo.:;,cb
_,
:>CoccomMZ
.:> ,) '$
ta.:ccoc
.:> l,
&:cooccdb:e
:>
~~ccdPwefl~~~eobo
.:>...., ,) 0 .:>0 0
619 S.D:IOdffii M V1 VW1lflH

~.,
u2cc:~~@b
ro 0c c< tQbce
...,
~~ cdllc 1 (b)C.et~aes~
~ .>0
t:oo(J)rec.ccd:(J)
0 .> 0 0
M :oo(J)tebl!ot()(C~
.5 0 ~ 0 t,.
.) .) .)
.
c.
u2cc<Qcb:ol:l:oc.J:;Jew:&ro
:;, .,:=~ .,)~ .> ~ o&kc .)2ce:o!J
.,) .,)~ ;
: .jobo~ .>~
G~WeOCes

ecb:re~!>~
.,)
o&co
.,)
'&wc.Fco~
.)
cr)
:hl&:oc.oo~ooc:c.00ooe
0'1 .) .) .)0
&x>:c.!l,

.
~~5~sollsoro ~:de?isooxcoso~G.w~:~ree&c.cc~frw ~~ ~~ c.msn~es

~~ (b) &bewc.Fco~ aech:c.o:2o . ~a l; :decb:ol:l:oc.J:;J~aa&es o&,&GI(Z .
:) .,:) . "' .) 0 0 .)~.) :::::::1 .) ~
11 ~t'>fbgesio~S2rof ~~cb:g:~J~es:&eo
o&,cbct;
j 0
u2ccQIQ4boes:o~2ro~hl
.) .):].) .> .) .:>:.3 &oo&hl:x:o:CC!~o
0 ~,) .)
~m@~oc.cc~Cloooecc~wcch>
0 .) ~.) .) 0
off:owc.~:'Joo/khl
.) .) ~
a!Gwcccoo
.)~ . ~.) .)
;~:CC~OeCC:'JWCC
"' .) .>
C.CC:'JOQ: oPeec II
.,:J.,) II wteooi:J:l:e
.,) ~ ::1.

II (!)C.OC.CC~
0
1
alC'
O.J
CI"J IO::l.>tj, ;C.eGnCC..)C...,'Ct'> 10WICC(J)OeCC:'JC.OCC
..., b .-,o
,J .>
, ,. 1 1 n 1
I.ICII> I'GO 100 OIWOOO~OO
.) .) .)
r
11w6rc
:jig .) 1 ..
.) 000<:\X)
.)Q
S.DIOdffii M.Y1 VW'tlflg OZ9

,..
O~:S:J
t:!lT;,~~ o1 J
~~
J
Q <'
2ltJtiG~?C
o1 jU
" When an inquiry or a trial in any criminal Court is

concluded, the Court may make such order as it thinks fit
for the disposal, by destruction, confiscation, or delivery to
any person claiming 'to be entitled to possession ~erefore.
or otherwise, . of any property or document produced before
it or in )ts custody, or~ regarding which any offence appears
to hav:e been committed, Of which has been used for the .
commission. ofany offence."
r,:c- oc- . . ' C' )
( t:::~tQ?~CC 2UGS~~ 01 4>:>QJ:Up \lOj II
cnococce~e~ :<.2o:>~~4ero~cc:2 t~<-2cc(j)hl~[Ecccc4bhl cccteesccce:::cnhc.c[.,
.:>~~!.:> :> :..J '--
.:>
CBJf'm
:>
01 '
oo
coreec
:>
2 :> ..
CDoe.EJ:o~
.:> e
a.;c:c~
,,.:> CCCO(J):le
1o 1
tG~
, . n lr1
.:> '\ .:>
ru:cte~cmm~:JaeBII!)CCf!fl
10
e l. .:> :> o . .:> ..L o .:> ::> o oo.

''o~~e~:ceorococQ:>eecccea.;cc
0 .:> . J
IGa.;cccooo~Cb:~k:l::x.I=':J:::ro
'5':> .:> .:> :>:::I J .::::::1
~ccteC2cc&
.) 0 .:> .
ccc~cc :@cd:oi~Qoro:oe&C.C
.J 0 .) :::1.:> 0 \ ~
iffi ll&fl4c.o~Sce
J
&keo
00 0 .) ..L
I G~ .:>o~:4cc:4cc
.:>
IGe>
.) -.1,;
'..:>~c.o4c.o
.:> ..L
1c~ ~~ce,~~es:2
.:> e
to:::cQ~:ccooro:o~
o :> ::::::1 :>
&oo~cc:2
o .:>
(J)~e.c;eecm
e .:>......s o
'l:mc.Pflc.O~a.;rocmcn~ro
o .:> .:> .:>
:hltn:Pee;e
eJ
~co*cc:2
.:> e
C2cd:O~b:::b
.:> . o .:> .:> ..L
me :>~~~
oe IGeJ &0.;1[13
.) ..L 0 \. ~
IICCCC~oto
.:>
:<.2coccocn~hroe~FJ
.) l. .:> J 00 l.
lee.E?ccc~oemeco~b~b
.:>
1ce
J .:> -.1,;
&co~cc:2
o o .:>
tu:cr~wc.::ccnco~es
e o .:>. .:> .:>
11 C2ccb&>~ h.:@cc:c.ro:tcco~a.;ro::&>
.:> o .:> o :> . .:> :>
(r) co<)cr;eccec.c;CC
.:> .:>
:~robtomto~b~b
J .:>0 .:> 0 .:> .:> ..L
IG~ li@cc&cc.eecc .:> .
w:;.b:;b
.) .:> ..L
IGel
I~WCCCOOO~@cc:re~ CCOOe.HBJgto 000'00 j~ ~CO;cc:2 IC~@cc:;oo I C:~
'5'.:> .:> .:> .:> .:> e o :> e .:> .:> ..L
e~ro
.:>
~ooCb4~11}1
:> ~
II @cc:ccooro:oei::C;!,>cc;2 to:dflCC~o:ca:co(;~ W
.:> .:> o.:> e o .> ,, .:>
ecc~cocc co6,~e 1ce t 8Glccoo:~ccoe IG:be>oEjcCD (o:cPeccfJcco:c.ocm~aro
0 .J .:> ..L .J..J 0 .:> '5' .:>......s 0 J .:> .:>
:~torocowr.:>to::-S &cot'O~b~b IF>f'lMlJ>:')~ 1ce 1co~cc:2 ccc4e<cc:hlolre
o
.:>o
In
tecOico
o
1
Yo .>
uoe>l' If
} JOFJ
o o :> .:> ..L :>
1 ~ <> } .:> ..L 1 .:> n e .:>r . .:> eJ.:>
c.occcc:~cc:o~CD roeece,c w:CI<'lCCfla.:o:cmcoooro
1n
.) 0 Ol. .)' :> .:> o . 0 .) .) .:>
ccce!Fi]eoo 6J\0
::>roolfec.accce:rb:Pee&:>
.:> .:> L o
u.:>C2cc:r:S:re~~hlo1Pec.(J)
l. .:>:1.:>
(r) cc~e.c .:>
~ccea.xc ecb:Pe~ tc~::Je ICel 000'00 jeflfl :@a::a.;;!,>cc:2 uC2cc
- .:> .:> o .:> ..L o oo .:> .:> e .:>
::ccoow 0hlcrJeflce.c :c.er;~cc:2 toooCb:re~ ooo'oo ~~ a.:&w wt;<.o
.:> .:>:1 .:> e .:> o .:> . e
coS.cc:2
0 .;, e
rrc~of!~f..Fl
.)
::>eo::..W~;c.o~wgc.o
.) v:..J .:> .) 0 J e
(ogcr~co<)a.:ro
0 .:> .:>
coccol!1cs
.:>
ccc:>
l!;b:::Jb @ccke IGe uC2ccccb.):oeJi6@1=':Jt-o :cco::cctb:::S u@ccco:~c.cc~
0 .:> :> :> ..L .) .:> 0 :5.) ::::::Jo .:> 0 .:> :> .:>
~&l:::Jb
o o :>
!G004bcckl
'S'o .:>
o~&o::Jrohco~oog(.o
:J .:> o., o .:> e
t'W:cPFJc.mm~hro
o .:>
~1:0
::>o
bco
.:>
1ce> .:>~b6~b
..L
10e 1:4cc:4cc
.:> .:> ..L .:> .:>
10e
..L
14m~m 1c~ roC:~~:h::2
.:> .:> ..L .:> . e
wke 18~
.:> ..L
ll@ce(J)hlcrowl;,sc<)~b~b
.:> ~:J .:> Ol.
!Geeco u cccca>~ccccv&:G:~ru1e~fl
.) .:> ..L .:> .:>:::.1 .:> Ov :> .:>
C!.Y;)kb rG~
.:> .:> ..L
:>be>(1)~6::,
.., .:> o
uC2ccotc~0~a.~e
.:> .:> '5' .:>
cs:1~c
::J
b..:otcroccoc.d!lrm~fo4e.4~@cc&
o .J .:> ot,; .:> :> :>
tJC2ccOihlccowt1,m:>fo4e~el
.;, .:>:1 .:> ol. .:> .:>
~~a.:ccf!C\:ru~
'$ .:> oe e
a>eccc:f!Pe
:>
@ccb;:e
.:>
IG~ itC2f!
.:> ..L :>
oeb:w:2(j)
.:>
tbroc.a::~w:c~~ro th.:wPewccceoocccc~
0 .:> 0 .:> 0
~e~:c.co:::&coo
.:> 0 .:> .:>
ruro~&cce~
..) y .:>
IGcc.
'5'.:>
c ccoo~~:cPflco~ccccccom~w
.:> .:> .:> .:> .)
eccea.:ccOihl:::JPero
J .:>:1 .:>
u<2cc(l)hl
.:> .:>:1
" JO;;>l<Jql UO!S

-s~ssod m p<}[lpu~ dq Ol 3u!WP~P UOSJ;;>d .t\u-e 01 A.ldA!l<}P ,.
-c.~coPewa.:ewccc~~
.) 0 0
~b:c0:2(j)
..) .:>
~wcccooo~~e.slffi
~.) .:> J ~
,<):c.P0Wre
.:>
ro ccc~Fi] 161e> .):::tce~Gtb::>
._;..L .) 0
S.DIOdffil M.Vl VW'tlflg ZZ9

Z9 Sl~Od'irn M V1 VWl!D!
r,;:c- <: , .
O(!~j
0 ~ 0 C' C' C' 0 C'
5)G~Gyt:j: e:~~O)C\1):\)~: 20G83;) 1-fm'J:T.)');~J?~B~ GLupmcv~?::x>~ li
<: 0 0 Q C' <: 0 <:<: 0 <:
"r c "l
mc:~:-q:ri)'):G:x>') l9c9:~p:;~ 20GG(:Ip:(lf CJ~~0G~?c;pt <D9c9:
G$1~1!( Olj
C'
S,C
c r,;:c C' r,:;:: c 'I' c- c c-r.;::c- r,;:c- C' r:::-:
J ~p::n~ ~~T.[9l~UJ:I.> rr.>Gt:jX: t::lc:'PGUI <p<D~9)0J':fO)t:JC:tjl:D~ II
0
1

e:~:G(,l')C
c
;3d~~': C" c' C' C' r,;;c 0 C' C"C"
?C~,Qc;co ~!<i()~OuiOXn ~~CO:X,'<,IC') Cl.lGUII OX CD')C CT.>I~()
6
o1 jll A
c
U
c
T
o
lJ
c-r
J J'.. J A h. cl
o c
6J t.
o c c- c- o c-c
!)d;;.s:>-:; et;:o XDCI<.lG:x>') Q>"CCO~~p:~)) GOO.SQ.SG;~G ')C~00 GO II
T J" --. L . LJ -, l ... L Tlt J 1 CT.>I~()
6.1t.
OC" C" QC' 'l C"G 0 C" 00 C'O ()
Q>OJ('-:;~?;t;.:n:>
-
Q)::lco:>:ro~~')t
l l \.. J
GO?<>Ima~t()o:>~
IL -~ \t
~c
J o
0:s:oo-:>~~cooo:
l CJ
j
C".
84~1:1 QJ~O)G::0?0~':: UQ):))~) II
0 C"
;n;
' C" oo
C" <" <: <: <: C"
C01lCICOO~~Q !T.l~iC~ <ill> ::l.."XT.:GO:Q<.l4):1):~c
Jl J ti J -J l l.::..::a l -~ l I "' ()l..- J ~
c- c-~ rc r c- c _Q c- c-~ c- o c- c-r,:
ooo:x>::t:>SJI t)~'=>;;~-:mXO.JC 9:x>CT.>G:x><:>O'.JCBG:x>? ~2:~ ~eJ:roct::10?
o rc r c C' r,;:c c- 0 c- r,:;:: c- r.;::c- o
oo~ SFv~~:.m;~o~;; tj~D:x>~ 11 o:t'P~c3d~: mGG?c:19c:'P~ro
r,:c c- ,. <: C'
tlrro~~Olm(>1t~~:nu
c r,::;:: C' t:::<" 0 0 (' <: C" C'
(.))<=?::T.I~~ 830l[:~Gt:j?c:l.'jc~9~J?: ~ -=>~ ~e:CD-:>g')I~Og2u B:dCXXD~C
r O<" 'I' c c _c:. c- c- . c- \ ~
~
C' O\ C' C'
:T.)())'DIO-:JOO'~::l.):DJ:d~C: I Gl3 19C9Cel rr.l~O(.))(.))')CI.)(l)~~(\)Q CT.>I.SG:D':l
W
SdQjC: <0
C' C'
L L..
SdCI(.))(.))')
C'
L
C' C' 0
(\)C"rn:.)O)~I')g(l)
lJl
"r
G81 QC<O()')
J
C'
J A(
C"
(\)O)~O)OCCIC~ I'):COQ.
C' 0<: C'
UT
0
~ tjJ J U ~ L ; l Jf U J
OC' C' C' ~ o C' o l" ,. o l<j<:' ( BC"
~ :t>~rou~oo">c:<XItUt 2::n.scomc ccG01em;; n::r:>~~m t! 0 GO::nc: c:
IL T') ll 0 0 Tc.,; 0
C" ~ C" r,::;:: c-r.;::c- r;;:<:- C' ('
:D2 g)l::l:d~qc S:dOi[:~G~')C;l.'jc~'P [j0:D29 <fc009G00211
C' 'l'C": :'l
C' C" c C" (' r:::
<: 0
!l:dG~~::_pc:l.'jc:'P~J?:;~ 20GS
SdOO:"OO<J>I tjl.)' m<:>JCT.>S:dC\:>CT.>I:olJ?:'J:?
c- ~ o C' c ~ C' o<: o <: <:
GCO?mo:>:>:~t o2?~ <O~cro'P:~~: QJ<troG:x>?rr.xJ~Of ~-r2:cm
r,: C' (' r.~ 0 C' 0 C' (' .,
<: 0 (' <:
t::lc;;x:>:::tJ: G:D?:r.>OI~O':f: ~-J~QJ'rro"{m:x>2"
oo C" '('<:'C" '('C C'C" 'r'C"O C" o C"
2 :8f:G~:>CI
<" c co
G31 o:>fo:>fl G81 :n;;::x>fry~ G31 O)C~o_to:>C! <XI~2 ::n~
c o _c c- o c- or,:c- c o<:
C\:>:T.>OID~'P~GfG:xl') CjC:~G1 Sd~(.l)(.))')~p:Of CjC:CJiltJr9G4Xjt Sd~~
<:' C' ' r (' C' _c;: C" C' C" .$.~ G <:' C' C" C" L'\
<:>JttOJ:x>~ll G81 'J:::')CG1 !J:d~(.l)O)');~oro:n ..~ e::x>tromo~ CO?:~
(' oc (' 0 C" C'
CO:>:G.09r !l:d~~<:>JttCD Xl:l.>:x>~ II
(J) IO!nl ~I !n-:>(9) I oero~I ~g'\tjl >-:> 01211

1965] BURM.A LAW REPORTS 625
C'f,;C' C'
q'e'Oo:>r:Jcooc~
~ <> (' c:
ro'P:~e~= 2:;uQ)~t1~c
-r
G8 1 GG)')Q
e (rc c c c \
JO,CQ:)CQ.SGCDJ')())OO'):::D I
t oeti~
I ._, -IT Ji ll/
~ro ('
C'
~~ J~ CjO:>II
J
0 C' 0 c (~ (' c c c 0 ) 

<I10JJC8d0 tjC~C'Jf GCD~:>rooo:>:~'J~(
c: c: (' ( ) 0 'l (' (' 0 ~(' ~('

~O<DOOJ<;~I 't99 j:>' 0 -~U{'UI:>.>OOG:>.>9o;e:"1 t:jfGUit:!CI II
. (' ('
;o: oo91ron 11~3#:>.>?~?3#a ~01
'!'
roc('
:>.>~?
(' ('
=~:>.>oo~:>.>:
(' "Q)~:>.>:J
l U Jl.. 4 I 4 CJ Gl:...:.
(' (' (' (' (' _C: (' - 'C: !:' (' (' (' 0 (' 0 0
:l)()OlJlllQ)OO:>.)e ~9J?ro<Xj~c:J OO'fiOCIDmeJID:>.>e.n G9J?OO~::l:>e CX?_4lmrq ~~~
C' _ C' C'O 'l C' 0 C'C' C'O A\ C' f}~
OOJIP"trG::l:>? e~oc ~1'f01qe:~ ~o>:>.>::l:>e~q o:>?~otiGOI:Jl Go:>?C9J?'jll;!t::::l:
C' C'
~.S<XDCJ:?::l:>:nul;o
C' _9
?IG::l:>?ro:n:
C' C' Oh
~
__ C'
<XDo:>::l:>
"
c =:=s!O<ll
OC OC'
oc;oc~o~=c 11
0<'
JT '"' t:..:. -l ._ c.:, l ll J l\ -- T L.-- -- l r.. 1. .11.- TL
C' C' C' ( ) C" C'OC' OC" C"
~Jq<X?_:c(SI.I ~)=''2 ::> 2<-'Gl:lOOJ?:'JO:r.l')l oxp:OC<-f~~? ~9J?ro9't~::l:>?
C'.. ('
cru::l:>en
r,: (' (' (' (' (' g . ('

tjCOOC'jfGOOJ:JO')CO?::l[O<)O~o:>ll ne:arG<:I')C II
r,:c- (' (' (' (' Q (' ('
tjCOOC9fGOOJ:l o:>CO?:C>90-[!n~ro II 112:GO?J')Oj1: II
~ o c- , f;<? <' " ~ -c

OO'j?::l[t:.:j: et<>JO II IIOi:~ ~~0)0) ~0') oxp:O?t~:~;et
c Ql roeoooC'g:<:~ m'=lo:>(' (' S 0 'T' (' co
oacs9
l:::
"'~j:'l
..)\~
o:>cC' G<:I')C::x> ~roo:> S'XOOI G<:I')Crolc
L-[
0 C' 0 ('
Jl
moolc moQilOQ)roo:>ro:~::
J
(' ('
moQI[OQ)roGQic:o:>Qm
(' 0
:;~:o:>:x> c roc-o:>ro :.
C' (' (' ('
ot.IL
') ('
U
0 0 C' C'g
tJ LJo ll lLLil o-L
c ~" " "o o ~ c <-~" C'
<1_fJ<:I ?0 m9l tl ~mJil:~;;:n~ Gm9G:X>')Gt~:P~ mC\:fe:J'=~:'~
10
' C' C' C C' OC' C'\ (' 0 C' C'-~~C'
. GOO X: 3m ~ (I) O)JQG)oji!DY~QJ'j<X>~:D~ II cq~co:>'f':Q G<:~')C...,-'tl~
J:':<'O '1 (' <' C' C' ~, (' C' OC' OC' 0 '1 C'
ro mtlopt:n~~:n~ 11 G<:l')~:r.>~m G<:~'):::mJcmooqc'js:>~t~~:
<:ll');m Q;o:>
00
:G.s')()')l
gj C'
moQI[~
C' C' C'O 'l'
G31 ~O'Xl:D GCo
QO
"''"lO ~C
0 <'
GffiC:Q)'):
C'
0 L L it. T U l -~ L .J.J- J T-
' (' 00 (' 0
OXn II OOQ:'=Io:>C oomOQI[OQ)ro:x>:x> :x>mG:DOO:D:x>: II)O):D II
C' (' (' (' (.> (''" (' 0
(X)O)O)GO)Q
(' ..
C:. L L JL 6 l 0 C:, OC:. CJ L
C' O~S (' C' C' OC'. o 0 (' C' 0 'T' Q <'
~~:<11ttf99-?G<:~?::mJcmom ~:~cc:cqpm:n~ n <:Qmo;rost GQ)XjOXO~~
. c <'~S<' <' ()
. Of!IS~ ~,()1 '"t"'~"C:f';oc~ ::>::>( 0) II .
t oeli9 ~,~, ~3:~ ~ ~J? a# "J~:>.>? oeli~ ~t~ ef?O~

c- ' ' l . ' G<? c- <' ~ c: OC' _o ~<'A; <'r:::f:
Jo ~~~011 or.:~r.' o:>g,.JI.l-p~ooooxp:oael:e. 3#\,lt9 Cjf!'lJ QOCcr-~11
GoTG>?9
('
:r.c
J.
o c Oc
otmJC~OII
"* * * delivery 'to any person .claiming to be entitled

_. to posseSsion !hereof, * * * "
Sl.'liOdffi! A"..V1 VW'tlng
11 (olrdd~~a.:ccoea.:ro)
.:> .:> .)
c.Pa.:ecc:2u
.:> e
11 co&eccoc.wcccco~z ~
.) .)
uC2cc:~~C2bW~
.> .:J ~ ov
I u cc rbcec
.>
trocnes1cd~
..>.> e
c\C~c
(b)c.gllch:f)64l!e
, o .)o
110!:1 C.(j) lWGd-otdwr~ uC~c rbc.ec tok leG~ l~w:2co o~ dserebl;

;; ..> t. .J .J. ,jO c :> l. e
ll bee\ C.)a.:w
.:J .}0 .) .} .:J 60.) ,) ,)
11C2cccefu
.>
tnCX!ccocccoQ,:h!:c(J>:2ea.:ro:oefl
.) ~
.) .} 0 0 .}
wrou)e :fuo~w
.) 0
.) .:J
1Gc.4:c.h:l
~ ~
w:g, 0l:c:ot;i6e:oc.co..,
.)~0 .}
0 -
<OCbec.ros&:w
..>
O~OCe~w
.> .)
~xkdbc.o:x:oc.ib:>~
.J .)
16ro 1:1 f1Cbeo2<0ro :\,~:)bG:chc.c
.:; .> .) ..> e
629 S.UfOdffi:I M V1 VJ!\l)lJlS:

S.DIOdEHI M V1 VWlli"HI 09
s.I~O&nr MV1 VWllilH Z9
8 a.n 8 -en
[B, ~, ~ ~ [B,
~ !=! .-8
01') l>q oO'l
8 @
8.,
caO'l (C)
~
d') ,.8o 8 ..~, ..8o
~ 2'1 8, nJG> d') [B,
<C
~ j ..D .-8 fB,
[J d') OG> 8 .8 8 ~ ~ .,8 ~
C'l [J ' ,
....
\0
. .. ~ Ci)] !=! . 8 cw 8 01') ~ V ~() ('), r2

<9>
~ 8 ..8<1:: (]1 ,t~o ruo ..So ~ :R4> ...88o eo '"5 ..So ~, a '-Rt>. ) _1) rB ~
,
n'li>O'li;B'l
8 . g( a.n 8
~ =-c9 ~., 8
~,I>~ .:~, ~,J .~. . ~0
0
, 0 e ~, 8 .-Rt>o
0
c;.o u
6) LO
-Po <e ....,

d'l
a,. ..~. ~ ~a,
1.)
!=! ~ Ci>1 d')

'1 C ~
f8,., 8 ~
1::::
s "'~
8
._a,
1.)
'l~~
8 Q'l
..!:)
2, JS
8o
,.8
~
a.,~ ~~
8 . ~
'"U
a,

8
.,
:=
.-~g ~ e00
F~ g r: 8 ~ !!n(:B., g? n'l !! ~ ~ ~'l "81')~ 8 rg 8 ~ fB'lf~ g., 2 fB
. .~ 9 8 ..> c;;: ,. o 8., .-8 d') -8 o.,
c1'-<C
Wn 8 0, 9 d') .-a ~ s d')
8 .]> an ..!:) 00 d') 8 6>
8 l.i:)Q
e W ~o!:-Ro 8 dLd~ P,
J ~ .-8 -v e
~ ..!)
0
,:>-.<(: f1.l ~ rD
8 W'l v'l L 01') 0'1 e,:;o:~AF
~ d') . <C
..!:)
a ::1'1. Cd') .,8P, .-0
J; ~~~~ t$~ ii!f> , ...,
fB.,
!! 8 8u r-'f1
W J
~, ~ ~ ~., ru, 8A ~ = =, CB1 ~ .. ., rn, 6 ~ 8 .oc., C8J CCJ ~>, v ~ di~ .-$( __.~., ~,
i
v
e .n'l CB1 ;: 6 -eng .o.,
, ~ rn<C .~, ..o .~,
s ~ c~ ~ .o,.,
P. ~ =a~ ~ ..D FP.v. Wn , o0 rutD e, ~o ~ -c
t" 0 6")
, ~, ~ ~ .' r-11:: o()l") .... ()I') c.vo -v
00
..._o X.,
00
w ,.,
, ~ o, 61 ,..
o ,.Ro
csl")
a ...Bo ,.so
()
~~~
'o'l
.-Oo !!n
"
d')
. d') P.01') P. ~ ~'-Rt>
~ lJ:) J ~ o01')
8 86 ,.80 =a~'l a _., 8 8 8 ~, -

)
8, ..'<1::8'l fBU
c.;;.
8.,r.gy,'Bill>~ em
~ ?.8 B n., ~ F~ .teo !!n ~, ~, . ~ 8 R ~ ~ 2 !:DO ~ q
C L.>:::l J
dh ,
J
B 8 eo
u 3., jo .
0
["8., ...8.
0
~
~() ~, [8, ..~o o, 8 00 d') 8 dh -en ~
1.) o()l')
8, .'? ..8,. 1.) 6
.-RoanJ?.-. ~'l n'l 'll'4?n 8 an ~ ~ 6 ,.C
t:j 'l ; ,.8 r-'f1 d') (:B., ~!!!> ,. ~ 0
8I') .-0
1>~ e~, ~ ~ o., ~, .o., o,,. ~ -en ~ d') '*" ~ ~
&L ... .,
01') nJID I> oO'l =r> u .-Rt>O I>~ ,. lJ:) J d') 0
oO'l
.-o
U<J J
.-So
'l 0 r=-~ ~

.. 8
3 1:.
='
o ._<C -8 ~ -eJ>'l
8..- ,.8o ruo
, oO'l
u . . c
0'1 "''l r-'f1 .-Rt>'l ~ '-"' 'l
w
J
cc lU() c,.,
=o ..Bo ~ -~g 1;8., ~, 8, ..~ CO'> 1"8 R, :::.> J .-g, :;8: ~
0 c.:. 0 ,_ t. ~ 0 "-'""
a., ;.8o Ci>1 , 8 S..,

t......1,... J
e 8 , <=g. [8, C'l
.... ,_
rn, a j &.Qn 0 em 1t ~ 1:1 g, r:8 ru~ '-1.) 0 ..ao ~, ,.~g ~ ~., c a GO)~~,~ d') n., rn, 8 ri'; ~
_
~~ (]1~ ...f,; ~ q,fB,~, no 8
, o ..D ~ 1.) 1.) o o
8 o0 ;-8 CCJo !& ~ ~, a 0CO'>
~J ..8 a,Lo,
..ao o~J ...So~ ... ~oru
'a
,~
7!1
8 ..u ~ ~ .-o.. -font')
..D = a en d') ,.,
o CG1 ,.Jno
V , oo 13 0
w qo ti> ~ ov o~ -en, -o
c o ~ .,~o 65 C ~
Qll ~~ .._ 'l ~ an 8 !:J . e>V 6 <=a ~ ~, ~ ::?, ,..,.;: ~ '"q Oo ~> a (B., 8 e J5
8
" tfj
oO'l O'l u
00
.o
.-s a a -a
1~,
-
~
l8J
-
~ ., 8.
, u 0 oO'l 8 g,
.,8 ro :==o ~
o[S!,1:~ ~ ~ ~t ~
. .-SoF_
6)
~~
8
8
fB,
.-8
~ an
'l~CCJ ~ ~'l;=
O'l
~ ._._ J
8 8 8
~, cs.. 0
d')
-
8, 8 ~ -
<C
rn,~ g'l?~ F~ ~O
8~-f/1~ .. 6 ~I>~~ d')'"8
F~8 l8~ rn.C.'l 8 .-~0 - ~ n~ '1. 8., ~ C
0
x 0
,.8 6 8 ~rn,ru
8o ~ 80
I>
.-8 (]l~'l r8 ~0
B_goaCE13
,.8 0'l I') ~'l 8~
rn
= 'l
8F<C
.-s 1>1')
Oil
8
~ ~ ~
I)
- o o O'l o '"' .t-8o 8 .-8
8 "'fft~ "e'ft~'l~ 0 ~
l
= C 1>8 a, CO') rn
oil
!:J
...8 0 ..8

0 0 0 a ;:
g, 8O'l 8oF8 8 ~
.-e ..~
~, ~ ~ , ~ ~ ... . .;.8o -f/t'l ...3o .o, .-8o ~
.o, ~> ~,@ !! .t8o -fit
~'l 0 ~ _2'l '-Ri''l ~
~
::~ o ~
0
..D'l lJ:) J Ci)] 'l .J) -:0
-f/>1') .o., 8, ...e CCJ 0

roo fl
~
;= ~ k2 ~
CG.I-
> .o, eo u
fd
fl
....... I ()
<-I.)
-tt ....
1$1 0'1
(N
:;; o .... t.;.;l
u@a:kl:xo
.) ~.)
~a:,o:x>:dx.o
.) 1, .)
:C2ro~ff:ocohl:ee
.) .) .) :3
u;:~o
~~
:C2co:2co
.) 6
:~&::Cbco
it:3 1:cco.l:b!Eu~~~
.) 0
eaxoero
'\ .)
~:@~:~
.) .) '\
1
Ccco
.
0 0
u@a:,o:XC:ceoooc-!:c~
.) 1,.) .) ~
co:r,e

c<:e~:>OJo
.)"I,
:cPft:~Cc::dx.o
it:3 ca:~h
0
1 1 1o 2 r ~11 1 n: 1 I 1 liP.
c;p<:000 C.OCOft<:C 1: <lS': <:e:coco 1~1roce ~ :cros-oc<:e lft~1ero c<:e~
w 0 .:> o. 6.:> e .:> o .:> .:> .>I..
ace~<
w
1
cs-:c 1 cocs-e>:
i
.)
~
ru:x ~ . <:e<
'\
1
0.)
.)
Irooocnw:coro
,, 1L __ 11 ~::>1ro:
" .)
11: ~ 11 v
:o~ :co~ero
,)
s.L1IOdffil' M.V1 VW1ID.H t9

'1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 635
C'C'
O@~:J
QC C' C' C' C'C'
oxp:09cG9: romeOGS <tS~ ~ ro91 GCSJ?CDCO?: ~0)~1 a.;>UflQOC~
roocco: C'
OO'JGmmGco?c:ro C'
c:mL m Cl:m C' OC' 0 ] :>:.S?Cl
~ ;" a.;>Qcco: C'
c:;;o:com 0 C'
~ It 0 -r l ~ 1.1 T n :1 6 0 il t GsTGlJZtg
0 C' C' C' C' C' C'C' 0 C' C' C' <:
'=lGO:com
L
Q)::>:0?:
c ..,..ro:
..$;.. L w::nc ::D~'Xn mt~oO?
c ~l OJ l "'L 0
mroo:>~") 11
tl c m~.srn?:
J T
c0 t<: C
G <:
0 c C' !i; C' C' 0 ~ Q C' C' 'l' e=~f :Gs;):>C
Q:(CSJCroe::l []jGCSJ':lCD~'J~C 02:?~ G~Gft.j: e:o:>l)f:CD Q{O?G<.9t
c~ ~ o c c c 'l c " r,;:c R o1 jll
O?CtjG::D? tjo:Df?rJt 0?9_):~:~Jt0 OOGf~~ U)QCOOQI~J?85 OO~:rot.:Jo:>
' C' C' C' (;;:C' ~ C'Q OC',.!i; ~
Go:~9 o:>~wG::n: 11 ::n~;;ro-:>:t.:J<? w'P=~u: ~Q)e:::n? ~c9r ~?:.p
C' 0
OOGro:GroQG::D'J
o}l
o ~
a.;>U)Q~~ 80?C
Jl Jj, 6
C'
O?m:o:> oQ
-c ll : o:>:e:
l
')C'
OIOCG::D? '
a.;l<.9<D
Ofl
8
1m r,;: C'' C' ~ C' C' 9 C' C' C' C'
t.j:>:p Q:(:t.:JO?~CSJCI tj~GCO'X4l 0)9_)8Q)9CG'j: romeoGS !.(8~ ~ ro91
o C' C' C OOC'C' 0~ ~ C' C' ' C C'
roco:mmQOCQC
ll IL c) o
Go:>x:ro~c
t. l
c: ~~1
Jl
mo
lt.71
ro:n:
C..:.
ro:
l
o:>co?:Qo:>:n
: C
~mo:>
L
o ~ G c 'l' oc:-~_c c:- 'r
GQJ II U)~ 0~?5l G~Gf~g e:o:>l)f8CD GSI Gl)Q)fr::J~ GC'jj?C'D~?GOI 1.j
~~ 0 'l' C' C~,!i; C'C 0 C' C' o (;;: C' (;::~
[ljtj:::my?rJt G<.91 ~O?O?Ct19!::D? ~~O<:Qa.;>Gf~9 Q)280?: ~:t.:JO? GCJ:9t:Jc:
r,;:c C'
l.':lQ)O)~II
c c r,;:c c o c
ro~o1 'jO?QJ()') GJ?:t.:Jq GSt Gl)Q)fr::JC:U GCSJ?CD~?rJ? romrom9J
'l' oc~_c C',.!i;
C'O C C' OC' C' C' C' C'C' 0 OC' C' 0 C' .C'
rooo:roo0:Ja.;>O?C:
L 1J .. [, &.
00G"8U)G00?CClCDC'IS
-1 lL AI -, T
()')I~O<X> rr.x,).S Qtl(JO?roo:>o:>:n II
61 L GL To 1.. c.:. j
cc o C',!i; c_t;: r,;:cr,;:c G c c
~~O~Sd?: OO?G~SJ ~:GO??t;;U O)(})')U) a.;>t.:JQ)t.:l~ o;?~OO'X~mG::D:>
0 c c OC' C . C' G c
O~?jJ romGCO?CD ~CCGO?:> G~GfQJlO e:o:>GCDJ? m?:l GJ?:~? GCDJ:<t:
co 1m c 0 c c C' c c
eom?ill O?C~Gt.j?c:rqroe:l 'j0?0?~80?C::D2:; II
o~'liJs: oQecoro 'a.X.&ax.lk~
11 .:>oJ .>::::1 .> o .:>
~:ob ~o~:@~cc~s D;:@Q& !l@cch ~&ePee~ woo od :oroo,A.Ob ccc~:coo
~ .l :> .:> .> ~"" S'.J:.3o J .J .) .:J "'l. .>
~~cecc
.... .)
1beD b5;1c c'c:es :cc;r..o>a5o
;) ;) 0 .
EJeo2 .)c.ccc:F.co:@@
.> ;)
:@roc~:ol:l.coococFro~~b
.) .):::r .) .)
wPG>roo
..> .:>
wbwc
oo e
ccc~:cooco~Pe
.l
cocccoccco
.:> .:>
c.otlcbecoclk~u
.:>
nooPecohl:beMoo
;, , .,:J . .>
11 .)@cc:~<C!@btd:O
.) .) 0 0
5;1t)
~
ElC.CCOC.roeD
.J.l
1& cglJc
;J
rlx.CD
.l
10~
.:>o
leD~ tccost;ccccoco
o .>
M
.:>
c~~ebco4botro4o
., .:> .) \.. .l
u0b CcCCD

re Cl:IVC
::J
1bceD
.)
ro"hJ
.)O
ICDe>
ucocoflro
.> oe
:bsocoeeh&cncc:oc~sroe
..> o .> "' :=',1
lcobcc.coec~"
"' .,
o~ ,coc4cnb~4Scw
.> , .>
u.)ccl:o" :cPf'lc.oPehl:oc~eeD
.) ~.) ::::J .) 0 bw ~c : .J@~ rtl .)0
.)l2ccOCDoo ~ewceo2
:koPcofl:cbco c~:cPec.oPehlgoc~ewcccehl oco &becoclken 11coPecohl:b
.) .) ~ .) ~ ~.) .) .) .) :J
. ll@cccohxo~M~
.) .) 0.) .) 0
4bcol;occee
:J ' .:J .)
JSccroc.oceW~es
~J .> o
:fil
cofG>roo
&1.> .:J
Wbc.oc ;P.CD:ob
o e o .>o .>
cb:coococ!ke
..>
~b:oe>
.>
wP~cno
.:> .,:,.
wbc.oc*f'!CDCOCCC.OCCCO
o e e.:Jo .:> .>
CCC:::>!COOCO~Pe
:J
ocd~CD:Wre:cbco
.l e.:.r
cc&becocJ6e
.:>
:o&,esccoeeDlx>
.) 0
ll@cc:oCc:ococ~c.oW~c.o
.) .) ..> .) .)
co (:~:cbco)

&becoclke
.)
<ho'.)OO
'liJ@coe.cbc.oc
!.3.> e e ~.>
~coroc.oce co&c.oclbe IC<l>ffiWOO:cbco:ob ohlcd&rnwo~:cbco
,:, .J .l o .> " .> ~ .> .:> .>o
e
.l
:tec.oc4e ll@ccoh,11J eco:hlbco1ibc.o> ~b'liJ@coeD hJbc.oco~esccce(;b:ob IOe>wi:O
.:> .:> .J ~ &1 o .> ~.> a e e .:> o o .> .J..; 6-
:~:cbco

c.oo~:<heo
.)O
c.oc~eho
.J o
u@cc~bbc.oco~ec
.J o e e ..> o
ro~&:2:b::
....~,.; o e
e:cbco colx>:cbco
o

( ~6e~ccococl'6e>)
.J0
@Peooc2
.J .J
ccocol8e>
,J\.,;
S.UIOd:ni M.V1 VW(IO.H

t~ccwhxo~re~ftro
~ ,) 0 ,) ,)0
~bwSocce~
,) ,) ,)
~wrorocebJ'/;ro'.
~r- ,) 0
uRroPtllmoeubws
eJ, , 0 e e
;~ro ccc~:ccocof,Peoeco o~;~cob
,o , , , ,, . flr .ro~~
eJ . :::::1 , f ~tJc
, ,a~e
,:hld:c!=;"J .;:.1
tocoPehloco COCCG~:2(])~ ICO:h-1&:cbc6 ri:cbco o&ea.:ccchlk@o .

0 ,) ~, ,) ,) e.) : ~- . ,)0 ,) . 0
-uC2cca.:&;~ro
. ,) i) ;)
:ccocodh>~
.>
uoc!=;"J~bcc~
.., :::::1 .>
~b:o~wr6'..coo
., , . .,
td~c.ob;~ec ccc~:cccccl,P~:;ero
oe e,:,o ., .,
twobtv
.,
18~ :cocd:ooo:cbco
..l.i ., o .,
~ (col-ccc:2
;:f ., o e tb~ttmro)
., ., oi>:cbco
.,o ,cb~cro
coclb:>~~b:o~cor001o
., ., .;, .,
wbcos;~escoccwccco
o e e.,o ., .;,
ccc~:crocohPe
.,
o'fu C:.
.;,
co&s(;:h':l~:cbco
.) o::J ,) r .;:.J~tJc J:&:h':ltbcbco
10-fe o::J 0
<:>:cbcoo~ea.:cccb
.)0 ,)
,'lm:ro~wft
O'J
.
wIO~eG:ob
., IW .,(])Peooc2:c
., e :~:cbco
::Co;~cob
.;, ., 0 robroC'Q
e 1.. IO.~e
~
c~tJc
.;:.t .
11 C2cc:oecococCi::wru;co
., ,., , .:>
JcoGPei:roc2:2
.,., e
:~:cbco

tchoh>'!IJ@coesh>bcos
., ~.;,
IGwc\xDcecoobtc~:camh>
o e e ~., ., .,
oo:cbcc~:ob
., o .;, Y .;,
Jo];:Jcc~b.:mw
.;, ~ ., .;,
col-ccc:2
.;, o
. o~:cbco .,
e .;,o
oro G ccf,ro~bcQ
.;, e
10~e
.,
b~~c
;;
IE:ce
.,
coc4~
:
uC2ccoto'l!Jbco:hl~co;bc..,
,) ,) ~ .eJ e
4b~C2eoro
,) ...J,,)
~bcoso~ffi
0 e e.;,o
ccc~~broio5
0 0
1 to~es~o~to:2 Mba:2 J(])Pernc2:2 :~:cbco tcocol-ccc:2 o~:cbco
.L o e .> e - e .;, .;, e .;, o e .:>O
II re~~'!IJ~:oQooetben tc:~'ill IG:2PcooCl>~'fbcos;t'lcr;
:::::1~ .,:::J., o '$ ~ .;, ., .;, e e.;,o
ccc~cohre IO~es~:ob co~o~to:2 o~bCl>:2 10Pernc2:2 e:cbco
,) .L 0 .) 0 e ,) eo e ,) ,) e 0
u@cc~bbco80~eJ IO~efJCo O~to:C ofb:CJ J(J)n~ooc2:C

.;, o e e.;,o o .Le .;, .:> e..;, e e
e:chco

wcol-ccc:2
.;,o
b:ncbco .,
eo ..>
0~ Gco~es~:h-1~:chco IG~e ~tlc J:~:h':l&
e::l ., .;:.t
r.e::J
:cbco ~:cbcoo~e
..>O
cocccb
.)
t'lm:ro~~~~~
O'J
n:4ccc.cc~~=d
.JO e
:O&:chco
~
l9 SJ..~Odffil M.V1 VW'llil1

11
0. 9, R. 13 is exclusive and the Court has no power, even
inherent power, to set aside the ex parte decree, on ground
not mentioned in R. r3.''
;;, r.:: c (' ~(' t: 'l c . c cc (' (' 0

Oi(Si~:~ooco-:>::u~ijcl
G (' o C .
o;;orscc;p~.-Jro~~f> ,c. roooro:>~Gro?
09c9:qc
11
An application to set aside an ex parte decree can be
allowed o:n:ly after an express finding by the Court. that it
is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by a sufficient
c~tise rom appearing in the suit. It mus~ be rejected if tlie
Court is not so satisfied. Where the Court observed .dlat
the applicant's affidavit . was not free .from sUspicion but
(::>) <0~1 # j ri:l? (4) I ::>efi::> ~,~I. ~~00 'i'l 11

(J) G~l ~dl~') (9) ::>efi::> -ttSI ~c&no:>d' eSn
BURMA LAW REPORTS 639-'
nevertheless allowed it on the ground that the decree-

holder's evidence in rebuttal was not reliable.
Held, that, this was virtually a finding that 'the court was
dissatisfied with the evidence of both the parties. The
omission to record a dear finding of satisfaction in accor
dance with R. 13 was a material irregularity whjch vitiated
the decision."
BURMA LAW REPORTS
"The provisions of section 5 of the Limjtation Act do not

apply to an application to se~ aside an ex parte decree; nor .
to an application to set aside an order. of dismiSsal for.
default. Negligence ~n the part: of ~ agent of a partj' is
no justification for review of an order of disJlP.ssaJ of an
application for default."
(9) o~o ~~ f9"~6c~6<4:r (oxp:~o'kro3) o~ou

(:J) Oe:J? ~~ tg"~8c~98<4: (ro'P:~Gro~) ?~9"
-.
11 (c) ::>cese:~ro:2n
..) .)6.)
11 co&ece:cbcoel!oec
0 0
1r 11 J.
ftecowcoo~oo
.)
t9 S.DIOdffil M V1 VW'Mng
644 BURMA LAW REPORTS [i965:
~ c cc o co e c c c 'Y'[; fR r,;:c ~
o~G~ WJt8:lGt_~j?C:Bc:~~p:~ G3d'J0)~: <D9CQJmOic GCSI t:Joo:>:t:J:tl<D9J
I
<:: 0 c 0 c c (' 0 'Y'[; c 0 C' c
g)j3d~Q'i~C ~:19m9f 8:lQJm~p:~ ~'JGUI t:J9f 9GU~~ II
r,:" "
tl~G<X>'JC~
~c
~f~'J~cc
Oc c o e r,:c <' <' r,:e <' r;:;:::c c C::"'
~
3d~~ ro~:cq e:r:(~G~m CjC:::n~ ~r:J9~~ rot:JCCOC~m?: tl<D<::'f>
fl; e C' C Of,~C:: C ~ C C \ 0 C rc '1 C c OC
t<)Q>~ 1Jtjtl<DG(:23'JC:I mc:q~ COC~UJ'J~8dj9<D GUIC~::OC: Gf<XiCCD'J~
\.
"
G~-x~;;:0~1'
c C":"
r-- c o
Glffi'JC:m o
rr.;>(l)QO)Q)~Q>
o c c c
G~'JCX~:' C\D
c
Gm:>c:~?
oo
~QG
c
"JC:I e
t:l WQ

L.::.J ... 11. -r ~, o c:. 11 :.~ -,.
tJ
c
~
c
GUI X1XD'J:~ C O)gO)g
o U. It
cor:)
CDrll"l
l:_; ..)
8d'):GQI"('~
~ ll -L-
~ c
I
oc
~II 8d(l)QO)COgQ>~I 8d<DCJGSOOCro
L -r
0
oc CO "(' '1 C 0 c '1 o o <' CC'

0 ~CO)CQG::D')
L b Jl
G01 QQJg()).S:::D
-1 LT OL
o:>?::))~18dQII
6 C.,
8d<DQO)COg<;>
fl -r- GCJ'JCOOM
6T
C0
<' , c ~ c o c r,:e c o o c
ro 8dQ')>:OO'tUSCJ~mro:>Gt.:j:>C:IC?._Gj>'Jm ~t19::D~ ffi<J?tQO:>'[):O> ~CDCD:>
c , c ~ c c r,:e cc c c c , ,7
G::D:> 8dQ;>:O)'t ~mro:>Gt.:j:>c:r
9c:m CJnq8d'): O?~.pmcqum:>ro
c '1 r,:e ccr,:c' oc ' " ~ r: ~ c r,:e
UfCJ:::D028dQll CJr:~9m r:lcq8d9c:::n ~15Pt:JGt.:j')C:I CJr:~9ro
Cc \ '1C C C" h, k: ..---. C C' 0 Co C'
o:>q>::;>f.::D') GOIC:::nc:CJm 9Gt:J?t:JGt:3?C~ ~())~3d<DVQ::D~If
ro:o:>; or.: )
( (\)iO"l
o G c
())I o:>CO:OJ oc o ::D:>:GromG::D'J8dQJt
c 0 CJC::U c '1
-r L J.:,:)~ CGQ:>:itC

IL U. LL:J ...J
n c c c c \
SJ<.DQO)Q)gQ moos: C:::O:::D 8dQ.s:ro~oomro:>G
o C. J o
c
l . <.t.
<'
"JC:I
6
o
-C
c CJ G
OOG.S'Jm c
Q ::D:D
6
It l L oT C..::. T J b ..l T 1 C..:.
o:1 <'' c ~ c oer,:<' re " c c
Gd~O GdQf:oo't O:>'f>:cq 2:r:~SG~m CJ~93J:>: OJ<J?;>m
~mro'JGI~~;pc:J
'" r,:e "L-5:' oc ' " r;:r:r,::;:::: <' co~ 0'
(\) urG~~'P' ~t:'l9ro [J~q3J9C:o::; o;> GtPBGee:;: ~m~9J O:>'f>:C',)
GJ;:<' . Co<'
GCO?:J.>~O)~ II
2 :r:J~G~3d:>:
~ c r,:c -~ r,:<' o<: o ~
g)i::DmG::D~'J: ~~<;> t:JfCI1f9JGg:t':ffg OO'[)iQ>ell O~'J~ G~Gf~:ro
c (' <:' c C' c -~ 0 'Y' . . (' c ~
G::n:>ro~:r 9c:::n~ . 8d.~Qo:>q>:Q~Got ~urooQ'tt t:Jcs;;roerom91
goom:::n
-l~
cco oom~
At
c oc ~ <'
c: L:::n~)())
C:.t
o<' <' c
m~:ltCGO):>())G~'JC
ILL
c
roGro?roGO)?
i.
~cr,::c o co r,;:c c c r,;:c cor;:co
mGl~.:ec:t:Jc:'P CJ~I::n~~ G9',?9::DtiS' 9c:::n~ SJtl~8:loJm~ r:~c::n::n~J
c oc c r,: o~ C'o c cr,:c c
urm01c:'t'f'f> Gt:J'J~9) 3JOOQ::D~<Jt (l)C~C~009GOCJ~II
G
2:CI10)f:
c ( or: c) ro
cqt:JI:$ o:>GtGO)'J~Gf .?
e c
f-:>9<;>~ mQdf~C
8c c
. o:>'P:cq
O'
Q r,: c _c;: 0 (' (' c C' C' (' r;: (' c r,: Q .
2 ~~~~G~~ 8d9Gf:>roGO:O>f:~ 3J.~~OXf~~ GCJ'JC~f:tjs:::n~ Yr:J m')g 9

c <' Of,"'~ ~ c ' c . c r,:e . c
0:-t)Gf:::D~CX{_I:j"Gt.:j'JC:I ~~cro~: 8d~QOO'f>:Q li) Yr:J98:l'J: O())CX)')g"
c oc
O);nro CG
I,....J t
6 c
')CZ
. 6
c o~
t
O e c
CO())Q:)~ I rom:ro ;:::: CGOOSJ:>:
-r t t,.::, 6
GC0')(1)~0)~111
.
c o
c
,
~ c' . 0 - o'_c;: 0 . ~ [;<" c~ . C'

~n::nroG::DrJ.i :n~Q .m'P:Q~ o~?~ G~G;;e1:m GCJ:~.y:. tJf0?r9J
c c c <' c o o 'Y' c c oc
coo:iG:xJ:>ro:'ml
~ ~
cc::::n~n
-1 ~
SJm~roro:~8dGOt
L T
CJO)ro:::n
T
c9 comro
~ t
c: .
'Y' '1 cc '
~c
C: 0 C C C . C . 0
L
{X?OO'<;iCG::O'J:UGSJ:>C
:)):::0())
C.:.
l~.o L I.
3JG 'JC:~1:>:
u .
GOI GOI()) C: ~Q:)) C~ ]I o
c .<' oc c o c: o c c c c
cc:::n:::D
-I ~
mooroc:g.sromO):>
t. L .a T -[ L
.comro::n:::nm
6 L C =.
(l)Q:>Q.S
tl- - -~ T
<DGOO):::DII
C.:,

BU~ LAVV. REPORTS 64$
Hccccw~cof,Pea.fles
.) .) 0 .) .)0
4b<D::?e!W 0~ c wcocoo~
.) 0 .) .) .)
.)M:flh"Job:es
.)~b
IG:oo<Dhle.c
~ .)-.1
rbes 02lb ooh:j:;Jcocc~<b
.) ~.)
:ces:ob .)
r:hlwf~,
eJ.)
roo Shlcco~XlflC2coes loa-flee ccc::?co~Pe 4bco&cc::?:<bco w:~wces~
~ .)~ .)0 :_j .) 0 .)0 .) .) .) 0.)
t:ces~b1:4ooocfl::? e:Cbcodbes ocj:;J::?:dfl:oc~::?es rohl r~::?wooes

.) :_j .) .) 0 0 .)~ .) :::::1 l, ~..L .)
11 C2ccobl:ilro toC2ccoesb:> 4b:o::?

' .) .)~~b .) .) 0 .)
l.o:lrflwc<Dhlro
0 II,'.) .)~
ccc::?a;cro::?:cco*m2~ocsb
.) .) .):::::1.)
:cesto& 0
ccc::?b:>4&:11Pw
0.)
1 ID 1r ~r-;:? or o ~l"
C1eesocs>~ w: flfle8w olS'o :s><X>OCfl~ e:mcoecoes ro
..., 1
0 .) .) .) .)
_1 _ 11 " cc<D ID1r
: e>lfles II obl:~dl:>CAS"
,Jl, .) 0 0 .) .)
,)~.) ,)
ccc::?oes:crottfl
.) 0
:C2coe,eesl5::?
.) .;>l,
;wflccc~&- .:>
,ees~co .)C2cc:lrfl~rolf13
l, II,' ~
0~
.)
u@fl ~oka~~
..>o .l
.)
~ocoo~@
Pe::?b:o~<Dhle.c 02)b flch:~cocc~Cb ,) ,)
.) ~ rbes .) e::J.) :ces!:>b1:4oo:::cfl::?

.) ~ .) .) e:cbcoefues 0
r:hlwP~coo ~hlcco~XlflC2coec W;fles ccc::?cctDcc::?:cbco :croe:<bco C3flc

e~b .;) .):! ,)O:_j .:> o .)0 .) -
S96I] S~'HOdffii MV1 VVlliOR 9t(}.

9t
cPdJ~:~ccco
.) .)0
:~dc.orocc.o
0 .) .)
0o .)oto~~:~
100:> .) .)0
lc:bl,~ct;wcbeCLro.
.) .)
a;~cS .
:b~:flCcWCCO~::XCCC:CoeG
.) .) .)
c<J:~b
.,
b10C~Q le~~
CC (.1) eL .)
c~tJc
;;
~b~ees
o .) a
to
II @d::e@cc~:Xx:J~~83e~eG ~OO:~ee.G &:co C ~ecd.o {0 eohen
., o ., :=:bo " .) .) O.) o .,
.)O .,
~=~co:Pe~~tu
,.) ., J'!&l~&.l4bJIG
.O'J.) ., ~ o ,Pfl:ccc:~cra.:~
., &)cc~~:c.J:;J::ccc@mcc:tces
.) ::=3., e e
~ro:cPfl:~c.o~cc~~.5ooJo
.). .) . o - .)
J:ocrc.o~cd:c&$c;.o
o l, .) ., o
1'!&l~~db
o~b .,
JcR'.oMeC\,&.:a
o .) .)
tcfle:
.) .,. .,
~
@~6)~~cfl~
.) :::::;
.,
&be:ccowcltoecMe~cnu
.,
n.)::>co:~&:C!
.)
:t:'l~bdsco
e Et:J
',I
ll@ccoccte:oc.<.e~4oe
.) .) 0 .)
c!accwcro~t-o
.) ..) ,J
ohlcc4$GQ~co~cd~Gb
.) :1 .>::J .) 0 ccc~:Q
o.J
:b$ec .)li?ccbc.ot;occe~
.) .)
~bG$wcroeo
.) .)
co:crA@hl@hlec cotoAttoo:crA~ec4eccc:ciJro
.) ~.) :.3 .,) 0'" .) :::1
c~~eG~C() II .).j
..JJA46co6'lco~cods~
.) .) ..) ..)
oo~@e
.> 0.)
IGGI:J&
~.l~O
ll~ll:or:locl3e:eco
0 .)~.) .)O
cam:ob
0 .)
a@ooccc$e~
.) .) \0
ff:lcrco$oo
.)
b c~C2cce:O$eAcec
.) \
:crA&becoclk$
J
cccekocJ:;';la
,) 0.) ~
roccec 11 @cc:2roe4bcelb k@cclxlo~ Gblecr:l~ec cf.,coreec: ob CCC$tc umtJ;kro .

.) .J .> \.> .> .>o .J~ ~ :J .:> .> o :>~oo
to@cci3:ocJ:;';l$e.G~boc(!;e:eco
.) 0 .) ::::::1 .) .) .) 0 "Cc:c
0
r.::loo~ CCcc:cra&:ccca:clbJen
,'j .) 0 .J .)
II corecoc:l:re
.) .) ::1
r
Ol3'
.)
lt9 SJ}IOd3}I M.v1 vmng:

S.UIOd31I M.V1 VWl09: 8t9
II cccccobJ:ooc.oMdh'lec~~hl Coe2cc'J.Cl8~redh.ob:ro
.J .J 0 .J .JO .J .j~ .J ~.J .)
'C.Oio:oe>:2~>f&do~ko
1.. e_, o.) .J
. (::x..cce>c.o)
.)
ooo'oc oPco
.) .
lC'ccc.uc<X:~o~EOl~
.J .J .J .....J

c.o:IXocece>
o.J
I:C(l)e8:.6.)
C(l)iftc~odc.o
.J o.)
ooo'u .Jor~ .J~fto:2cd'cbeoccib:e>
e 0.)
1:C2roccce>6e>
.J .) 0
~bcooo.>~wcbe>~o
.) .) .) .) .)
-Fe>occce>wo~IW
0 .J 0 .) .)
h:cccce:oeeflcec
0 .) '1. 0

,!.bPee>b:,c.oroe.c :~&>ec2(l)4e>:cee>oo~ec be.c uilb flch:ro~Pco :ce.c
.J .J .J .) .J .J .J
:cr(')~becoc.froe> w:i=7J~.bcbc.o~~w(l) ,Oc.I=7Je>de>:~ci=7JeeEiohl

o~ e.J ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ L~~
,.,e>
6t9 S.DIOdtni M.V1 Vli'ruf1H

650 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965"
('~ (' ('
<ipC'OOOtjCOOC~
~ Q (" ('
oo'P:~e:1= e=<>J~~>G~~
t :>eli:> ~o:>tG]} ( GCD~ ?aSco?:~)

OC'
erocoo
.. -l.- ('
:>j ~c
("
J
'}OJ II
r,: C
tl~GCO?C~t::lr~')~CC
C' J;:C' OC'o ( .
GCD~?CDOO:>:Q 9 ~
c o )*
<'r:;;!1 ('
~~roe:1:tto~ jO~-:.IIGO)C:OOH~,-<jCittSI.ICIII
0 , (' (' <:c '1 c:
~0 '}Uc.IJ?:-roJIII~ft:lCI Co~roJjll
C'f:::C'
C'f:::C' (' 0 <: ...

~ftSCI'~ OO&p:~C!IIOO?Ofll
r::: ... ('

~lc:JOO;IJC'I)II 11'f~:oo:le:1l <{31.l ~CGGI tlCO?IGO.Y)
C' ~
CjOI>lJ':ll~~ e~oo
C'
JO:J (' 'T'f-:
::DO'1 (' (' 0 ...
r.::~ 0 ' 0 C' (' (' 0 (' (' .s.

(' ...
<'r.::c- ' r,: C' (' (' ('
t:J" II.l~:Y.> l.lttqoo:>O:>~:IJ GO!GOOJ'?jfltGO:>?CjC I I l>l?.IQX,jll.l~Ct:JC:Y.> Dt90')fCOO:>::lCjC:I
o (' ('~ (' roo l.l&. OO:.>:Y.>CO?IO:>:DroGO:>?Cc
(' , (' o (' (': <X)CQ?IG>?
('
19 o (' oc
:oo:l~ll.l(J.)(Y.)
1. t::. L L
O:>CO:>
2 L l. L ~ l -1 Jl A
OOQ.SI.l? o:>IDIOO:t
L -, T J r L
o:>:>o~~ O:>e u
C" 0('"(' 0 t:" (" C" (' 'l C' 0 O C" ('
:u:n
~
corol?roO:>::Diol::l l.li O>:T.>':>Iro:Y.>O>l.li.C <X)IolC:OII':O:>::l
(' 0
IH&C
J
-').1
('
IL
('
Oo:>::O:T.>
:i
('~

C.
GOI::OO:>
...

tJ
e ()')
L
.I
. ('
3S~IOOO\GOOQQWI.li.C
T I. L 6 Jll! )I J
00::00\lro~? <X)::rliOCGO:>?CI:l::D:.>O:>~<.D::OOllroi.)O)o:>lt
IL 1J J T l t:.!.lt IJ L
o (' ('
Grol?roO:>
..
lJ
('
K.
f"c.~?;8c i'~ Glol?g.,l Selected Judgements; Lower Burma(t8?z-x8gz)

page4u.
~~
c:u?c0c;
t'J::C'
4)')
'neq (ro:J)"
c C: ('
l::l~GCX>?Ct Ofc.!?iCCI
to CC' oc
oe<fO
(" r::c:
t;: ("Q c: c-
~~G>I t:lfc.1::ltJ~CCI111>lJ?IIJ 00''=~

Of:' C: 0 C
6f U?&cc
l
toe lol!n.61
J LT
Selected Judgements; Lower Burma (187z-x8g2)
page I34
r::r o (' h
or"'?~CC (' o
Cloi?C'J~ selected Judgements; Lower Burma (1872-1892)
page 337
C::<' O('o (' <"0<" J
of"'?~CC ~q C"?CClf Se ected Judgements; Lower Burma (x8?I-I892)
_o o c- c- c-
page 569 ~'"'{'li?.:i?lfi O:>en
(" (' Q(" ("
GCOJ'JO)OO'J:~m~ro ll ne:o:>;;:GOO?C II
(" (' ( 0 ~) 9 ("

GCOJ'JOOoo'J: ;,90jtm~m II II ro~:'JG~~feJ: 2:,011
o o c- ll~
OO~%~k.:.:l : e l;!JOII
r.: ::~l!itl
c- r~r,<? ( ) c- c ~ ~
j 'J?:D:T.>'J?C'oo;>oxp:O[c..:.:!:'tl~l oe~<f
~I
c-g
roc-0~
(' . (" (" . 'l' ("
:Q~<,l()) ::>0() ())CIG:OI?:T.>OO')lO)GCIJO)CO:OJ GSI O:>CGCI'J.dGOI
'Y'
L T JL J r ~ o ll 'llll . T .AI
e oeli:J ~i~ I 'F'ooS8~~::D~o5 OO:J . ( 0>) II .

t c
:>e~S9 ~to1 cpeoo?t:;~:~~
(' co (' ?oo ~<>J~fo:>G~?
(' c- . o~~:11;or
c (' r,'! (' '
et!oo p 9mcotf
'l r,-s r. w? (:1) 'Promc-
01 t:l"ll:llr.l
c-
'F'oo:>O?'P:~e:1:~t"~.9t~:x>c~~~~
o oc-..J!c:'"~ c-r.::r
BURMA LAvV REPORTS 651
e e e oe ")" e e e e e e e
:leS~
G e~e 0
<:mlG ::I.) X::~:; ffCT.l:JlC~()) GOI o:>CG~O.)~ oo;sc:QJ mtlc:~~)e?C?ct~ 00'.):::0())
e e c e ,e ~ ') ~ e e ece e
~
"r G "1 o
C' Cl I G::JI o:>:::GCI:D:::O (;l~:>::;~()::01:): GOIGOI~ C\l{)O)O)()) OOCiQC:::O!:))O.
~o:>C~jl :1 .AI t._. J UC o o J. L Lo L LJ L
re e c-
f:7 CJ o
"
.1\C
('
U;(<Dac:'Jl') :))0)')0:-J')J Q:Y.>J~e=~')~9 Gu:J~ 11
tl~GCO'Jelll C'
SJOO:Y.>o:>C Q;"))())Q:)):Yl:JdO)C:I
e ~ e ' e OC'
():1)')(1
o
G!J:l:>:Y.>C>:
e o e o
~~Cl:ID::D:c:t
.C
GCQI')())
e
~C" OC' 6 c ~ l C.J l.fJ] L )J
CJf~"iCCII "r 0e . e G e e Be e C' e
00')::::0 G:JI CJ:)CGCI3dQQv~P, Q!GCU')C:)):'l)<.J)GO)') 3d ::::SJm$.C ()()):))())
il ~t .; ~ c it -r J
~ e G e C'f~
1,;: C' e ~ e 0
~ ~QJQJCT.l~')l O)e?O)i:?')O)i:?: t9DG:::0')t:p:a:>~:l liJIG;l!ft~C <.Je?')~
GSJ'):Y.>~J:
e0 C'.
.li\!>Cl~~::o:ro G:DQI'):Y.>I.S1)') ro::;ee e ece
CG()C9.S o:>:o:>OiQC: (;l
&, "' (\)()<)
~ J U L U IJT 6 T l L:J l J. ~
~ C' e e 0 ~ e e
GO)') SJG~:_~p::;:o;l'f' ro~y') 00:::5j')J:De? II ~:PGt=j')C:SJc;p~') G~')(J)(X)')g
"r C' C' C'r;::,!? C' C' '")"~ 1 C'
Oif GOI m:::Gl]:.:D~I 'P~:::Oo:>e1:<p<:l j0j ~C G01 tjO:)'):G:::O') OJ() 90IJJ"J:
o c c- e e ere e c-~ c
cq mJil:~::D~ (;l:Y.>Jj[;~.p:::oe:o::~ID:::Oe?fl ~e:::omt.:j:l(00 jOj m
oo .c -
g] :::oro~u Ol L
! t l: .,.L -
" hljll
e 0
fl(;l:D:))(:l;;D~
e 0 ec C'
SdO)ffiffiSJ$.(;00) iDGDGSJ')C G:::O')CC:I
e C'
.;- C.:, IL l l~o l 00 -[ l
') 0 e e C' e 0 C' C' C' C'
~0:>01 ~~ t XDJCGI!lo:JfG ::O'J:Y.>G::O'JC I ~roe::gqm 'f0f ')GI!lO)f
C' C' e C' G C' 0 C' e G C' C'
G:O') .J)G~')C G:::O')CC: (:): :::; I :::oro;::o:~())O) <:l!GC\J'JCCUU:>G:::O?
l o et "-- t. U
rc
SJ(;OQO)l' lcqc
-rroDo
[Y.I.LJL
C' o SJQgg
C\JO<:lo:>QQ())
l LL -,
C' "
I()GOI ')
GOIGI.UI')~')
U.c.fl
"4:>Gd) COICI
C'
l:.U
0 C'
:::0 m:n:(;l(J):J) (:l:G
C'G6C' ecQ C' C'
?~G:X)')CC:Ig:G(O')C:::DU:>G:::O') SJ(;OQCBI G
" ?C
ol c ... l a. -r o5t 0
C' c- <' <' r;:<' <"ore- c- c- c-

G:x>?CC~
r
mtL ro::nmm~roo:>
oo-r Jt!!iDo:>WO!QC:~
u o JlCJ J
m:>:nmaq;
6-- -,.
CUGC\J?m
1.
C' eoe 0 0 <:' C' G C' C' 0
G')d')::; CU:Y.>_~<:~:<J.tl ::l?~ro~:<J~O)
g:G:D'J~~U:>G:D? Sd<fO~l~
' o e er,:: e "1 r;:: c e C' c
Gf'Pro:Y.>JGC:O?::::r.>l::lJ ::Oj:-r.>~qtjiiG~I GUJGron~?[jDG~ OJCT.l~fficq]C I
0 0 C' 0 C' C' C' C' 0 C' C'OC C'
cxp?tr!.( ~;11()00 GOO'):::::Jcp1~ G-~Om~:oe:~ 0J~o:>~C:::O~ II
~ C' e 'I' C' C' C' C' 'T'C: e

gjl'3d~q;:; GI.1J'):UOO'):~ GOI O)~G~:::O~JnJCO;nqc . GOI tJOO:>:o:>e!
'3:l()
{1 e
Q:jC)I')~$.~
C' G
:D.:DO)
C' C'
C: ,(:)C10)1
0 \ Q C'
<:l:~COO):))ffiCI
C' e GUIG0.11')c,!ffi
') .o
G::D'JCC:I
e C'
. -, 0 J o Cl:.b Jl J o ~J c -1..1 Jl L. 1
<.1~:0~: (J<lJC':
c ( c 'C <'~ c- c- o <' c/Y. c o
C:::r.>J(,?':\)OCl G:::O')C-:;gr_ ::UQ):n:~:~mo:> (l)():x>C:O:D())
<' c
g
!Y..COUc
ll UL . l :1 . l ot C L 1. l o ~ L l 1.
' C' o c c c- r o e o <: <'r;:: c C'
::n ro')::ne: Y{G:::O')Cjc: coc~e:~')~~9f~:> m~:cu.c:~ ro?Of(9d):::O~ 11
~ 0 C' C' C' ~ r,: C' 0 C'. C' C' .~ ( ) e C'r;::,!? ..
~~c. om~rog, r:JfC:l:>~cc 7c. GC:l?c~dl o m~qcto:>'[:>:oye1: otJCOJI[I
C'(C') G (") C'') OC' h C' C'
mm o l<:l~: q:> m1 GnJ')CT.>~Iroqc: SJ~:o;;t:lro Go:oo:>::::oe:rr
;, READ the report of the Deputy Commissioner of

dated the 13th. October r887: read aiso th~ report of the
Assistant Commissioner of : . . dated' the 5th October
( o) Selected Judgements; Lower Burma (t872-1S92) p. 4II

1887 ; read also the record Queen-Empress v. Nga Cho. The
only evidence on the record is that the accused while smoke-
ing let fall a spark on his pillow, which became ignited and
was afterwards extinguished. The accused has been con-
victed under section 285, Indian Penal Code.
In order to support a conviction under that section the
following matters must be proved : -
(i) rash or negligent dealing with fire;
(ii) this rashness or negligence must be such as (a)
endangers human life, or (b) is likely to cause hurt
or injury to any other person; or
(iii) there must be found intentional or negligent omis-
sion in dealing with fire to guard against probable
danger to human life.
Jn the present case there is only shown to have been
neg1igent dealing with fire.
There is no evidence at all that human life was endangered
or that hurt or injury was likely to be caused to any other
person, or that there was any probable danger to human
1ife. The conviction is therefore clearly bad and is set aside.
The fine, if paid, will be refunded."
"The words 'necessary inference' n1ust mean the only

reasonable inference possible, not merely a ' probable'
inference from the facts appearing in evidence."
o 1:::::: c c T c oc cg c c c c
O?,_G~')~ I G~jj')~DCQ')g:::'?t GS. Q)CGjl:.l<il,lad~~()')S':::lOJ()) O:>~lf~ O::.>:lC:
"'' C'O oo C'-:'C' C'GC C' C~ '1 C'
UIGO)') 8.S:r.:i())Q;;J.lQ .. ~~~:; G81 ())::;Gq~LO:> CJ?.ft:: OO)O.XDC)l G~.li:>D ));:l)(,')
T l L oo Jlll JJ J o .L ~ J <..!J (j L.. t.
(' C' 0 C' (' <:' <:' 0 C' C'
U:>:;DQj())'=l') O)q:>W:::G:x>') (I)SJO::D.::Dill~)QUiO)I:l())O:>GO If {I())()')~U):)(;)iO;>')
11. U J .. L U.. ll L. n. C JJ
r,;: C' C' 0 0 (' C' "t;:;g C' C' '1"~ ("
i:jo:>o:>~q 'i {:Dell , :Dtf:eq::t:O'.J:>)')~:\(:1(,) jOj O'~CG~I tJCO'J:o:>tt
tl ('
roo 9:..>CJp;a1
0 0 ~ C'
Q):Y.ljtjo:>::D')?~')
r: 00 ('
GtP~y::'Jff')O:>GfHC\{~1
(' 0 c;: 0
GdG(';)O':>')Of
<"'
r,;:C' C' (' 0 <:' 0 C' 0 0 g (' C'C::C'

tJ.:>:D~II W~8dst~::; 02')~G8J'):J.>~Z~0~:o:>:;(:m l:l:o:>OX: G:X)')::;t:fc:~p
J ('
GS ro:;Gjj:D:.i<f OG :O'):::U
0<:' <:' ~
:D;E<J?
<:' 0
0)2;C:>t:;':>::r.>~g~:;;q~8J[90:>
<:' 0 c <:'
GU:Go:>-:l
C'
r~
tJ'):::O~~ I
(' . "'~ r1 c- "
2U~9UI :x>:) 9:..lCJJ':iZ~~
c: c-A; c- c- c- ('
UO':>:lXDSJ~l:XDGo:>~roOlJrome:;~CJ~l
o.
<:' r: (' 0 ('~ (' (' 0 r,;: (' ~ C' ('. C'. 0 C'
Q{0::1:GCJ'!::!t: ~::; eJC :ro~: CJ~:>?t:l~ l g)jGt9?qc (,SJ')('))~:~ID'J: IDC\1~~.
C' C' 0 <:' (' C' ('
~a:>G~Px~o:>~(J:? ~~U<.l;?~ n~ 11
r.:c OC'
l,'jt~':>~CC ~S tol~f:
c o C' (
?
) c
8Ji~CI Q)'P:O t,:..:j:~Jl U 0 CD ~COCf ~S
c-~ c e( C') c C' c
C'r;::.s! C'(C) ~OC' 0 C~ OC' o [(;<' C'

~=ate~: roro \" 1u J~c:v~m G~-:J:-no :oo-?C ~s:a~:z:m~o:>Go:co'):::))e:; 11
"This is a reference by the learned Judicial Commissioner

to this Court as tO whether Magistrates are justified in
assuming that a person who is in charge of a house in
which a fire takes place is rash or negligent and punishable
under section 285 of the Penal Code. In the case in which
this reference arose there is not a scintilla of evidence against
the accused. AU the evidence there is, i~ that a fire was
discovered in the accused's house, but it does not appear
how it originated.. Magistrates are no :more justifieq in
asruming rashness or negHgenc~ merely because a fire breaks
out than in assuming the guilt of.an acc1:1sed person upon any
. other charge. It must be proved as in all other cases. T}].ere
may . be <:onduct either by a~t or omission from which ras~-
(J) o~9o ~i'~' f~.,t'1Jcxi:r cr.>'P~o5r::oo-5 Gl':>I>Jo5p ?'2e (ro:J) 11

(?) Sel~cted Judgements Lower Burma (187z-I89~) p. 134
BURMA LA\V REPORTS 655"
ness or negligence may be inferred, which would require

the accused to rebut it by evidnce ; but merely because a fire
breaks out and destroys property or occassions risk to life or
--
property, evidence of actual carelessness or of an illegal
omission to take order with it must be generally be shown
before the party by or through whom a fire is said to be
occassioned can be convicted. As there was an absence of
any such evidence in this case, we therefore quash the convic-
tion and order the return of the fine, if paid to the accused."
J;:C' r.:" OC'o C' C~

C'
'iC :S. t)Cl 15fl.lJ~CC tS C' 0 ( . ) C' C'(C)
G~,>JCCjl{l 9 ~~qc1 o;'['' Otl:j: 8;0)\~ I
G (c)
'=~9?~ 0 ~o
C''l oc- r,;:c-r,: r.:c- C'
G:..?-:> nom:Y.fc: m:;q::ut<Jo:> D!.co-:>:st :~ n
" The only evidence in this case goes to show that the
accused person had the misfortune to lose his house by a fire
which broke out in it. What the origin of the fire was there
is no evidence whatever to show. It does not appear that
accused was in any way directly or indirectly responsible
for the fire. Nevertheless the Magistrate has thought fit to
convict under section 285, Indian Penal Code, and has fined
the defendant Rs. 10 with an order of 15 days' rigorous
imprisonment in default. This order betrays great ignorance
of the Magistrate's judicial duties. The conviction and
sentence are set aside. The fine, if paid, will be refunded."
0 r,:C'
~rot:jc1
r.:c- OC' o
tlf(,)J~cc ~~
C' C'OC
G(,)JC1>f j
() C'
m~~cro~:1
C' C'~
o:>'P:Oftj:
GO
J(.vc) o:>rm'GT.I"J:J?()IG'd~C:
c c '1 oc r,;: C' ~ C' o
ro~:8;ltl0) Df.CO:>:o:>~~ G9~'lo:>~ II
o C'
"The evidence simply" shows that one day about noon

the roof of the accused;s house caught fire, but there is
nothing to indicate how . the fire originated or that the
accused was guilty of any negligent conduct punishable
under section 285, Indian P~nal Code. The Magistrate should
be caTeful in futtue not to strain the law as he has done
in this case. The suppositions on which he has convicted
the accused are purely fanciful and are not based on any .
evidence. Negligence with fire js doubtless punishable, but
such negligence must be cl~ly proved. The mere fact that:
(7) Selected J udgements Lower Burma t87~-I89~, p. 337
(j) Selected Judgements Lower Burma t87~-189~. p. 569.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
a man's house is burnt owing to causes which cannot be

discovered furnishes no ground for the assumption that he
has been guilty of negligence and ought to be punished.
I reverse the conviction and direct that the fine, if paid,
must be refunded."
c
~c
J
11 C2ccwb:J~~Pe~~ro
.) 0 .)
.) 0 .)0
~b0e>:oe>IGC2ro4hl
.:> ~.:> 0.J:.J. :ces:oS w ,o:hl
l,; e'J 0. .)
0
~occ.ee>:oe>
~.>
to~e>CIDG
o .:>
CCcc~bl~
.:> .:.J &:ccorocltoe>
.>
~:f~b<.Jp5)ffi()
.:> .:> .> .>
I~QCCO~'J!Je
.>;j .>o:.J
cccoes
.)
tocros<Dhles
O.) .>:.J
McdewPecoQ:b::
.) o . ) . ) .)~
:c~OOO~<Dhl
.) .>:.J
ccce>coMe:~wcroe>
.:> o.)
~
1oe>roGbl~
:.J &:c.cowcltue> o~cr,;Je>:cPf):ocMe>ro
0 :::J .) :::J
.)
id)l,5)e>rocoro
l,; ~~ .).)
11 ccccoe>Cl>Q~bewro tuwPehlocb :r,;J,_b15e>b:~eskcco &~wPeecoccx:ie>

.) .) ~.) .) 0 .) :.J.> ~ 0 0 .:> .) .:>
g~/!c:cbcoo~WCl>
~ .) .)
kcco toCCCC~eJCl>QOO:cr~&ook~~Q
.) .) ~.) 0 .) 0 .) :.J
cccc&:ob
.) 0 .)
~Qcccoi:o~ccflcobl~~wc ~bcd'o toecCCCl>Q:hl~mob ~Cl>Qro&oo~

0
.) ~ .) .) .) :.J.:> .) .)
Proe> .) .) .) ~ e:'J, \.)
0
.) ~ 0 0.)
Cfl~Q ~Q~cw:cct; ccooHcol$wo cccc:dfl:~ccll!l:ob ~~.:;,ble~&:coo

.:>:..:1 .>~ o .>o.> t.; .> e ::> .> .> :.J
wcFcoe> ~Qcc~~ :oblhlococ.uPcecce~wcc ~w:::.cb:>:cbco 1:ocr,;J6obJl!J
.) .) ~ 0 .) ~:.J.> .) .) .) 0 .) ~ .) :.J
1 r Q 1 11 Q 1 ., i!.. 1 o ., .., 1 .
~covso~ J~S'ele.G sucme>cocc:c:::J?J~ Jco:?~jC00W~ :Jco~505g:>
~e~eoo~cfl~Q
.)o .)0 .>:.J
1:ocr,;Je>e&btoco~wco:&>oo~
.) ~ \. 0 .) .> o .)0
~oo~~co~ro1o
o .JO.:> l,;
c.u20cco
.)
wcbe>:)occro~hl l:Cookf)4Q 1:ocQe>fue Cl>Qm<booMco~wo rem

.) .J .) .:>:.J 0 o .JO .:>:.J .) ::::::J o .)~ o .)0.) \,; l,
&:!cc:cct;
.)
l:Coo~4COI~WIO
0 0.)
CCcc~bl~
l,; .)
0.) :.J
&:coorocltoe~
.)
I:CCroccce>Cl>QOol:C
0 .;) .) .) ~.:> 0
IICC~oe~b~toccccob:>
.) 0 .) .) ~
l()eJ tbes:cft'lCl>~l()
.) l,;
ccce>hloco
:J..:>
eroe;es l:ocEOle>
.) \ .) :::::::1
cco~hl l:Coo~cf)4fJ
.) :J 0 .:> 0 0
JIG:cct;l:Coo~
.) :.J ~ 0
4co~Wio
0 .)
cccc.d;;le
ol,; .) W o
&:ccowcitve~
0 .:>
.) 0
ue2floe>b~
.:> 0
~~cc~w~~
.) .) .)
1bro:de 0
wPeecce>wcc
.) 0 .)
ccce>o&-..l,;toe~ero~ro
.) .:>\
cccc:cP~c.ure:ccocoG]:~c.e&IGJ
.) .) .) ._, ':> 0
II CCccoe>J~wPco~:cco
.) 0.) 0
&:obd:o
.) .)0 0
ookf1461
.)0 .:>:J
,bro:cP~c.uPee
.) 0
:ccc--:>c.u:r,;J&:cbcoo~w<J> ~cC2o.
.) ~ .:>.:> 0
uC2cco:;,;w)b.):ccohl,ce>:c.cc
.:>0 0.:> :.J..L
:be>o&>wPeoba>
.> .:> .:> e
:ocr,;)e>c.e&o~oco
.> ::::J .>.__,.>
m::2cc01i)l:2co
.> .>~e
&:obd:oook~4Q
.> .:>oo.:>o .>:.J
@cc.d;;]<'? o&:ccowdtoe>
:;) 0..... .:>
ibeswPeeCl>OleG
.:)
:docce>wcc w:~co~wcese>
,J 0.) ~ 0
11
.) :_j.) \ .) !toe~
C2cc9oc:oc'-')aJC
:::d:Ob~cc4bewco
.> --J .> .:> o .>
wwPeewccoe;&cch:oe>
0 .> o .> .> 0
tbMJ3
0 '$
o
cu:EURbcbro
O...J
o~w0l;ccco
.).) 0
t .)~
bhlcc:o~:c~
.)
c~C2cc:o~0h!es
.) .)....J
tbro (c) Gesl->se>o2wes .) .)
1 r Q 1 1 n o!;)! 1Ji] p .,. :<:> ,
5co030e ~ccc:c.:::J?5~ :c.cr;g~o w:~~c.es~ ~::Jcc~cce:jt)gJ.:::i~c03<ll~gro
:~ro hJ0Qes&ookf)~Q gCC!roccce>eoh>~~IBcoCbegctt ccooHcolc.u,o
e'J 0~.)~ .>0 .>::! .) .) \ .>0 ~.) 0 o.)O.) l,;
SL<!Odtrn .MV1 VW<IfHI 859

6~9 S~~Od3.~ M.V1 VJAruflH
S.DIOdtru M.V1 VW1IOa 099
BURMA LAW REPORTS 66 1:~
('o
G~':l<l'""i): ~
('o
G~':l~:m
0<:' <'
~~~QJ'jo:> .
_. .. l!c.~l6~~~lfo:~ ~s>~rw~~ ~j~
tocre w;~b t)f eo~loc.~~ ~~~e. C~tlc 'jlb .b~f (~) -~t) -~1i~kseh
~~~:r.-J1.bdxoo&u~ I"!B~b:.co~ <!accc.or6>coo to;~a;(!Cccco~fe 100;~6 Ol COCCC0~
0
1
e.:J .) .) 01 .) .) .) .,) 0 .>0 .) ,) "' ' .,) l
1 .)Gt~ b~:~tlc 1bw (c)' oob ~'~d'>

~ .)
:kof~cb
.) .)
ln~"&beac.oowc.l&>~
....L .)
->oro b~:~fo~
;). ~
~~~ce~cb I.:~:~&:Cbcoscio~cbsocccb_ (~) 1~~S"-co~ <.o&:c.oosoc. 16~ +

II (e) CC. FX~oo~~soo~cb I ~-e C~tlc
11 @ccMoc.co
.> o.>
~bOt-..ocoo~W.:c.w-
:J .> . ...J
.
~coclbJ~
.;,
c.~&bewc.lbJ~
.>
octOJ~b:, u@ccl;onwfrot:l@co
.) :::::J 0 .> O.l .> \'J.> C.~OCC~IC.COfiOOO
~ .>
IIO~tefl-
.> 00
beseod l:n@ccec.chl
.J ~ ' .)
:4e:c.cnfl!~e000
.) .> .>
O~~okbc.och~:c.~&oo
.) .JO .) 0 0
u@ccGc::!:ot:lb
.) .>:.l .)::J .
okJ~c.ocb~:c.~
.>O :>
oo:dl'lcct'leM
o:>-oo
:c.wb~e:Cdconr.-J
.> .>~.>
4&w :b~coc.cc~:b~:c.e
.>
ohlcc.
.>:J
.n~l'l~ofecoschlco
..) ::1 o~..J;~weo~ ~:~&b~wc.lb~
.) .)::J,:, .) 0 :> .)
@<:G&c.oc.l6eu
.) .>
uwfecoR:k
.) .) :1
u4b
.)
:oecobcm.o
.l o
:cec:ccoA c.cc~ok4ec.oCbs:c&!!AwccA-(c)
.>o .J .J.>O o
oob floh:l:oofc.ocooO>cb
.l .l .>
* (~6e~caxoc Fro54b::>ce::>~) : ><J>CD

,
0
0
n~bgc-
0 .) .).) .) .) 0
r , ..
~ (\}~
c~~CCOCDC rco~~6::>ce::>)
.) .) .) .)
cee.ce Cs~c t-
:Xot;~re:a
.) .> 0
:~&:clx.o
~oceocoo.Q>Cb
.) .) .)
.5961] S.l~Odmi 1'1\. V~I VW'tlfl1 Z9<J;

664 BURMA LAW.. REPORTS
~~G')
a8
rBiC:su
'o.
llcrlcccob:>'JCJ@coro
~ ~ 0 ~~
to~~ro ~:!=;J&:Cbco
0 .)0 b~ Etj 0
l;ccr!o :b~ ,rt;coP6>rooto
0 ~~ ~ 0
;~ro ~:!=;J&:Cbco::>~coCD l;c@o t~c!=;Je>:cPft::::>c!=;Je>ro 1ohl t6>e>cocow
.;)0 :;- ~ . .) ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ :=:1 1.. ~...... ~
11 cr!c:C~:::>c
~ 0 ~ ~
!=;Je>ro .)4b0c.occoe>
0.)
toft:~~~~ftft
0
~hlccCDGl
.)0::1 00 ;,;:3 ~ .....
:2co
e
&roWM~ro
' 15 ~
to:Cb~o~ro
o ~
c~~b.lCDto
;,~o o
&be:ccowclb:>e>
o ~
~cEOle>oo
~ ~ o
ncr!cc:cco&-,
~
:crlrotococroe>coft:~ft
~ 0 .)
oco~de>
.)0 ~ .)
tohlro&kc~ft
.)~ ~ 0
:okJ&-, tee>
;,::! ......
cocbe>:c~
~
crlcc~bl<llto
.) ~~0 0
&be:coowclb:>e> w2<11o~4e>
0 .) ~ .)0
co:d<':lccft ~:ob
0 ::f ~
0
toc~ro~ &:ccowclb:>e> 11 ;:;Jcc<llf.::;bQo"ln~e> <11:ckJco weCSee> olb:>ccclb

o ;, ':3'"' ~ ~ ~ ::);, o e ::1 ;, ~
o
~
1
::>ccftcoero
~0
11:cce>]ca.>coft
<1 i1
'1. ~
_,_
::>o:wco r ,.
cftcoceroe
0
11 tr
cc:ccococrroe>.)
o r o ~ 1
o~o <11W
.) .) oO
&be :coowclb:>e>
~
ucrlcc<llhl:okJbwccce>:cCD
~ ;,;:3 ;,::) .) . f[;:c~oo:docc~
~ 0
c~&<11hl
~:~.
ei~ft x!=;Je>oo
.)0 .) ~ 0
toa.>ccoe>e
.)
co~ro:be>coccce>
.) ~
:be>:c<ll :crlrotoA:~~
~ 0
t::>h1ro
.)0 .)~
&Jcc~llrroCDrro
, ~
ta.>bfl~()
~ o
tD~:~A
o
~(')(') CCCC~bl<llto
;,o ::foo;, ~~oo
&be:ccococltoe>
o ~
nab
;,
;cce>Mw
.)
cPwocPcoe>
~ .)
ooc
0
~:, c.~ro~:ob tkcoCDe>Ce
0.)
C2ccb:oe>II:, oC
::f~ 0
:r-Je>rooltoroco fbl~ccce>cc cAroA &:coowcltoe> ,t;eCSto c~:okJee
::::1 ;, ~' ~ o o ;,::lo
hl~to f[;b:oe>:Wle>ro
eh ~ ::::1 d:.oco~ero
~0~
ucr!cct;~e>::>o
~ 0 ~
ccce>cocroe>to
.)
~obl(l)to
~~~o
&be :ccococltoe> 11 crlccorob:> ~bt;cccGrcoco to:cooccce>cc ~ oob
;, ;, .:> o ~ oo o o s
8b:~~rwcoo<;>Cb
.:> .:> .:>
n C2ccce&o~IW
.:> ~~
toCCcc<llhl
.:>
~b.l(l)to
.:> ::3 5 ~. 0
&be:coowcltoe>
.:>
~&wwwPo
. .) ~
:cbe3o totocbocc:cdme>
.:> .:> .:>
cMuc.recce> to~roiG3
0 ':5
u.:>cccc<~~hl:okJa.i~wP6>roo
.:> ::3 .:> ::!.:> 0 .) .:>
to~~ro
0 .) 0
~:~&:cbco
-:,~ <r.:::l
lkcco
0
:~~ tcw~toLosog:,be S.O~(I):crofl t~Je>:dfteb:~:~c]e>ro ecce>

:~cobi<11Pe
0.:> ~.:>
IGhwoo:cPwcroe>
~0.:> !)
wcce
0 0
t:hl:to:cro
eJ 0 toccft
0
~0ft tohlro&Jcc
0 ::>oo ~~ .:>
Q,'J~CJA :cro:cPwcroe>
!)
tCCeo~:CbC3o:ccnA
e ~
tCCcccAroe
.:>
&:ccowcFroe>
;,
o~eb
~
roP6>CDo W:j:;J&:cbco::>~ l;c@o to~~eGCo II CCcccobre~AW to@~b:oa
.:> ;, Etj ;, ~ o o ;,o o ;, .:> .:>o .:>
:ccrowohl(l)to &be:ccowcFroe> 11 ;:;:::Jccco~boc ~::>Froroco .:>cob<11:c~
~ .:> ~. 0 .:> 3'"' ~ 0 0 0
. uc~l6~
,:,
ccc~:o&:xo .bee o~b 6Elbc~oa :h:>orcoc.oo..,d,
~ ~ .) . .) .)
;hlcc~cxoo.
Ji:J .) 0 .) co;~b
. :J
il roccft
.J
10~e
.)
Ct~~c
;)
hx:.&wcl6~e6cw
0 . :J
ccc~e:x.c.oo
.)
o&> Ct~/V
:J ;;
cof,w;:cc~coo..,d,
.> .>
a=.:f,:h.l~bdxoo~COG
~- ~ . .> .:>
o~et?.otb ot c.oocccco
.>o .> .:> .> o
1.
T.
u& ,J~wc&coc~~:cc~c.oo~
~ .- ;) \. .)
IGte
;,
Ct~tlc
::J .... "II"
o
ncocowccoo:ccow
.) .)
,,
clc;Q~
1 _
. rr
* (i.lcbe:o.::owcfco~) :):)~CeJ~Q
0 ;) ;)~
0
~:)cco~cchl
;)0 ~ .) ;)
ucob cc
r .) 'h:J
:)~
.) ~:::::::1
(&::crowcfco~) crc.u~:)Cfl~
;) ;) ;)
S.DIOdffii f.AV1 VJAnlfiH

L99 S.DIO&ni M.Y1 Vli\ffi09:
u.;)C2ccwtv(!)~re:t(?ed'oo~rr...u
..,) 0 .;) ..)0 0 .:>.:>
~bmnoe> .;)~~oo4e>:.~eftcro
.;) ..)0 .;)
1::>fro
.;)
-:~c:xo ~Jih2<i?&~o.~ h;e~cw ~co ooo'~ ~e> @cd:bcoococfcoe> :c.co

.:> .:> .:>;:J e.:> .:> o .:> o .:> .:>
~~~oCOWCCO~W~<n
.;) .;)
II <_:2cc<llQ4bcor,l:bc0ococoCo W:,CC(? bcdb:ca:>
..:> .:>:..:!.:> .) :.:1. .;) .:> 0 .) .:> .;)
Ccocococe
"$'.:>.:>
b~e.ecro :cw&:ccoc.c:cfcoe>
:> .:>
w&to O
l::>fco<lle>,cee>a<ll
.:> .:>
:ce;;d:>
.:>
lfi.!:@<ll~:&~coo~d:d:Oro
~.) '1. .:>
'brocoro
~.)
uC2cc~ce&>
.) ::::::1 roo~!W
0 .).)
wC2cc~'JIJ
.) .:> ~
obto4e>
.:> .)0
~~eeces :cedbc.cowcfroe> ~c.h:le>to:oc.h:le>ro
.) 0 ::::::1 0 .) ::::::1
.;)
IOCOCX>eG
1.- .) .;)
11 oe>oroeQ f'l:1PeC2cc:o~wcmhles
.) .)::1 ~ .:> .;) ~
~:)CO]q cc:cce>t;(oe>e:d~~~,.J:J ~ IOe>CB:ob oR:,J;locboli'eecto
~ .:> Q.:J ' 0 .:> w 5'~ .:> .:> :.:1 ~.:>
.:> .:> 0 0
ucoenee2ccoes:c.a:> 'bode>olre c.0bblc.~ ~::Xoro2<ll~e>:cee>oo tclies
.) .:> .:> '5'.:> .:> .:>:.l ::::::1 .:> .:> .:> .:> 0
cob.if'l~ lf'l~cce>b11Je :ok:l:ce<ll<ll ~ocoee:& w&s :c.c:n:2co &bc}oo~ro
OJ o e ~ .:>::1 _, ~ .> o o e ".:>
SJ.tiOdffii MV1 VWlli19 89Q

:r.7J4~~:')b:'llro 11
e:J 0
u;4o41!iocro:'):2u
.) .)0.) 6
u@cc:~rd@btdiJ
:) .) ,.) 0 0
.J!:I~c
:J
. ,~-1 ~rokrosecXl
~.. \ .)
coo.-,Cb. .10>~e
0 ,J
C~tlc c.coeoo~
.,)
o~ (e)coccc.uac.co~
.,)0 .) .) .,) .,) 0
u6tlb ukobC>obsa JC>~e tlC?Jc .bc.es-ok-ese 1co~@l::l M .ceebc.ec.cco n~tlf'

.J o.> .) .l . .>o ., .) ~:J t,
:kobO> ccoooXO o~ca~l:l 10>~e bCtlc J:>:>~c.a~ IJl,oc.C:oe@l::l ;He:~Zo::><.ae

.;, e " ..:> .:>o .J~ .J .,o .,) ::1 ., ., :.:J .:: .:>o ~ .:~
u~ce~ ksacc~g
cot:laaX:o
.>:::lo..> o
:ces:roew&:eecce
.
oc.hJoccce~~:ocae
.> ~ .J .>
o[:Jc.cceioe
.>:.l Li
c.c:croaccihJcocc
., ~o
h>:c.waa @cc&:co::>wclb:>e ofco:cC>:ClC>ot:locelb~ to:l:oecokGn nc.urecoiJ:k
o oo .J .:> .) .> .>~b 'S';-J o - " ., :J
o:cb~o~occo
.)
lllil"l.'c:xae:c.c.u-:ol:lobe:c.~oro~el::lbes
~- .,) .):::1.) 0 .,) .)!.:) (c.u) bod ~uh:t:;:tcocc..,e:Cl t~&:cbco
.) JO 0 iS.::J
699 S~'aOdffil M V1 VW~o.g

"It is the ~uty of thedriver to <41-ve his v~hicle at a sp~4

which will not imperil the saf~ty o~ oP1ers u~ng the road."
~ r;;:r
t:j:~ptl~
r r r~ r or::;:: r c- c-
GY:X:::7c9f' e:):G:',XG:D:> o:>:>Of'<>g?'f>:~Gt:j:>C : GO C\~X~~
;r
(' r.: (' ('
tf?C09f> tJVGO:x>2:; il
(' 0 (' (' ( (") (' 0 (" (' ( ) Q (" ('
OY~f' ~OO':>YroO?OO 0 ;~ ~CCGcm \) Q'>'jC~:~-
" Mere velocity of the vehicle is not the only criterion of

rash and negligent driving. It may consist in taking, while
driving, risks which by the exercise of a little diligence could
have been avoided.
DriVing a car recklessly until it came so close to the
pedestrian that it became impossible to save the collision
cannot but be characterised as rash and negligent driving.
It is true that ordinarily the pedestrians who use the road are
not exempt from the duty to take care of themselves, but
negligence, if any, on the part of a pedestrian cannot excuse
negligence on tlie part of a driver of such a fast and dange-
rous vehicle as a motor bus. As between a pedestrian and a
driver of a motor vehicle the responsibility of the latter is
greater. He has a duty to keep better outlook than a pede-
strian. The duty to use care increases in proportion to the
danger involved in dealing with the instruments which for
a man's own purpose he brings into relations of proximity
to his neighbours. There is the strongest presumption (of
negligence) both in fact and in law against a driver who
~s downa. person in day-light."
o~Sj ffiGO):<JI'J: "'

~OI~OC CD8J~I')g()')
(' 0 ('
roms? [Y. ' "' ('
~c;g o:>l GO!OO<P'J COO<J:GOI 0:>
(' (' .,. ().
o.
(' C' oc
Gl:l':lcmJc~;;:
('
O)O):)):D~~IO)C
U o.
0
U
(' "' (' O)CI
('~ I
'ltl
0
:x>:>:roo.xn~~JO)C
c.!.
LT
(' "' ('
1.
::::O'J: 6 oA
::::0 Clc ('

m:>:G<J:>C:
ot-
~8
l
0 0 C
::D<JI:>:m oo::n
iL tJ
C
mxs: ::n?:ro'J
;"I 6 l
6 0
0 C'OC
OJ<JI'):~:>:mrog
ll tJ
A
:;>.c: g
o
"<PG<Pq.stC ggmeJlC:
T
00 0
~.....~ C'
l ol. I 6 t. ol
J.
i::lt::GOO'JC~ o o~ r c c cr;:;:: c o c r;::::: c o .,.~.
~C OC'
m?:gp;~ ::DO)t:j:~p~q G<J?C:~C~']f cq~<>Gt:~:>C: :))O)GO:GO l tJ.
c:Jf~':I~CC ll 0 c
cqGo::n2u
0
CO::D:x>mGo:
0
GOt
0 '~' ('
Ql C:<J'J::O:D:I
('
ffi'):G<J::>C:OJ<Jt'J:m OO<J:GOI me.
<: c .,. ('
<P~:n:mg:g
C
Lot
(' (' ' mo:J.s:OJ?:ro?
(' (' 6 :x><JI?:Sd:>:
o
. T 6
J C.:.
lt U
n.U o
0 co
mrog::n:nGJ:;>IO)CI
l . 1:.2, 6
C' ') (' ('
cc:mm.
I ol
0
oo_o<:: o o~ r,;:c c cr,:::c r,;:c r::;::: c c

<J<JO:,etl m:>;<Jp:c-q ::nm~:~?[jt:; G<J?c:~cE!c: t:J<PGeJ?c:t rog:
GoT~::nt: ~?:ro?o;(GJ,:m::n? Go1ro~:>s ~::n~: ~?:
r::::: r;:;:: (' 0 cor,:::c r,;:c rm (' "T'~~ r,:::c ~oc-
ro?~G::D?Gt:~?S I ~mgtjc:tj<PGt;.~pc: G<91 t1SJ CX?,GQJt:IC: <J6l,~C
(no con,tributory negligence can be pleaded) G:x>:>G?SB~Go::n211

or,::~ cr,:::c c c c c oo o
~~O)'t9:~t1lSJ .OOCtjC 02:0?:cqjCI Gcqj'JCDCO:>:O?t:x>2 <J<Jm?:~
OS:<P?<JCO?:o:>' GO')1000?"C
::DO) (' . ('
G<J?c:~CG:::D?G
6 'JC(' G::DOO::x>mGro:nJ?:
.
"':rom CDtx>Q:>?OO:B
A o 6 o J o L li.. .
o coc
O)()')g c: Be c
<P::D:D(J) c
GG'd'Jffi<JOO~:~c GG'd?(J)~(J):;>
c c o G
0)
C'"
L C.:. I. IL 1! J o ll iJ oL Jl.._..6 l
c c c c c cc- c c c c
co:n::n2~:> ~j:>:~c:~o:>G~J? <JGo:>:><Jo:>'P:i9.~ ::n2o:r q?OO'J.PGcqJ:>m;>
('~ (' (' (' (' 0 ('~(' (' .,. (' ~(' C'
::nc;r:Jmg2g~0)0)2~ G\',?9o:l2ttJCI cpmGOI QJ~O)OO'J:G::D? ~[jG:>OCD
(' 0 0 ~ (' \ ('~ (' . 0<" (' C'
~?::02:1 <>2?1J m~:9G~Grt:~= Gcqpmcumctl::netm9c:t qc:roJil:~;s
(' (' (' (' (' 0 ' (' (' Cc c ('
Go:l? ~<J~CG:>?G::D:> (J I ')~C\).S~::D;x>(J)
Jl J 0 u .0T '- l
<JOO::D?::Y.>I
l '
.S::::o~ro.s:O):"l1(J)()CU)OO').S
T ~ AT L ll T c.:.
hC' <" 0 <"f,.. C <" 'I' ~C C O~C'~ C' C' '
tj~GO::D211 ~GO)')t:J'J:ro~:l ~c:GdGOI 8dtJG:>SC1D 9:[]lqSJG0:9f~~m
\ (' h
0 f,"; (' ~ C'
C' C C' ~G
(' (' C' <" r,: C'
8dG9:g~~o:ltjq1 2Ji09C~Jro~c 8dt:lq>OC1J) ~:t'llq~G0:9f o:JqGCOJ?<J~
(' . .
<JO:::O)G() II
L
C' "T'~ ') r;:;::: (' r;:;:: (' (' , "'T' C'"o
8d00(l')G<91 tJUI - ~Gei?c:<Jp:G~'Jt:; GC'iJ?mro?:~roGOI GG'd'Jm~:
(' . 1,'~ (' . 17.: (' (' (' C": (' 0 (' C' (' (' c-
~J~O)GO)'J tJ"'~COC~)?~ ~:Cjo:>OlJm~q 8dtJ"'3CID~ OCG'J?()')~()')O()')')f
0('
QCOOGOJ?
c
~GIO::PC~<JQ::D
(' 0 ('Cl m
~' ('
'C' o . . (' C' oc
COOC<J GCUI?CDCO?m OCOUQ Gd<J.S...
L l ~ Jl o 6J J\. JJ .L:J l IT T0.4
(' 0 (' :C'
~J'to:><:qCDOJ211
u@ccc.~coto:~C2@b
.) ..) 0 .) .)
bJ
0
C~f C.G I (c.co~coro
,) ,)
:dxo) :c.rl'l:to:>bG
.:> e
@hlc.l'l~Q
.> ~ .>~
I~ bf:~c IOO;GI'l~Q
q.)o
~::>Gc:x>!>@hl
.>~ :J ;, !3 .>
~G:~m::>GI'l~
of .>o :J :>
u@cc:~~@bh.J
.) .) ~ 0
0or. e.G n>.r('):tool@hlc.dbl
..) 0.) ~ .)~
1ci>.f~
.)
~Ctlc u&~a .)o~~~~&::>c.(')~
.) ,)
u~::x.h.l~ec
0 .) :::::3 .,)~bw6la.>G
.) .)
,vl..~oo
'lt'Vt./1 :J
W~(')WC.CC~re
0 .)0 .,)
:@c.oc.cc~ccco
.)
~:hloc;c:h:c.roro~
&1.> c.Mrwdecc~ 0wl;ec
:@roco:k:~wf
:J ..>
:&coc.ec~
.>
:c.cobo;.ro&.>:oq(')
.>o.> .>::1 "-e@cc
.>
'!IJoc.co~ec
~., .>o
o~:Clco:(')C'C:
.> e e
lP('
~~
)e)
ocococ.k~ ohl&?ccO<.occo~(') :c.ec&becoc.ltu~ co&coc.ltu~ uobloc.ec~ :@ooc.cc~
~ ~ .;> :.:!.;>
.;> .) .) .)~,) ~ ~
ek~:cbco o&x.co~:~:cbco ~6::>~C.&_, of&becoc.ltu~ co&coc.fco~ u@ccGc:Jc;:e,bbl
'\0 " .) .) .) .,) .) .) ..) .) .>:1\. \j
@COGc:Jec :c.coooc;uo[:';'Jecoo:cbco ~1:Q&becoc.ltu~
0.):1 .).)::::1.) 0
o~l!ccoc.lb,~ll
O.) .) .)
II corec.otJ:k
:J,):lo
11 'l.Oa:oi:Jwoco;cochooo-~awc.cc~c.o:,re bw (c) uub flcoGooa :korcoc.oo.olch

:.:J .:t::J.> .) .) .) .lO ~ .) .> ~

r
~lg
.:>
:tl9
~~.~:>J~&G(J?g
~c"'
~.~~j}ll
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 675;
c co ere Sl Q c c oc c c ~ '1
:::> ~oomp~::x>~:~cl rr.JG0l:::x>g: :::> G(J)')('J);~ rr.lGGCO:JC:)')ffi Dl.GfOI:O~
c, :>eGj
(" 'T'~ "' 0 (" 0 0 ~ (" c r.~ c ~ ~~
9:340XDG<.91 tjO'<T.l<t$~ O~:l9JG~Gft::j:Gp:ro 'J~tf:tj:Gf:lm gi::IGj)C:U (: c c-
c c o c c c '1 c c o c c ~r;c c GG'JC~GG':lc;
~:qc o;?:n~G:o:J o;?:D:;!Jm':? Gm:Jmo,~:;~J:n~ 9~tr=t~C:Jr:::>.:>~u &G
c
" . 1$
c (\):))')g!))Q(J)O)C
c c c 0 c (' 0 oc (' c 0 c ' J
CDGCU: l()')l,sgg;;n::n~cGg')CO)CDrr.J'6~~CCOO')CDffi:O C
.0:1 6 6JJ l ot,. JJ L l. o
~.~G]lll-
c (' c 0 oc 0 ~ (' oc '1 ("" (" 'l
qjyG:x>~roGCO:~~rr.lOj( Go:>Gp:mg~ Gtpc:G~Gr~C'JOIO)C rr.JO:XDOI
oc (' c c~ 0 ~ cr c \ (" ~ . c-
!n~C:92tr=tl:l o2')~G~Gre:1=~:~J:J:m cocBGcopmro:o~') gr:~Gj):c>2
<' c ~ c c c r o c co
'G:O I'):T)(\)')C0CO)g : a:o:>CCO:J.l~l:-;)0)0 GiU')OOCO');O) Cl g GClel!CO(')')OO
'
lJ .06 "UL)AIJ L WL ..616 L
C .,... COC r,::;::: C 0 C' C ') C' C C' C'
QJ :J.lgJ:l;':?') ~l:!j~~C4>'f' !nGt::jJC: gCg9 molll GG?CQCGI:I')Crr.JGr~S
C c o o c r c c c 'T' ' 11
<,H,lGCI:JJ')g rr.JGCOJ:''I )$)0 Gi.nCOGO)') "':l:::D;D:I G!QGQ1) G~')CQCG~')Crr.lGOI
u...er
o o
too Jl
(" , c
..
c C' r. ,
o o
..._ LJ..oJ
c c c c .
J
.
-rL
o ("' c- ~
(J)OX)QG:))') 11X..lil)QI('J)g!'):IL~.; 4'J00 C..: GI:I')C:;lCGI:I?Cg.crom G,scoc9.s
o. 6 ll u u. .. T
s
c c r;:c r r. c c c o o c co oc 'l
C:OUJ::DlGC G!'-'lGCI::D.:TI GG')CQCGG')C~ I:IU)')g:()QCD GCO')('J)()GC<dCI~COIII
l.Jo 0 AI o
c
!n:xl:-DG<.91 0IQOI !nG
'T'r 'l Cc r ')c:!:;)c~mm
c o o
O.:TI')Q Gm')ffil;l:
J
co
!
c.
~q:,Q:~ero:m
o
6
ffi:'l)::DC:a
-.L
c c ~
0 -L- l. G 1 J 1! J v L ......... (i. ~ ::"1
c r,;: c !;; . c ~c c r. c c. co ~c
1:)1)2gq:,');:))')g:))KgCI ffi]QI:GCD')9 lLJOCQJCGS,)G,SiCJIC GG;;l')ffi~:~:oa:4'JCD:C:U
XJgs;o
OC' 0
TOL
6
C'
L.lo
O(.l)OI:D:x>COI::D:TI())
U
C'
o
c::::..:~
C' '1 C
Ct.
J
J tL
C
G~j' ')COCO:J::::>..-~1
Jl !U~
<:
():::>.)')(.)
L..J
0
UJ
6
GQG CJ'.1g(:)!')g('l)
OJil
....t!
lJ
L
C' \ C' 00 G
GCO.J:lffiO.)Oi'):::x>~ II :3'J~(.)):fJ9COfggp:GL C\.)i::!g vt:::')~GSGyt::j:I:IJ:l::"'J) <DC[g
c 8 C' 0 ~ C'j"
. (' .
~')=~~II
C' ~ ~ 0 ~ Q C' (' C' ~C' C'A;

titCOcSJ
0
GCDpro<m::;~'J~ l:lt\G~~~ 02':l5]G~Gye;J: e:Gg')CGG:lCQCffi
G~\)1');1)(\)0!ICDGO:COO?C
C' ' c C' (' .
G~l')ffiCO:l:::D:x>:D~
C' "
COC 1 ::D:J:G::D')
00
8;)~().)0')C
Q c
~ u T ~ ~ ll J 6 0 I
~ (' 0 co !;::;:: (' r,:: c C' r; Q
o:r:~:~p:lf') (J)TIJ:GQ)')G~~ G~~GfG::D') SdJlGt?j?C:eJc:~T~ Oe'):ID.
C' '1 C'

0G.SOI::!XD II COG
i C..::.
0
eL
OQ C' o 0 o C C' (' C' 6 ('
')C COtDCICCO:GJ'):m Q:Go:>:>m CO.:TIOX:G0:':>:0?:Qs
o L -1 t U t l! ~ c. 1:-
C'
-IT
J;;: C' ') c r. o c c C'O C C' C C'
tiWI~2:; II (J)~SJ~qc lj):GO?')CD 0 :q:,'): f~G::D'):340!J:D':?'.) GG')COCGG')C
2 9
c ~ 0 c r,::;::: (' (' . "f.~ r. C' 0 '1 (' C''
~S'=~CJGj)CQ~fE rr.le:JCCOCI:I(J)'):a:>o <Xlt:!t:J::DJffiOC ~Gf>OIG::D:::D2 II Gg')c
'c c o o C' c~ oc c c C' o .c '1
QCG(:)')C('J) G GCI:D CI('J)~('J)~ ~()q)('J) C:l G GCI:D GG')CQCGI:)')CO) q).SQJ
'' .
, .iii L 1J J J .iii l 010 0
A; c r,::c o !;; o ,~ o o r,;: c c c c c
;jj<J;?:D~'.)geJc:~:JI .illl'~rr.J~gdl:~ ro~:XItJroGO:'f>~ G00f>l1:::n<.XW
o C'
OOQCDOOQI('I)Q()')O)()III S?QCDS,)'QI('J)Q')
C' '1 o. C'
GQ'.)CQCGG:JC~C
c C . C' c
G GCio:>:)).:TI rr.l
0 C' . C C"
lJ l. 0 J Jo ..OIL C.:.
(' C' C'(' ('(' (' ('~ C' A; C'
.' CDC(:)(.))'.): ~0Xl9~q1 G(:)')CQCG(:)?C::D2 '=>tjGj)8;)'J: CDJOO:>J!li);jj GCO~CD
~ c c cr;;,c '1 c ~"' .c c c.<:: o c
~'['=lJ": 'G!Yte\fO::D~roQJCDtJWI::O~II '=>&]l'f> GG:lCOCGG?Cc:J g:)')Gp~q.
oc 'l c c c o '1 c
!nO?r:JX'D GG.S~COIII GO)')('J)OOI')~C O)C CDOOCIOI II GU:>')ffii:)QI')~C
II. A -J l & lJ J o -- Jt.- JJ
o o9 (J ..&
. o c c c . ~ c oo c A; oo o c.
ro~G-ji~CG::D')Gt::j')S ~tjGjl'J:l::D:l:CO:>CJRCD~ gg Y:)')GJ:l:~c ~'):
. C'
G'f'roG<felfC'jOI::D211
. 0 c .... C' 00 ~c:: C' s r,;:
C'
l:)gc:JC\)CGU:>:lCDd'):.tJ0~
C'
GG:lCOCGG:lC~ G~O;iOC
C' C' 0 C' 0 C'
o
ro:J:ro:ro?:CO:J:CQI(J)QG.SG~?CO.:TI:
co c c' GO}?(DGS,)YO)C
oc c
~.S~C~
oc c
C GCD
'
L u~-Jl - T C.:. ~ o Tl A-
:67q BURMA LAW REPORTS
C?) :;~e ~~z~

(J) O@j9 ~!~1
lL9 SL~Od3~ AAV1 vvr.ffiOH
.)00,1ico
-- u::;looot:.:l~bok10
:>"" ~~.;) ..) ~ .:1~bo~c.oc.bl~oo
,:) ~
. "c.o~cc&,t:":lco
0 ~
.~@oolc.r~~&~ilfrc.o
.>
~,.Q
l'!.l
<OI::;lCOC.OCO; eCbo~](lto~co~ohl c.~ bd flcb:h:icooo~cbu ualec.ot:.:l:~nnoo
yw ;) .> ~0 .)~ .) ~,) .) ..) ::1 .,) .
ft@oo:~~@b
,J .> ..)
to roc c~c.or!'lc.O
0 .)
t:kobo~w~b
.> 0.) .)
to~l,
.)
~:~btlc
;)
OC.flel&,
~
M .,)C.C.O&OO~
:) .,) 0
S.D:l0d3)I M V1 VW~OH 8L.9

1:' 1 ,,
11 cocowe:oscoecow
:J
0 h , 1 ,,
u.)c.ocoes:c.lf'o:>:cocoecoes
0
u@cc:~~@b h.> c
~ ;, .) 0
~r6CG
.>
nkobOCahlc.fl~tJ ~~~b ~
~ O.l ::J .>:.:J ..,
Qctlc lo::>~c.n41:l
.)0
~::>c.ooe@hl
.):,j .)
o~ :~ccoc.we
:J ~ .l .'JO .l
u~AO:bx.ocowcoPee.c
0 .) .)
~coo
'$'.>
.)
ol1cb:obl:ocF'Jeec
.) .> ::::1.) ::::::1
c.o:xrocpoe loe~&a .lcoCM&
.J \., J.., ., 0
rcoreco&x:cecocc
.:J .> .l
~bobo:lrcoec
.) .>o.>
~ch:ob
.l .> .>
61..9 S.l1!0d3'tl M.V1 :VW'tlflH

urcc:c.J .
c ~ .,<nccccflcofl
'::1
.:> o.:>
r "
c<n:~c.<.o~ :~c.
.:>

.:>
]~~].. oro:2 :coto ~cc~~:~c.re~:cow
.:> .:>
11
e
11
1, .:>

.:>
11
1,
:ro\'i'~co
1 "

u:oc
.:>
l- ~G.:> J .:>oco:
1
e
2:coto
11
1,
..-.
ccccoro:
.:> .:>
1 2=~b 1~
e .:>
J;rucccoo
. .:> .:>
o\'i'oro:
r 1 2'
.:> .:> e
eCc~CJJCC
.;)
ccc~b~&)~
0
ero:ocre~ IOOC.~a.Jre~ci=J~:ob
.)\ .) ,) . .) ,) ~ ,)
IICCCC<ntc
,) ,)
to:~o
0 ,)
CCCD ~: ~ 1
-.-, 1CCCOb~ 1CCCJJ
11 .
:ccec CD&COIO ~r-> ':':l
W Ucc;CCCOCC<n\' ri' ~"
r ore
I~(J)\'i'fl ~CO"
.:> ::> e o o \ 1, o \ .:> .:> e.:>
.:> \ .:>
ro:oc r.e~ :cru:e~:ecru
1
c.ro..J...te~ 10 (:c.~m~cf!e>
1 ) g~1
f!f! r 11 11
~l'i':<n:<n::>Cf!~ .
\ .:> o 1, 1, .:> e
oo .:> .:>
1 11 . r 11
1 211
t:w~ccocf!~ o wcoscc:r~ o~ :com :c.wc.cc~cm ecce~ 1 wruteoc ~
b n J
...:> .:> o e 1, .:> 1, .:> e .:> .:>
1CO
0
.--, blr
IICCCC
.)
" OCOCOf!e.G
OCO~
0 .)
" " 1r (J)
\ ,)
W (()) ,)COf!W
r 1 n J e>:O.b
eCCe>CDCC ICDCDteOC
u@cce&6 wrure~CQe> CD
.:> \ o .:> .:> ::1
crcJ::lto) @t:;JOC.We>:2
~o ::::.!, .:>
.)
:t:;J&:cbco COO"cb
0.:>.)
e ~
.)
.:>
L 1 1ccoo: ~11cc:wco
ruccw rococo 1 cocc ncccceo ~l
.1. '"""l . 1
1ru:~o
1\ If J.
L
w:c.tf!oww b
ccrec.80
...:>o, , ... ,
o o .:> \O o e o .:> o \
coccccco:oe>rute~c.
nJ ~ w:c.~tooc.f!e>
1 ..-. 11 .1
ucccc:re:<"6'lCDco:c.s-
.:> 0 ,) 0 .) .:> I,,) .:> EI.:>OO
tOOC.fl~
or1111
~l:G:<n~Cfl~ t:e.G~COOCf!e> I~-
oCDCOCDre ~
:re:fl6'l 1o
:ee.:> 1 11 or
WCOGCC:tOO\'i"
1,.:> .:> .:> .:> .:> .:> oe 1,.:>
11
:coto 11
cc..J...reelcco .1
l:c.esc.ccs-cm 2 1orro:
n: ~ :ree>(J)(ll w b o\'i'flCOCC
nr 1
ccc~cm
2
1, .:> . e.:> e .:> \.:> .:> .:> e
S~'HOdmi MV1 VW"tlDH 089

t89 S.DIOdtrn M.'11 VW'HflH
..
.. .
'
: ... .
u2cc:cro
.:>
ec.ob::> d-J cc.>
~.:>
ua:!ccrote
l. o
~:xb!)roe<>
.> l.
cco~~IW
.:> .>
1:oo<h~occw~coo
o .> e .>
ccc~
:crocoo :cr~:cccb ua:!a:::ro<ll~ o<h!)roa:; cboh>:2l2cc:occe~:&Ho c.o~~
.) '\ .) l..:>~.) l. .:> 6.) .) l.
ccc~ot;l:ro<ll
.,...., l.
w (~cJ~l !:o) o&~<ll:2 ohl'ro ucccc:cl;oro :oc~~<llR
;:; :,jo .>O .:>O e .> ~o .> J .> ::::::3 .>~
om:2 ccc~:::>cce~:<J~rocb:dftob:>:2 'l:ceooh>:2 ecc~c.occ 'roltuteba:;
..> e .> .> eO'\J e .> .> o
c.oPeeewO:,IR II ccccr otl; ro~:oc.ce~ too<h~~~<llo:l oto:2 ~eel; Cc!):::>Cce!)
.:> o .> ~" .> 1.. o .:> o .:> JO .:> e.> o .>
S.l~Odffii M.V1 VW~fUI

SJ.'c!Od:nl M V1 VJAfffi1g t89
BURMA LAW REPORTS 68$
(' r,~ (' (' (' (' 0 (' C' oc
()')O)ffiO?~t: ffiJQG~'f ~w rooo?:GO)') S?lol~
c--Q 1 C'
o:>2:q <.![:;ot:j:J GOO?CSC'ID
0 C'C' C' oO'C' C' r,:_c- ~ C \ C!;,
9 O]'tOC\)(OOQ:eCGOJI CjC:tjC g)jnd~~~ ~eo:>OO~: <iS~ ?9 02~CJ.:9JJ
\ (' C7. c c 0 (' 0 (' 0 (' r,:_c- 0
~QJm DLoturo?:o:>eD:froeg G~90Je 11 o:r~s'=' ?9 ~J 13v~m<to.t
r,:_ cc \ r,:_c c c- ~ o r;-: c
Dlcqu~~~ 'itrommm t10~mdll~'}'Oil'='J':l:o:l2 8dt::J<J?t~:r9 OOGc:~?m
C C7. C C' f:C' C' ~ (;:;:: CCC C' C' C',S.i C' OC' C'
GGl'Jf DLntUCJt e~0)2JJ illl8dGI~?:Pc:!9c:'P'S OO)j)(J.)~( G:lll?COJt: ~s
C7. C' (' r.; (' 0 C' c c 'l oc C' C' Q
tJC:GOO?C~ tJfi:I?~CC ? Sd~~~ G8d?(l)(.JJ8dotC: 09co:r:!;!OO?::x>e:;IJ
0 ( ) 0 \
"It is not every combination of two or more persons

making an attack upon another tba't one can infer from
such joint attack, if the other is wounded or killed 'thereby
the existence of a common intention 'to do a criminal act
in furtherance of such intention within :the ambit of s. 34
In other words to attract the provisions of S. 34 there must
have been a prior meeting of minds. Several persons may
simultaneously attack a man and each can have the same
intention, namely, the intention to kill and each can
individually inflict a separate blow, and yet none would have
the common intention required under s. 34 of the Penal Code
if there was no prior meeting of minds 'to form a pre-arranged
plan. In such a case each, individually, would be liable for
whatever injury he caused, but none could be vicariously,
convicted for the act of any of the other persons."
!;_ C' C~ C' . C' C'OC C C C C'
g)j:ld~~C 'f'eo:lmt.j:<{S'=l \'9
Cf.J,C 8dffiJl;OC~C9f o:lffiGo:lO:{DQJ:UI
0 ('
OJ(:)())O)
ot..l
C'
Sd~O?C
JL6
'T' ') ('
GOJ GOtmro?Go::l'J SdG ?C: C' f:'C' (' C'
IQc~ro~JC Oroo:>m~
u-r
('~ 6
(' (' 0 0
8dQlJm rocom "l:~GQJ rr
(' C' (' 0 (' 0 0 (' C' ~ '!fr: C'
~~O<fc:;Qo:l~ 8dil?89 ~roGro?
mOiC:I <.l~?S) G)Gf~: GS c:J~~~
, (7 'l c- (' (' C'\ ~~
co::n:
C
<.DOOOJO):nm
JL
u:;roc:~:> Grot?mroo:>?:c;u rr
C.:, - l 6 o 6 )J A
. ro~G~TC7.u1
. tf 8dGr;:;::?f:(:)I?:Gr;:;::?8.
. ~ U t_j o
m<.D~
ll
roro:c8
l- L
Glol?foJro:~t ll J o
C''l o 'T'
Gl:l?CUif'J:q( SdGOJ Cf.J,C 'PC'o:lo:>t:J: <{S<:i
c- c-~ c-
rO ( )/ r,:_c c
j j ?9 00')1 tj~OOC~'J:
C' r.~ C' C' (' C' Q c 0 c
0)2q ~:;otj:l GOO')C8(8) O)O)(l)O)~f:~ ffiJQGQX]f QJ'fO) OO?:Go:>:>
OC' 0 C' C' C' C' ~ 0 o 0 ~ C' C' C'
Sd(:)~91 qj'tUOu:x.9JCD~I <:Xf8d<.l[Q ro~:<:q~J?:Sd?_:l g)jnd~'~ Uroo:>m
f,~ C' C OC' C 0 C' C'
t1:' .roq:>:Go:> ~OO'Jr Sd~~ QJ~rocqm0)2 u
~b or
lf 11 _l_
fteC'OWC.OO.Q>Q)
0 :>
S..DIOdffil M.Y1 YY"rnOH 989

1..89 S.DIOdtru M.V1 Vffi!OH
S.L1IOd:n M.V1 VJArnflH 889
-
~89 S..DIOdffii M V1 VW'tlng:
r
~~
.)
li 11 1 11
flecoesco0.4>CG:coes
0 :J
S.L~Odffi! M V1 VW"lli1ij 069

!69 Sl1!0dffil MV1 VW1IflH
S.DIOdmi MV1 VW1IflH Z69.
69 S.DIOdtrn M.V1 VW~IJl\I
Sl.1IOdffii M V1 VW):J[lg t69
6t
II 0
~o
' r. b'
~CC:e2 : e S'e!l5e> : oClle.G II
11boco:cu
e~ e
11 .)co&ecto:Cbcoe&es
0 0
u@cc:~rd@b
.l .;, .)
toi:O
0 0
6~c c.@ roP<Aor
.) .)
cesd:Gres~
.)0
JG~e
.)
cC~c rb:les
0
M :ooe1
.) .)
oco
...
1J rb~ G@ ICCO~
.:> .)
rcbco ulx>ob@
.) 6
@hlc~MJ
.) ~
J<P~e
.):_j .)
~C~c roo~ca~l:l
o.)O
loc.oo~@hl
.):::J .) .) ~ .)o~ .)~.)
bl:l:!kc
ualcccetn
.>
in@cc~Co:llret)lcocdb
:> .> .;,
fbt,Goco'!l;J ocr:;;,~i-O:xF;J~co@cc~
~o.> ~ ::> ~ o :> -:::::1 ., o
c;:cr~~Pees
., B .>::::1 o.> O,j .)~bMbi:o&cc~
:oQt'IGoco'!l;J .) o
co:alco<.o:2~CA..-cJI,
.> e
oecoccGoeMco~cc~
.) .) ~ ;;, ,
S69 SJ)IOdffil M.V1 VW'dDH

Sl1IOdmi MV1 VW'dfl9: 969
" "
Gll:lCGS??C
S.DIOdffil M V1 VW~OH 869
"A First Information Report usually does no~ contain a

detailed account of every point in the case and the police
officer who records it cannot go into the length of examining
the informant in the way a wimess is examined in Court.
Because a certain allegation as against an accused concerned
has not been mentioned in the First Information Report
although the main features of the case have already been
incorporated therein, one cannot conclude that the witness
(inform.ant) is a false witness and that his evidence in Court
should be rejected in toto on that account."
~ r.;c oe c <:. ~ c c '1 o c r,: ~
q::: tj::l <Xt{)9C~:ct G>?~Jro;? 0 j j ~:; G:-D?0YJI8do:>._c : ~(OO)CO?:
c o ~c o c o o ~
"":))~I) CDI~'J.J) SdG.S~::: ~~~;))II
c.:, L All cl. TJ ... ~
" * * * In his cross-examination before ijie Court he

admitted having met Ma Ngwe Sein and Aye Saung directly
after the incident. . He explained that 'though he knew that
Maung Po Maung was aisQ concerne<t in the alleged murder
before he left for the police station, ye.t he did not mention
. Maung Po Maun(s name as he was afraid of reprisals,-
Maung Po Mating's followers being members of .the village
(o) o~~ ~ ~f~.,rg~~c4: (crnp:cFro3) >?I o~n

. .
700 BURMA L.A.W REPORTS
defence force who were fully armed. This e:h'Planatimi for

reasons which we shall set out hereinafter appears to be
quite plausible. * * * "
0 ~C OG C C C C ~ C C 0 CC 0
C9~8dt:JCI CO~D,COf: (i)')9Jmp 8?0 ~::;ro~: IJ:OJOX~J00{ O?j~OO?~
0 0 ('
~)O)T~9::D~ II
" "' * * Maung Aye Saung's testimony has also been

impeached on the ground that he has stated before the
Court more than what he has stated before the police
when the police examined him a few days after the crime.
Here again, Aye Saung has given the reason why he refrained
from disclosing the names of 1:;he two appellants. He says
he was afraid that if he disclosed that fact earlier he would
be killed by the members of the defence force and that he
therefore decided to disclose the fac~ only before the Court.
In the tense atmosphere the villagers found themselves at
the relevant time, especially when there was a conflict
between the members of the defence force, who were in
possession of fire-arms, and the younger folks of the fire
brigade who were without fire-arms, the explanation offered
by this witness is . not unreasonable. It is urged by the
learned counsel for the appellants that this witness has
embellished his statements and that his evidence should be
rejected."
a
" To constitute premeditated killing it is necessary that
the accused should have had 'time to reflect, with a vitw to
0
determine whether, he would kill-or not, and that he should

have determined to kill as a result of 'that reflection; that

it is to say, the killing should be a predetermined killing
upon consideration, and not a sudden killing under the
momentary excitment and impulse of passion upon provoca
tion given at the time or so recen'tly before as noJ; to allow
time for reflection.
Kirpal Sinah v. The State, li952) 52 Cr.L.J. p. 1520,
followed."
(" ("Cl (" . (" (" (" ("

QY:DO) G:D::D8d:>: G:D()).1ft:::;()l)ffi<X>C OYJO:>C\JCDOtD c:
(" \ \ C"("
r
9C"c: -, T tL 1t tL.
c- ~ C"~ C" o 'i'~
T
C"
J -r a
C" r::-::- c- o c-
~[9C:~t;p.:x>~ b[m:;e.:102~~ Gt9 l tj:D2~ <fc;;D9r ~:;;~:>:::5):D~~
"l C" C" 0 ( . ) C" C" '1 OC" o \ C' 0 C
rootroc8 .1ft:;
Jo
!noga .:>
l-1'\
ro~mc
Jlll
Gro:>.not~mc:
l
OY<.9ro:>~:n:x>~::\:>~;
LCIU l-ILC
0 ("
G9,?1)9 ::D2 II
" Pre-meditation may be established by direct or positive
evidence or by circumstantial evidence. Evidence of pre-
meditation can be furnished by former grudges or preVious
threats and expressions of iii-feeling ; by acts of preparation
to kill, such as procuring a deadly weapon or selecting a
dangerous weapon in preference to one less dangerous, and
by the manner in which the killing was committed. For
example, repeated shots, blows or other acts. of violence, are
sufficient evidence of pre-meditation. Pre-meditation is not
proved frpm the mere fact. of killing by the use of a deadly
weapon but must be shown by the manner of the killing
and cir~umstances, under which it was done or from other
facts in evidence."
IIO::l~G8l!obl
o.)O .:1~
~~~~B
0\!:
.:>.,
lCX>el
gcer;~~cl'>e~
0[.
~~~oc.~~cccoceoco
~ .) ~
1bes (c) t~a AOOo~o2coec
;)J .) .)
~ecotJec o~c.A~Q
.) .) ~ .)0 .) ::.1
+
ud ~~~cooc.<~scbco ~~'~ Cstlc *
S~'aOdffii M.V1 VW'tl09:

c ocr;::: c C' <' C' r,~ r,;: c <'f:: C' C' G <' <'
C\(oqc 0 c: rom~o;;S:D'JI l:fOXlo:>:;ro:>:tl: t:lOo:>ettiCI:Jd~~F 2::;>Jy~y:
C' ('~ C' G 0 C' C' r:::::
C' "T" C'C'C' (' Q OC'
qm~f~l :Jd~~ 2:~~~ ~ro~?:Gt~:J?~:;~ e:o.yo~:J GSI n:>JC~<)
0 C' C' (' G 0 C' C'A; C' C'C' C'C' C'O
~ml Gf?rDOOO :Jd~C 9 e:q OOet~c:SJ ~yUffiOO Of->Cy:o:>CD~
(' C'f:: C'f,' ' (' f,'i r,;: (' r::::: (' 0 0 (' 0 C' (' C' 0
O?:;>JlO:Jdo:>CDIJtC\(Otl;l ~CD2:t1; tjC!>Ge_:j?C:CQ9 o:>ro~C'J? 1:f0Xl0:>C!D9?1J
0 r::::: C' r::::: (' 0 (' (' 0 (' r::::: C' r::::: f,~ r,;: ('A;
ro~1 :DGt~::ec:t~:::e=9t9rouo:>et:Dotc:J roGt:.1:>::::t:.1:>:tl:eJCD9JI GCD:>sm
C' 0 " ('
('
o~o:>roo:>:nl
u.
0
L c
C'
I
(.' 0 c:::
l
('
LT
C' ('
cc:o:>c:JJro.suOXlu L
(' ('
T
(.' 0
rooc.s:::oCDm L
(' (' ('
msumoomomc
LT -1. L
c: rom(.'

eo~Snd'J
C' A;
CX)()(JSJ
(.' "r.: (.' ('
l:f~O:>CDt90'Jf ~9Gt:.1?C: romJOOO:>O~
0 r::::: C' (' c
G"iJ?roro
(' '
cr;:
ro:tlo:>~n
"
f::C'C'
:Dt::jo:>~y rom~stts~
(' (' r.: (' ('(' CDoroJ2:::gl
J~-m tl~p.y::;>Jm7~ (' ('~ ~
~'J:m
r;:c OC' r;:c C' C~ C'
Cf,C? f: C' C'c )G C' 0 C' C'
CfU'J~CC !nr;,OO~UC:eJ: 1~ 'Jf~ell ::OOil:la~OO(T.)~ j JC<Xl:~-
" In our opinion, sub-section {I) of section 26A of the

Burma Income-Tax Act read wi'th the proviso thereto clearly
lays down that in order that a firm may be able to make
to the Income-tax Officer the necessary application tor
registration it must be (I) constituted by an instrument of
partnership specifying the individual shares of the partners ;
.(2) if situated in any area to which .t he provisions of the
Registta'tion Act apply, the instrument of partnership has.
been registered under the Registration Act aJ\d l3) if situated
in any area to which the provisions of Chapter VII of the
Partnership Act apply, duly regitstered under the Partnership
Act.
It is not sufficient that at the time of the application for

registration tmder section 26A is made, the firm is in the
process of being registered under the Partnership Act or that
the instrUment of partnership should be in the .P.rocess of
being registered under the Registration Act."
''708 BURMA LAW REPORTS
C' C' C' C' C' C 0 C' C' C' o C' ( r:::G) ,..
~y<sO"A:>O CI:(OCf~:OO~i
9
Q)')O'ljlOrD?CD(:):~p:-:!JrD
CjO~CDC ~G 0~[g
:')OGS~J
G
(:l~om5~ro09~
-- -1 J L l)t L I
c38dcSX>:)_W;3,
L U.O
m<.9oSrocSrocSo3~f:::8:
LT L L eJ
fJdd;2uG8
.
c- c- cr C' c- o c- c- k <' " <' k. <'
:Jd9co~:! ~ro~o:;;CI)tC'.:Cv~;> Cl:(::3dOo:J~01 O[~~;t:'IOXJ? tllD::DI:j~l
r: GQn::;m
C' o <:: o ~ c \ c~ C' o C' o C' C' C' C'
OC::>jfOJ~I Ot;?~G~ft:j; Gcqj?ffiO)(J'JCe~Jffi~ O)ffi<:l9f O)~Grop~t;
IJ~~~Ot{;9GOlJ::D2 II
8droCJ5Gl9To1 mG')8:~JrnG')~I g)j~:~ b}~~t~' -m~~~
0 0 (' (' ~(' C'
!JJ<ftOl~: GOJ?CDOfl:GIJ:r:1f:::D~-
" Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the

case, a fresh registration under 'the Partnership Act is
necessary for the reconstituted partnership firm for the
purpose of section 26A of the Income-Tax Act."-
core10@coo::
.) :.:].)
C.G:~~
.)
:X.o:ik:cbc:oo&e
.) .) 0
OCJCC~:)\;&o]hl
.) ~ 0
?~obob~ ,o'b:xJ:x.
.,) c)'] ~ .) 0 ,) .... ..,
.,. CO~
0 .,)
co&:dx.o
..,
.
of:~~:cbcoo&~
,) .)0
ISwcccooM:'~lliJ@coo:: c.e:I'KOCC~II
"5.> .) .) ~~.) .)
ncurec:o":le
.) .) :.. -~
u@ccoo~!;b
.) . \0
cb:c.cococ.Fco~
.)
~610~ooek.o:&es cd-o:dxoe&w~5o
.) :.:1.) .) 0
Oc.l=:j~1b,
.) :::::::1 0
u@cc~c:O~r~coo
.) .) 0 .) .)
w;ftW:~ec~
0 .)0 .)
leecc.cctJooek.o
t.,; .)
'ecolre:&:<ko
0 .)
we:cbc:o
.
e"&ec

:Xod,&
.) 0
u@ccro~..JJ:x:.ec~
.) ,3":.l,.) cbro~c.cococ.Fco~
. .) .)e:~~:dx.ook
.)0
~b:o:)corocno.
.., .) .)
W:.J:l1Q@coro C.G:~:)
0 5~:,j., .)
<CCOOoeG<O~ :cm:ob C.C~1cbcoe~"'5o WC~~b:>
' .) ..) 0 .) 0 .) 0 .
u@ccl=:je:c.cococ.FcotJ
.) ~\ .)
~:o~oco:ecoco~
.) .) .) .)
:X.o~l'lm
.) .)0

w:i1 .>ofco:hl~:eG:)~~
e'J:::::J ::::J
w:d~cc&o ccc~ll'ets of~:cbcoe~"'5o e~es.
.> B~ .> o .>
11 @ccro~ooe~
.) .) .)~;:h"J~:cbco
e:::J c.cc~\.)t,~~~~
0 00
w~:dxoe&m~5o
0
Mocccc
e e
.::>
r
0~
.)
C10 8~ccccPocm
L.:>ee~
lf il l 11 0 "
fteoow
0
ft:O~co&oo~ew
.)
60l Sl.110d3.'tl M.V1 VW1IOH

...
C.IWm
II:)
n 211 v n 1
II CIJC.OW!CU'IOO!OSC.OSCOeG
,_ ,,
:.> ::J 6 .,) 0 . 0
ua:!cc:~~
.. ~
I 4reC.C.OO
.,)
'::,~ .):J
0.;)
Oo:>ICI~
t,
nose c~ u$o
:)ba>~W~b
.l O..l ..>
1e oCeJc uc.rcH~Co~;C.c'l:f:l!:col'lAC.Oo:>:l'lea>a>eG
.) o ., :J ., .).)
o-t lC.I'liOOCOMC.OC.O;W
~ e ;, .) .:~ o
ure~ccctel'l
0
d,@l'lbo:ote
.) .:>0
Mff:l@,ooe&es
.) .) 0
ua:!cco~a>hlccc@ebc.ohl:teii-Peore
.) .:>:.J .,) .) :l l).) 0 .)
'::>ccfl .)ocdb:cco
.) .)
-o:otel;ec.occes~c.oesto~es
.JO 0 ..) .J 0
'::>-tff:l~:ccoooe&es
.) .)
o'oHees:lll
.) o
n@cca>hiJb:ccoc.ocl6e
.l .l~.l ..>
l~b~cc*o'
- ..,
~co~co:l:cbc.o
.., .:>
1: o6ccc~:l1ollle
;; .l o .Jo
ccccotu:cb~"'l:oese5o
o
cotu:oe:cc.o
o e
n4ruc.cc.c
D e e
to:or:l<;o~OC<:eeCOCI:lCOOO
.):::1.:> .) ,) .) ~d:o II reoc.<:eteflCoOOA:cbc.o @cc;or:lcof;oc<:e~COOJCOOO
.)~.) ..) ..01::
r
0
teo' o~ .) .,o.., .)
0 0
11 a:!cco~col;ocoeecococooe
.) .) o .,)
0
.) .,
.)
ul31'l!l-occ.o~b:ca>oc<l>~
.)
coes@cccohl:hl
o .) .) :J eJ oh.J@cc:cco
.)
.) .)
c !.? f
c.cc.c Poe.co .
?coe~es
..,o
cotu:cbc.oe&esA5o
0
o~cc.o~:cbco
.) ,') .)
@cc:&or,e
.) o.)Q
oc~~ccc~rcoobes
.) ~ .)
e e 1:1
v , " , cb ,, 5 o "T cb @ r Q ~
~ccc~~ ~: co;cnes ~'~ o _rc.os-c.o~~: co :-> roc.e:5:::J~:ccosoc co~
SL'd:Odffil M V1 :VW'dOJI OT.L.

OS'
Hl SDIOd311 M.V1 V.Vnmg

C' C'' C' OC' ~ G G C:: C' C' C' o C'
:>efi:'J me
A
UCOU~::Dcnmmc: ())X)
o t:.!. L
OXX>C:U S'd'=lQ)C cc:::D::-1"} S'dG(;)Q)')g S'dGG:;,ICXJ)<X>I
JL ll I C A .0 t.
COG
0 'JC(' IDIDOCQC
' OOC' C' 0
l'dl:l())a ro:
~ o [9 Q)CX)'Jg:l):"l.Jm
C' C' 0 C' C'C'
UillOI()) c:CO:-:t1: (;}QGO II
C' 0
(.1)':)0~~~ eL o I} l L A o Jl ll;"l L C .. 'i. 1J C J1
<li
JO
u1..,..) S'd<J?~'=lm
0 0
roro;CO<X>Gro?m Or.?"''"''
C' C' C'
~~IDI
C
Oo:>CO :::>0
r C'
C~roG.S<X>C :;o: ~<X>
k
C' OC'
~ +L -"-- c. -[ L} C'"-'J l J t. \ ~ -1 f; 6 L
&C
-"' ..
_Q C' ~ G G OC' o 0 C' ~ 0 o
J
~
o:>O)OJfU
cy-r.>'PI ())')()pX:r.>m O~~~l~'JC ro'P:~;~ ~'J:G<;pm9JI ~'i);m ~ oeJJ
c ~ c
~IDI t:j'[OXO
c C' c cr,;r,:::c o
OI:S c o C'
'JCDG~~l:l<? G::D<X>'=l:ID? S'd<X>~DI.tjc:0[1 ~c:ro:>: ~ o <X>ID
'r.:' 4
c ' C' C' C' C'C' . C' C' ") 00 C' C' C' C' c::
'=lCOWo:>l oomcomGOO?CQCD c:::D::n roro:oocou ~::D::noxn; rou:>co.s::Dc:u
L AI C T C C ... ll 4ll 1L
roGGro~CDO?c
6 J
C'
6
C'
rom~:::DmGrom~c::D
C' C'OC'
-c L lL
C'
IDCO?~C'~ 00 0 C'
q iD 1 ggmco::n: l C
0
& C'
<X>ID
Lo
C' C' '1 C' 00 _C: c C' C' 0 C' C' (" ~- C'
CO<X>::DCOt::D::nl
t. o C.:.
ooe~~mmroroc
61.-A
G~c:m
Jl L
romroCT.;Q)IDGro:a
.:1
G::DroG:ID?
C'~'C::C' C' C'C::C' _, C' c C'
S'd<X>~I)t~l:jc:::D~ ::OG'i(OOm~l:jc; romeOG8<(0G JI:S? n:;91 G::l)())Q;Q>?
c~ c o c c c ~ c r:::;::: c c r,;:c '"I c
roro~Dl~Jm0[ Oill<.9JCD::D~G::D? S'dG'J:~:::D~ s::lG~?C:<X>'JU t:~IDOI::D~
~ G G C' C' ~ 0 C' C OC' C'
~ m?o11::x>::x>m G9J ?mco?:Gco::D~ 11 ~::=or:Gm?c:~~ roG'Kco;;: Gcqpm
C' 00 C' C' C' C' C' 0 0 'l
CO?:::DGI?!::D::D
tl U C:.
oom roro:CO<X>G<X>?<X>C
1.- A 6
S';lillQ
n. OCG.SG::D:::D::nro
-T 1:.:, L
::DOl
corm1c 1:\:m:>:
II

-t!
roc
L
c: G~ ::D:DY:>co:n:
?:c
L
c
C. J C.
c rooou.oG(;)c:u
L L
oc
o ~ c c ro9ctm o 'l c Gm:>moo
0
c
. IL
c ~ c c o oc c r,:::c c;:c '"I c
QJCDS'd'J roG'):~:G.:x>? ro~JCD<X>QJm~ co;;<;>mcxn:tjc: i91DU ~~~
~gg r:::;:::c~ c
m :>011::x>::x>m roG~ :>c:t:J::D211
0 OC' ~ C ~ g 9 C:: C' 0 r,::;:::
0~?5] G1JC<X>'f:g <X>~:~e:l;::u~ ())'JOdo:>o:>~l GcopmC2?rq l.~.:p:p
[9:G.s?mJ
T
C'
cc;3;1:>:
I
C' . 0
~
J.O
C' C' \
WiD'=lCO<X>o:> rogm;;om.x>mcocoGoo: GOO'JCQmG c:
L .

Jl.
0
l
C' C' C' C'
iii
C' ' C'

C' ~ ~ C' C' C' r,;:<- c ~ ~9 c C' C'
::D~I S'dG'J:e:l:G::D? ~dl~C!~J(})OXJO l:ICO::D~ ll t::or:Gm?C: S'dGy~~co~;
OO~m
o 3;10):;\QCCO?:G
c ?C:
c <X>C<:::DC::D::D
c cII o o Gmc
CO::U ccC:G 'JCc S'dGQg
..l L tl. .c.:. Let. 0 I
~ c c o oc c r,:::c r,;:c ~ c c r,;: c
~:G::D? ro~Jmro9o0[ co;;qmco?:elc: ~:~~DGI::l?m::D~~ ~:i:jrom?
(" 0 C'~ c:: c 0 C' C' 0 c C'
G::D<X>'=l:CO?GJ ?:<'q S'do:>~DI.CO'J:tjC:0[ 00)(.9JmotCDGCO::D2:; ll
0
coro:
o O)<)tmlol C' C' g G C'
(,):J)O)()I.Sffi ox:o:a:QIIO::D SJU)QOCQ:D:"n II O:"l.Y)a
C' 0 o C'\ C' 0
L L lJ J UT T 1J lll L. IL o G G Jl

o:x:o:::D
-- -r IL Bu g
C' 0 C'
:~1?;
.
C'
:o

G::D? :::>:coG'=l?:::&-;
c J
C'
Q
G 6T

::J:co.s:rocrom
ot
C' 0 0
(' C'
0
Q
C'
C'

(' 0

ll
C'~
0
rom:::~m
l
0 C'
:>:.s?
T
O)'JI :x>m;;ol CC02UG8
-[
S';lQJmS'dCO('I)<X>mco:n:
tJ Ol. L C..:.
GCOCOoD?
o l4
:))gO)() I
l
Qa<:;Q)ro:'=l
l,l -r
~:m
C'' 0(' 0 (" C". 0 C' ('
O?m::n Ql'=l<X>~";;::D? m'=l.sm UOO:Jlllmcom,;;co::D,::D 11
T tl UJ o . T- L L . .....__
_C: Q C'
o (' . C' C~ C' ~ G G C' 1:-: (0
~:c;u co9:::;,Jm':l mcx;t:ro~Go:::~;Dl.9f m?DJ::x>o:J<)) G03J?mco?:;g;;
c
o:> ::1 c _c: C'
c:::~GcQI-:)OXO?m
o-:1:.s?@:G.s?mtc ooo:>:;,o::;Q.s
-C'C' c.
mG:::co: Go::;,
'
l T T ~L -IT Ao
o
C' ('
O):"n II WQ;:;co; SJCDQro GCOI::;>roCOG::D? U:"n'JQGCIG.S
).1 ..A
0
L
C' \ 0 3: g
e:G(I)I') Cml
IL
C'C'
o
.
C.:. oon, ILL ll C.JI~IT U . o
0 C' ~ (' C' C'~ C' 0 . (' C' C' <';I
.Q~G<X>'f';g <X>'f':~ei:::D~ . Gro<X>~:ID? S';lQ)~iYLQJm~ UOOt9J~51
.
mG~;;Q<"!->Q~::.
C'"' C'
romeuGS<(Sg
C' . C' c
JI:S? (' '10
q::ot~G::D?
. . C' ('
1):::co:::;;,Jm S'd"f<X>
(' C' c0 )"
C' C'\C::C' r,;:co'"l C' 0 C' C' C'C:: O')C' Q 0 C'
:::09 GOO'J:::~m~tjc: l:;j001::D211 ~c:ro:;QJmC:U S'dG~IO)SJ'J e:~:GCD?Cg
IL S.DIOdffii f.AV1 V:Vnfflij
oe~:J <.r.l?OU
oxn::n::n
G G ~
ro~Y4>-:>:m~Y~
Q
ro2:Y<.r.lO:lOn
C' '1
roG
0 xC 0
~
C'
(1)4)cororo:-; c:
C' CC'
G b ~ L O!. 0 LO L
c-o ~ '1 o o o Be c oc o c
~ Q 9
<Xl?Odo:>o:> ~<:>CClo::Jg(J)())()III
4 JI M.. l
m::n
-1. L
OJGO'.)JQCl
jJI
::n cro::n:
C
:;,acaxo:c.JCt:ro
'] -- -l -i
9c:ro:>:
c (' \ (' ('
t o1 :l
("
0
~-(1)4)~o:> rorororo ~ao:>c~ro~c:
C' ('~ (' ,.... C' ')
j94>01::n~
C' ('~
roctl::x>~ll
~
:oc (' ~ 0 0~ C' 0 (' ~ Q Q (' ('

Q ~.
rorom;:-; ~~=~oo:>:~ir otro-=>:cqJc m?OJo:>o:> roo::J-:>1 9C:::n~
o:>~OJtn ~ C' C' C' c o<' ., oe> o
mro:roOJGro:>ro:::
--T 0 ~
SJu:>Ol
IL
ocoo:>:~::n:OJ c ro::::cGO:o1m ~ocmco:yCl;ro
o l o L IJ- -- T 1) L
C' C r,;:<' '1 C' 0 <' C' <' 0 OC' OC' C' C'
r.>cqj:>roco-:>:9r tloo1::n211 0;1~ ro'P:~ror.>ro:>qr oqc:~Y~ ~ro:>c:~.y
C' '1 C' C' C' 0 0 OC' <' ~ \ \ t' El o <' 0 C'
OOIOJ::n<.no:>C
C -l --
OJ::D
C.:,
II (X)OJCO:::;CQ.SY
L L l lT L
0'.) ~.S~:::D::x>Y:>::::>:o:>:Gro?c:ro::DmY.
To C.:. J C. l oL J
~ <'~~ C' ~GG ~ C' C'\~<.' r,;:~'1 <'
UJro~ro~c:Yotrol <.r.l?Odo:>OJ~ UJro~ro~t:!c:~:> tlooiOJ201 Y~ro:>
~ ~ \ C' '1 ce c e c ( ) o c <' ~
OJ?f'OJO) Groproro::n211 GUIOOO '~ OO':>~:}Jf j ~92t?lf;SJ G())J2":>
C' 0 C Cf,~ C' C' <'~ <' 'O C'
@Jroop:rq CJSY ~ao~tl:Gpro1 G::nroY:4:l? SdOJ2DL@Jrr.>l ~yqro
0(' c- C' C' (' (' 0 0 (' (' (' C' o-
s:;JG~co.y:ID:>'~ OQ)OJ(DGO)') ~QC;Q)90CY.f.l:m IDIDGOO: GOO?C~mGt:::D2C"Yt
oo '1 C' C' C' C' ~ o~ C' ~ 00 _C C' C' ~ o r,;: <'
OJ~UICOJm;~ OCG'PmGtj":>~~C:YDll ~Yc:ll ~m'Pqc Sd~OOGOO: ~:tlro
G C' C' 00 0 0 C' C' C' C' <' C'~
GID:::DQ)2;0)::n
n. C
G.S?CY
T J
~ym ~
1. L o
Q)IDYCOQ)::O::Drr.lQ)rJ)
L [i, l!l
GO)(J)Y;IO:> SdQ').:l)
C.:. L
C' 0 C' OC' 0 C' 0 C' C' C' '1 . C' 0 C' <'
~10)1 OJ~Q)
U L L
SJGYCO.S:IDJro
C. T l
QOOJY:
-IJ
O..OOICT.lGO:OIO?
U L
GCDI?mm:>:o-:oc
lJ &. 0 o
o ~ C' 0 ~ <"~ C' ~ C' ~ G G
Y~ot ~:Dl.oo:>:::n~ ~:> o:>:>po11 m ~rt1::oe:;11 ~SJ'ft3 m?011 0J::n
C' C' (' C'~ C' G 0 C' G G C' C' 0
::n2 'fOCDOC ~::nroy:4>:> roro2DL9f 2::q:Gm:>c:1 o:>~Jt 10::02"am
~ t;;:r;:;:::<' 01 <' o~ C' <' <' r;;:c <'
Gcqj:>mCO:>:Gop~G~JC : OJOIOJ21 0J9J m~~~')Q)COJ(j~ 9-::ro:>:
0 (' C'g (' 19(' ., (' 0 (' C' (' (' ('
~ (1)4)coro :ro.:n: 4:lOIOJ~II ooG.s:>mY 9c:m rom:roo:>Gro:>roc ~GY!cl
L . L c:. c:. l T J T .I> 0 O.ll
\ 0\ ~ (.' oc 0 C' <'~~ (' (.' C'
~~~~ 9::::mo~ ~coxp:~:~ ~::nroY:4>? Sdro2rit:!'-':'<; oroo::Jro:;::n:>
0 OC' ~ <' ' '1 C' <' C' 0~ C'
SJ~ ~:<;m:>:G4>9f G"3j?OJOO:>:~Oio::l211 G"3jJmOO:>:OJ~ rn~:ro2:
OC' OC' \ '1 C' C' C' 0 C' OC '1<'
Q":;CI:m
1f U ao~:CGO:QOIOJ::D II mco:c OJGQ):l34Ym
L C -- T A .Jl t.
co:::oy:::n:>:GOJ:>
1! 6
9dQI~
~
~ C'
G Q C' C' 0 '1 C' 0<:' o '1 ~ OC'o C'
QO)?;
ll
())JO ::1.)0'.)0)~1 rom~ OCC\)OIG:::O:::x>::nll ro:::::cGO:OI<.r.l
C ~il. t. C.:. l o IL
O)QCQ;Q):;
1J -ll 6
C' C' C' C' C' OC' o OC' <' 00 C'
ro2:YGcqj:l\f.>l rocp:~ror.>ro~:;ro2: cx:p~rn<,>~YGQ)JC:I 00 ~o:>q>
<' . o -c- <' C'<' oC' ,., <' oc c c-
roc::n:>
6
rnYm
Jl t.
romro(X>GOOJCClm
AI
ro:
L
roGIDQO
o
1::x>::o
C.:.
11 ooG
ot
:>:::o 9c:roc
6
C'OC' C' C'~ C' 0 <' <' C' <' OC' C'
Gpmqc:'t ~OJroY:il>:> _mro2DLQJrorq omt9JmGo:9f G"3]Jrr.>co:>:~c1c..
c.l~o1ot ~~ro:> ::n:>;;?Ojm ro3:x>eu

. 0 ~ r,;:cr,:;::: G o C'. c- G C' C' 0 C'
o2 ?~ OJ'f';q(~:Yp: tliD~G::O? :1DGY:>': '<; 2:~f~OJC~OJGOJ<.T.)Ial 2
C'~C' C: C' <'~ OC' o C C' C' 0 C' 0 <'
o:> rnro.:nc;. L
c:~c oroo::Jmc ~croco:t.lCI:~c rom:roroGro?roroc IDQC
J o :1 """11 \.- -u J o T ;A t o -1
Ot' C' f,~ C' 0 r,:;::: r,;: C' 0 C' C' C' <'~ C'
<.f~ t:JLC~Gop~OJ(jql O~g?ll~C ro9_?:'=Xj};~ .GOJOJY:o:> 9JQ)2DtQJffi
(' \~C' C' C' C' C' ~ G G \ 0 _<:
~cqJJrr.>oo:>: ~~c:ct-=>ro2: ~:~OJ_Gro:>_~ ~:X:uO?_~m,-~~OJ~ !ld)t~
0(" ("
( j) oe<fJ ~I G!r.II ~I!D'X)I .ro~-:>:1 4>? .JOrll
su. Sl.'tlOdffii M.V1 VW'tlOS:
u.:>C2ccco~cocc
u<J
Co d~l5~
o
ucrJcccotonroo
.) ,) 0 .::>
toco:.~coOO
,) .) 0
toeroe.e;l(!)
0 ~
I~CJccb('o~~
.,:.~
to@cc
0 .)
<L>1o~ 10~ :C2roc.~ccchl
..) t, ..1, .) ~
GeoC ccc~cocro~'JIJ~e d.Je(lbes:&es l::tklesw
.) ~,) 0 .) ~ 0
.:::>c.Qele.G lOCOCOe.G ucecc~b CCC~cc(boco g@rocoo~!Co :::>toes&!cc:c.ro

,) :::::1 t, .:> .) 0 .) .) 0 .).) .)0 .) .
.)cohl:~
:.1 co~cr~:Q~bcbco
~
~ca:!o .)~ooe&es:Mi:l
0 ':)
rocoro~~~
.:; ,) 0
:ccro'::lb~
.) ,) .)0
c<>W~W II o~coro~cc~o~~ roes::tees coPees:::>c Q~e.G ::>Ito~ ::~CJ:ces4~es

.) .) " .) .) oo .:> 0 .) " :::::1 .) 0 ,) :.1 .) .
.:C2ro4bcow~cocorecoro wccccPocco &!cc~::--eroCbecocc:1Pcoes c.cc::.reco
" <J " ., ;, ;, 6 e ~ ;, o" ;, " 1:) .:>
~W:::>b
0 ,)
lcuProccJo19~
" '1. t, ~
::);;lc.oW~co
.:> :::b .:>
corocore~oo:~
.) i) .)
cu::>tocoto:2o~
.:> 0 .) 0 6.)
::>~
i)
cococcu bJ ucccc(l)hl~d; :;erocb~rocc:lPcues :Xo(l)~e.G~eJesC2ccccccPecco

~ o " .:>~ o .:> .:> v 1:) " " <:> e e ~
c.cc~ reco ~:2(1)~ tuowcc ccc~Qecoto~cu (l)hles:d~e;~es :c@~~ro
" e<:> o ;, 6 :::::~,., ;, ;,:.!
Sl.11:0dffii .M.V'I VW'MlH 91!.

* ( :c rf)~:ttKo~&Jro)
1 , , ,,
wcof)ro:cf):ccc (')')) C.ese:~08Poroe:~ :c sg:)rowcowl'm
.J oe .J e.J .JO .J .J 0
1 _1_ 1! ) 01 L
( rogwcoemro
o
ca:>f)W881:5e>008CeBe>
e .:> .J
LIL SJ:tiOdffil M V1 VW'tlfla

0 C' 0 C' C'

~10)~ UCIXJC\{(.)')::0~11
G. H. Renton and Co. Ltd. v. Palmyra Trading Coporation of Panama,

0 C' C' C'
1957 Appeal Cases p. 149 (House of U..rd). Of9~~~:::o~u
6ll SD!Od3'tl AA..Vl VW'tlfHI
nf t_O<p'O
t=K\:>:cA:c.cc
oe
(f)) ccre<oiO
" ""
ec~:c.~~So
co~~
~ ~ 0
r
~'r
,,
~co
ocbxooc.e:ce
~ ~
Sl~Odffi:I M.V1 VW'Mlij ou.

oL.z d ~'l"S: (tS6t) (f)
lZL. S.l'8:0d3}I M V1 VW'8:flij

S.DI0d3~ M V1 VW'i119:
!965] ~URMA LAW REPORTS 72J
C' C' 0~ C' C'C' C' OC'~C' C' C'~C' J:::C' r,;:C'
2oGs~2 axptJ;><Ytt:~2fo:>iScoe: w.,~~tltmm~mtlr GroJ2-:>Elc:tJ~ oeli~
C C'~(''\
C' O<il C' C' C'
C' 0
8'J?Cil)'J0CDtl~~o:>211 ~~~~:~:p~ ~ID9C~:~c 20G8~'JOO') Q())2Go:>:Go:>? G:T.l?CCOG'j!JC
(' ('
C' C' C' 0 OC'

::n.so:>m~:e~
C' C' C' 0 0 t C'O'\C'
QOO~:g
C' ~
ro~o~::n;~r?:ro mo:>G::O?OY.;OQ c:~c 20G801 0)1,1(8)
..
C.:.T 6}1 J Llct>l:...:ttJ l.~"l Lo Jo lO
c C' C' 0 C' OC'

')!'.gQ rrom::n:-ng:;oc 1 o:>G ::r.>"JCDb\.'T.>~c
~ 0 C C'
ro.soo;:o;ro
C'
o:>o:>Grox:G<Do:>m
0 C' C' 0 :.8
J
D T u l G l LU J 0 l T ()L..., l - ll l 0 (' c
c c C' o~ o <' c <' r;;:c o r;;: C' U(.DO:>m
:340>J(;;;;}JC: O>J[<>~~Go:>-:> o~2-:>2<D~;m!J:gp:tJ:;o:>? ro~q ~:Bm oc
cqcrp:G:T.l
0 '
d'f:
QgX)(J)
-, L.- 1.
G C''\C' "
(!)Q::;Q
-, o
C'
c: IDGOo:>::D
C:.
II (X)G
c::ol
?.::('o OG C' C' C'
(X)Il)CIC(X):::n::nro::n:
l -~ L C. C:.
CDI~OOJ
tJ l L
C'C' _ Q C'Q
0JC4>G~'?
(C')
~
GCGQ?CDCI
Ojf .J Jl
C'O ::ID.S?CD
T
0
L
:JdGro?roSJm11.~Lo:>::Dm
C'
~ ~1.
C'
Q<;OO)?GQJ
L U
0
II :y))~Q?~
~ o C'
C' C C'O~
C' C OC CC C' C
rorJ ol jll
g)I 8J)t~C q_;;o~~:q G())-:>CG:D?C'jmC~9f O>J'Jf :;oorog:~J-:>"lf<Ytf
oc C' f.:C' C' ~ C'~ C oC C' C 0'\~ OC' o G G
OO:.>:D~:Ijii>::O~II SJt12?tl~~C9? II>?O>J(03d'J O>J[O~~~Go:>? tCCSJ::n:o:>:
c c "r;;:c c c o cr.::c oc c o c
~::: G1:o~:Ol'J;te o1?2:::ouxlj(~Goo?cElc:~cc;p SJmeoGsgp:q <D?O>Jlo
'1 (' oc ~ (' 0 (' (' (' ,.;;; (' ('
o11D :n?:'J:.>~J?:8Jotc: tl~:Pr:ro?:~o:>~'j-:> roc 'il'):::n211 CJJSJ~~c o:>mGo:>:;!
C' C' C' C' C C' "T" C' C' C' 0 t C' C'O
ox::::Dc:ro'):G::n?
c.
m.smc:om0mGUI
. 1 T J
mcco::n:
A C
o<D::n:m
t>C.::. L
roG::r.>? co mco
L
J:::C' C' C' Q r.: C' C' 0 Cf:::C' OC' C' ('
EJ:::~o:>~l G'J:Uiol:Q'):~ 01?2:::x><..DU?t~LGOO?CEJC:~c<;p G())?CGCD?ceoGS
C' C' OC' . C' 6 C' "T" C' 0 C' OC' C' C'
~c
J 0
::o:noocoxnw
l c L :Jdm8J:oc: G<SI ro::>:::D::nmGDX'Io:>::nH
c.:. l 06-, c ro
L
cro.sooc
LT
. (' ('(' "T"~ (' (' (' (' (' (' C' ~('
ro:r.>~o::>5GUI tlro?:G::D? ID~:rog: SJ~()) 0 iS OCcqjCl rnc:eoGS:JdtiC
~ C'~ C' OC' C' C' Q'\ C' C' C' C' C'
:Jd~~tl~~C<;p II>')OlJ[<>o;c o:>G::O')Ojl~~Go:>? ID2:rog;QJffiQJ-:>:;~ro2:
(' 0(' (' "T"~ C' 0 \ 0 0 C' "T"~ f:::C' .
::O:D<:X:),Co:>~ GUI tloo-:>:::ne:;11 <Jt0?~ SJ())G'JOOC:GUI t:lro?:~c:gp:
~ c ~ cr,: c oc C' C' C' C' C'~C'\
G~')q l Wtli?:?tl~~C'f' ID?QJ[OG'J91 Gv"J?CGCD?C~ CXfo::>t:lf~Go:>')
C C" C" C C" C'C '
QO)QU)QJ('X)())Q())::n:l o::>OJG::O?O):'n: c o:>:II>G:D')IDffi'):OJ:<Jr?:
e
';:;;;)~:
J -lwOI U l C C.:. l 6 l U
<' C' \ \~C' o ~<' OC' OC' C' G f.:C' C' <'
~cro~~ ~~EJC:Q~Go:>') l:'JfQ')tCC~C'J? G9CCQ:~:tlS ~e:;:o:>o:>~
0 C'J:::C' C' (' ~ C' "T" '1 (' . (' (' . C'
~GOO?CEJc: :JdroeoGso:>e:; 2JJ::ld~~CGOI GOI(J)GO)') ffi')C\JID2:;:mg:.o:>o::>
C . C' OC' C' . C' C ] ' C'O 0 <'
::m.s::>~::
T J
::omooc::o::nm
l c.:.;-(
rn;;oQ.So:>')e~o:>::nll
n. -r T
0
Jl C
m
C::..l o ol L-1.
0
roo:> oocommGo:>')
OC' C
~~C~':::
C' OC' 0
.SQ-:>~CC())())C
C'
())::DGOJ?
9
20G9QGS
0
GOJ'):T.IQII

roeoG9CD
'l 0
L J r t ot. o u.c 11- T . . t
~ c c c c c o o c r;::;::r.::c.r,;:c : .c ooc
t19')f:O:l?!OJC ID2:mg~QJCDQJ?:<q o;zmp~~CCj~ ~~ro2:~~C
(' (' C' (' (' (' 0 (' (' (' (' r,: ('
::o~1 m::o:nmO>Jro f<DP9rroe:;:g'il' 10e:;:rog:O>J()')QJ?~ro2: mGt:l:me:;:
<'OC' C' OC' <:' OC'o' C' C' C' 0 C'C' 0 C'
D~CO):'nl ~CC~';~CC
L C L J o l
GQ009:QI:l:
-, l q;,C
Q
Co OID:D:OJ<P<D.<-?GOO')C
llL
c:mro:r:
l C
C
. ~~c oc C' o ' o c c cr,;c ~ C'~ C' oc

Gtj[jii>GO>J?G9? GID~Co:>21 cqm.~GO)') 92~<.X>O>JC?tJ~. Wt12:':t12~'f>
C 0 OOC' ~ . C' 0\~f:::C' r,;:c C' C' C 0 C' ') C' ' C' .
ID')QJlOCI.f~~c:~ QJ[O~~EJc:tjiDOJ~ II ID?QJl0 O>J[O~~COOI?Cl G9C\)(,)g .
orC'
QQNllC Ol!):'ngO)U)(l)~GOO?C
c C' o c8 oc
g:;ocm 20Gsmro::n:
o c ".S<J')::C.1i\C
O<'<' oc
romro
-I :.:J o t>G u.L t. T L C..:,. T t. . J. L
G C'CC' J:::C' o OC'o C' C' C'o C' ~ "T"
SJe;~mi9;;ro::>:Elc:g51Go:>-:> ~cc~ 9r01?2:mc~cqJCm'):t t1::mf~Gol
(' 'r (' \ 0 Sl . (- ('~ OC'. OC'. ~
Gffi?C:GOI <Je:;ll LD~O?~ eoG9())Qdl:m~: o::>2~G::O~ ~~C j ~CCOOe;i":l
su S.DIOdffil .M.V1 VW'tiOH
nf L<'l rpro
~go:cft:ccc
II ccccwbxo~Pe~<'lffitcO~IW
.) .) 0 .) .)0 0 .).)
4b~e>erw (~)
.) 0
.)
cesoooro
0.)
ese:d:ol:o
:cc:ccrotoflfl ~:..>COb(!l&:,fJ<'l cccc:cP<'lCCCC~e.G IGcocccoo Mco~efue.slffi .>o
e e o oo o .> o o oo .> .> ~ .> .> .> .> o o S coc.oco~'lb
.) .) 0
.)~cEOle>oo nCCcc0t:J&ccce>eb<'l:CCco:~e>cr(\)e) t:be:@($o OC"'..<XlWC04~ro r

::::1 0 .) .)~ '\ .) ::::1 .) 0 .) .) .) .)
r>g
01
cccd. u:cbcoe&ro JbrotowPero:oc~e>ro
.) ::::1 .) ..L10e> .)o&>~ro ucccc(!lt:J
ccce>ob:> .)~
WI"CO
..) 0 0 0 .) .) "
oG beroocece
:ccroc
.>
4cccklccce>0e>flcc
:..J .JO
@ccda:cklseoCl
.J :..J
ccce>kloco
:..J;,
w&>b:mbcoefues
0 0 o
.) .)
::>&>e<.'oro
..:> o
uccccwl:oocoo
.> .> o .>
tue<.'oro 1.J~Bccb~tce>too~fc.o
0 o ::.:J o o .J .J
td.o1
o \. l. .>
~J
oCL.:rocr.> - L!i
S.DIOd3."'tl M.V1 VW'dmi 9ZL

ll@cc:*~@t; to&
.) .) .) 0 0
t!Cc c.fwPl'lcc
.) utoo""'-;:;:u:Jc..,~bl
.) tn'"'~ .,)~ rds.~llc
;) r6oC()(.re~l'lec
0 .) .)
(c) wee
.) .)
o.f t;'l'dcc
.)
1oe .
.) 0 w
uCC
.
diwPI'lccr:toobOO:lhlcfl~Qrf
.) .) 0.) ~
s.~PJcJf .....roc.wc.wc.cell,Poc.coof(c)
.)~ ;:) . ., .)
(!)aG~~ec 6Poc.co
.) . .)
. . 11 (r~ I~Oro) sCc
cfoorl'IC@
.J
r:toob<ll@hlc!'I4Q
.> e.> ~ .:>~
IO!:l~C
;;
rd 10 oc.o:oc.cceoc.ae
\.. ., :J .,
o.f :roewl!o:2e .
.)
11bc dwPC'lcc
.J
:toob@@hlcfl~Q
.> o.> ~
rgCllc c ro
.:>~ ;;,
wgh>oc.ae:acc:t!
t...: o .l
0> cc 105 ro5
.:.o e .:; e ..t.. J..
cccto 11 @cc~~brel!o
.) O.)
@d~&:)hl
.)
o~obLoe.c
o.) ~ .) .) l
&!cc(l)hl:of:lowb:> .;)4bobx.ocree
.) .:>:3 .l:::J.> , 0 .) .)
@ro4hl
.)
Mcc.cecc ccc5ochle
.)~.) .) ~
:~waro:oPero
00 .)0 .)
~ccchlwPeorob:>
.) .J:l.> .) 0
1bro (o) (c) rc ash .)
.~t;~e:och.l~~:crooro
0 .) :=:1 0 .)
a@~o :@ro4bo~~c.ree&to r:Rb:>:,e di:oc!=;leorob:> Mc:c.ceccccceochle: (',

.i) .:> ., .>o.> .) o o OJ .>a ..> ::::::1 .> o .) .> :J o
4bob:>wccee
.) .> ..>
toflro :ob~ccbelbb
0 .JO .:>0 .) 0 \ .>
@cc&k:ctKoe&es
.:> 0 0 o
r:cwbc.otoawees
.> 0
c)iwPebe@cc~b(l)hl
.) o .) ::::::J .>:.1 .>
O<oaoccfl:2co
.) e
of:2co
.) e
Jbro:c.PflwPe:~~@b
.:> .) .>
rmc.Pfl:toob(l)
L. .) o
~ccebehlwwcoec <Ps(l)hloo<i:@fl 11 o~hl"' :@ro:c.corowcooees cccer..ucroeb:> fl,ec
.:> \.O ~ ..> .>:J.J o .J .:>o::.l .:> .J .:>
: ~@cco~bew&,ac-&Pwco
.>oo .J
..., .> o
h'>@cc(j)hl:of:lbe&:cbco
.J .,~.:>:::to '
4bcotoo~wccwcc
.:> .> .J .) .)
hf>teG
.lO
:c.ro
:c.Pfle:d~c.oel!o--...c
~
lb:coococooc.es
~ ccchbe&~co=cb
0\..)
roees&:ob
J., 0.)
w:crfle:cbcoel:'nec

cfl:of:lbe~:cbco
.)~0 \
:c.Pl'ltu:<bcoel!ow
0
Jcnod.-le<llGeG:cPI'le:cbcoe&wu
.) o .) o
uwPec.ohl:l:.e
.> .) :J
-d:le:o&:ocdo~el!oec ohlcc:c.&:ft~:~ o&>gec rcbebe~:chco I (,eo (o) (c) f'C flCh
' .> .> o .J::J .:>o :J \O ' .>
ceo2;b~oq:~
.)~ ~
e:flb:1b
.) L
cb::>tehl~
.)0 ~OJ
rof~
.) ollllc
~ .)4boo:;:oewcb~ro
.) .) .) :hl:c.lko~
61 .) hl'les
.)0
li:'reC.OC2ccroh:> ~boaxocree
'$'0 .J L o .> .:> .J @ro4hl
.>
ohlccc~ccccceOc.1e:l',
.>:_j .>:J .> :J o
ckPro5:c.ec:oc~e
.> .> ~
eo w:c.Pflb:>:cbcoe&es
o o~esto
.>o o
:ces:cn,e:cbcoel!oes
o o
&otobGfiil.embfles
.>6- .J~-- l, .>o
e:4ec.o
.> .>
;4een
.) l'.l:)fles<~~hl:oero
:f .)0 .)~.) ~cceobeoh&xoo&:ob
.) \.)0 .)0 .) 0 .)
:X.o(l)f~
.) .)
l:lC~c w:cPflk:d:lcoefuec
;) 0 .
uwb
.)
, 11
cc r
roo~ ::>'S'
.>o .)
LZL SL'tlOdH~ MV1 VW1IfHI

,zs BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
c c
oeli:~
0 Q
~~~oo'P:~WJ?: ~~mu u 2:o:>2l~ll
e.r;;::C" c C" 0 OC'
2~c~;ax o
m~ll<n;pt:)c.IJ?:~~mu u2:a;::u;;: u
o'l j
:.cc ~ " c c c erR c
--rJoC. c
oo'P:O[t:jl e'<Xlf:ooc II !IO)l rr.llt1?1 9f~f'\!rl oxp:~:l ::>~1:1 j ~I
G31 :nt:at
C' C' 0 C' 0
m::o:~ 3:g~~cn j::>j cnct (;}rooxn:a:xJn: 0::>:> romQmco:com ::>aj~ ~
c
o'l J" -- T JL J 0 ll. - ~ -- T l u IL ll - - T I. \:. L
C C 0 C OC' OC' C' C' C'~ C C Q 0 C' C
~Q)m cc:cno~m uc;oc:;>o:>:n 9sm.s 1o~.sGcn?c 2:o~?rog: ~~o:: nt
J I L IL l L L!. T Ll L 6T e J '
C C' C' C C ~OC' _<:. C C' C OC' "l r,;:c OC'
0000'->UJ?,GCOX UJ2~C:2'JY(;ll n;)Qf: OO~f:OlC Odi:Xji:Od[jQ) Gy<XfC~
~romco:~(,)t?:
o ("1>::n mm~ roro:~cnm?:l
0
ro~Ym
0 OC" 0
romQ oxo:~n:m
o 0
IL ____ T \1 -fL II. -r l l L IL ---r l 1J
r,::;:: c c o r,;: C' r,;:c r,:c- c c c c
OdGel?c:sn:GCDJ?~? 'J:G[j':>~G::>:>? :::OO:::r.>?tj~ tjyro~ GOO':>ro909f
o"l C' 0~ OC' C' f,~ C' C' C' C' c rRr.: oC'
9U[~I:JJ2>qSJI rr.x:I~~<.D~p:tj: C\)(1)G'P())G0:~09f ::>@1:10 ~I l!l'i.t:J9C'P
c
g"l1:9(:}:~ ~ r,::;::c c
t:j:t:jOG'J: 20GStt8(;} ::> j
( ) ( )
::> ' o'
C ro9 oxp:~9~'J?I rr.l~ft~C
c
oc
Q:.Sid:JJ-:>:o:>c
c m:;>rotl)~(;}()) c c '"
romQ cnro:roldt-:>:ro cnc::>:>c:Q ~c : 0GO o o c
Jill ~ L ll.JLl ll -r 1.0 ~ o
. C'
o:>~ll
c o c or;-: c
o c c c c o.
rom~ cnc;p:~p:ro roldcnc rr.x:~mt:1;;ro2 Goo?mroo9r o:>Go:>~
C'
1
0 lC C' 0 ;~ b C C l OC C C' l . CQ VC'
~ <:q24UG-:>c:<Jtl roGQoo0 9C:mld~? GW:>e:*'g: OJ())Q):Gf::D2
C' OC' ~ QQ "l C' C' o C' C' C' 0:
enG ?::::1 ~~?
J
.SDOI:WGO:
a. T J
o:>:n
~
OQ>SX\
L -- -l
GOO?mrooro?:
L
oc: QU)(j)
L
r,:c ~C f.":99"l C' C' OC' C C' OOC'"l c 0
o:>tl~ 2d~Ji;:,x;~: ll(yOOI~ ()J0X:OO:GO='Jf GOOX:~cOI:JJ~ q:m?:
~::u~ll
or;; o c o r,::c o ~ o
S'J~Q oxp:~:,)p:ml!l Oft1~~JCT.X:>p:q tlc:~91 ro~~ ro'P:~p:'f?
OC C' C' C'OC' C' C' C' (;"; C C' r;;:c OC' 0
n;)g2'J::01> GOO?OX'I:l0tC9y 0~2:rr.lC24:>: tjr;~~p: QtJta:l::Otj~l rr.lYCJ:t
C' C' 0 ?:G::n-:> C' C' 0') C' 0 C'
C
OdG
C"l
6 :>e:ro-:>:GCDI?1>:>
c 0 C' 0
1J
C' o
6
C'
e~:G
1f
.

:::OO~?~C
J o
9(.).)CD0t:J):n
11. L C:.
OOO):n(;}?
L C:. J
ld~ymfU ltJt GQJOGCDo:>211 OfG~JUQJ('I)IdJ?:t"J{ ~G::O~~Jmldp:SX)I t[CO

C' C'. c ~ 0 ~c:: 0 (' 0 c C'
4.>0Goo:o:>::DCl:g
U If J
roroQ :1 rnmQoxo:CD(,)t-:>:en24Ym
IL -- T L 0 Jl L
orooromGroo:>:n
L c::,
11
C' C' C' . o 0 C" Co
m~ ~U[QI cnc~:c;pom ro~~ cn'P:~p:m t[CDIDQ>G:;o:o:>~'J=~
0 ~ 0 ' 0 C C' C' 0 C' OC' 0 '
rom~ roro:~J?:
. ll -L- L u L
ooo:>m:JJ
OL
rn~tc:
tJ
0 rr.lGoo?roSJ2(;}:>
J
ro~crogs~Qo:>
c)O T Jl
C' <; C' C' 0 C' c 0 . C' ~ C' C'
GOO?OX\f.oro-:>:o:>~ roGoo?mro2 otro ootro~::>:>~t:1::roy?~-:> 02:0?:9;;
o C' "l c o c c c C' ~ c ..c c cr;:: c
ldJ':>:Ill? cqS'JootroJml Ofrr.l:o>Jm1S oroo:>ro~ cq:oGro?ro~Jm OfO?~rotjc:
r;-: C' ' c . C' r.::::: C' 0 . c C' r.: C'
-ldDll Y02 :0-:>:~o:>2,p ~?:~:GfGt:j?C:<Jt s:;~~rr.l~Jm OO')Urr.lGf[j~
r,: 0 c ~ rA>c
:t:l~GO::U211
0 C' ' C'
rr.l~ (.).)~Cro t:j?:y-:>~o:>~ SJD~:0-:>:~~':>:Go:>? oxp:
~ 9 c or;; o c o r,;:c c c L'?
~)-lt:j: 2:0Gid:>C())I cqtj:>qQJ(I)S'X) :::OO:::P?Oil2o:>tl~l ::l@~:S9 ~;Q)t t1C\)
C' ' 'l C' _c:: Q C' ~' 0 0 h C'OC' C C' 'l
oo 'l~~o1 ;c:c:~ ~c:o>JmOO<:jt ~q romJ~?:;q:tlcn~c9r Gro?mot
"8d!6Q! @3!:)):-1) C'?

GO)?:U~IO)~D~:n
C' C' C' - 0 C' C'
COJ'd 'JGS:::D'JX)):;Q:U !I ax;:;O)")O)QJO)QI')!
Of.G 0 C' C'
oe!Sj
C'
-,
C' C'~
~
.
~::..>()):));)')~I GS')O)OXJ "':x>roG:::DQI?:m 0J)~Q:>g~ co;::
T ~ IJ
\J J l ; .
C' C' C'
t L
0
T
C'
L....
~
L Ll.J
C' C'
L
CQIO)~C8d())
tJ
C'
J o
C'
U
u.
B
rJ
C'
.S
T <>r:-c- c-
J o L e:~o;'>~':)C
C' o C' o o c c o oc cr,::;:::
ro~Go:~9r 1 'it::o1J;~ 00'P!tol:Y.lJ<;;9:8dY1!~9::> 1 r2:2:.JG!3 Jj 8d9 1 ~ft~:p: ol J
0\ C' c-
G:..J!:..JQGCD:D:x> II t,C
J
l 0 t:..:.. 'T' oc- c-
G!ll ~;;:e.;.g
C' C'\ C' C' C'
00
t.
))~ ))~
l 0
))")) G.} )') 'J)QJI);JI?!tol')-
~ l.l IJ. J
o1 Jll
(a) Was there an unauthorized extension to the suit
building, if so, when was it done and by
whom?
(b) Is it possible to remove this-unauthorized exten-
sion without the necessity of effecting major
and structural repairs ?
o cr,::;::: c o c c c 'Y' c o c
9t!ift_:(';QJ:D(:)J?!3d')l 'it::O~!~ G:JJ"):J)QJ(T.)itQ)'t3JG01 :::DffiG:::DQQJffi
C' 0 ~ ":'c:;:eJl
G,I?!OO:..JClQu:>:;l
u
C' C'. ~ C' C'
co:; C' C'
:;:;>I:n~:;
~, It :"I
8dcn -u:>:;> .s:o::n
~: -~
C' C'
.I u J c.:. V. ~cnco:>c:Q:x>
ll c. 0
c1
l
T C' . C' ' 19 C'
f 19
0 0
o 0 C' C' C' - G C' C' ~ o C C'

8d:.x>QCl:U 00.1):::0."1) 'J!.S") ~: lOCO I U)<;>1)QCQ!(J)t,l") m a: ::>al$C ~~01
ll JL L -r .,., l -1 lJ. J CJ "U T
C. 7 LJ
r.e C' c G c c c c c c c r,;:c
C'\ c
-c;:t) ::0 ::>0 9 :J.)~t:-1) QJ~O)~-XJ~ 09SQJ:Y.l1 ~ 00:-I)CO:J)O)())_ji)9f t:JIDGO:::D211
C'C C'C'C' C'C' C'C'C'~ o. C'C'
-G.S'J:-1)000 CO:::O~-:D.:U;J;? G:J)'J:J.)QI:J)~J")~~:; 0:::0:))./)C\ I <,i(O;"i!<,i G:J)'):J)QIO)
T l ( l....!, u u J 0 ;'I JL ] Jy u
C' ( ) C' C' C' A\ C' r,;:c OC' .<: 0 \ C' 0 C' 'Y' ')G
8df::O ::> it~ W::OJ2!9JI 3'JQJC!t:J1>.Jd<:lell::q:~QfD1 ::>@jO 11101 G~G~I 019
C' C' 'T''1G C C' C'C":GG'1l' C'
CO~ 9mG~~ ::>@j::> 't11DIGUG<.91 019:::0 ::>~ 9:JJG~8;1~C:IIlii.fWI~ mcn2
C'OC' 0 \ C' C'\ ') C' C' C' C'
Q:;(:l.SI:lQO)
10 J1
o
T
o
8dU)Q cnm:QI:li'J!Cb GQ:>'?:J)::DO;;JOI.)):"l)(J)CC!I
U C -1-1
G:J)'):J)Qiffi
U
-sd~~
LAo
C' c)
j 1~
C' C'
IL
C' A\ 0 0 ,
IO:>::OJ2!9JI. <::q:Jt:~Qf!0:( <.9J~'=~2:!901:-I)I 8d'=IC:lt:j:q 8dt:j:
C' 0
l
C' . C' 0 '1
o
OC' ~ 0 _ ~
c r,:c c o ' r,: cnc '). c cr,:c .. c ' c or,;:c

mmJm tlcroc~C:l~::JJ Dl~:>~C:.Jl :De:!9 ooct:J::<;>J~ Go:~GCO:-x>211 ~tliD9
c o o f:::f,\ c c c c r,;: c
ill'J:I 8d~~c 8d~Q~:QC:lJ?! ::PGeJDl:))~ 8dQJ0X}J?:8drffil ~QJC:tliO
OC' ~GG '1 C' . C'~OC' . 0 \ . C' C' C' o c C'
Bd~tol? .S0:.JIU)C:l 8d:JXD (:l.Ss;l~ O)!QIG:;o'):-1)(\){)00): )):"l)s;l(:l (:1())0)
J Il l J C:. l li> -~ . l 011 l 1:!. . L
o C'
'00:)):"l1C:l")l
C'
(:l.SG::D'J::IXD!I
C' . C' o oc" . C'G o c
OOJdl:lC:l'J OI:JJ0:u:>mc: G.S
~C'
1)G
?C:,-ntoJ
c o
3~
l C:.J JT 1::. l J U l l> T Lll

GOO'J:D:JdOO'?:
C' OC' o
l:l~CCDG
' ?C:
C'
G())Qa::n:nu
0 C' C' 0
C:l:n:-x>oc 000
C'C'
U)Qs;l<X:)'J
l L 0 6)1~1 . C.:. C.:, ol l JLJ
l;<?C": 0 C' '1 C' ~ r,::;::: C' C' ( ) ( ) . ' 0' C'
Wi_tj~C'f> 1':9C:l:Qt:jte10G9! 20~81.[8<:1 0j -o C 009 ~~~:::Dffi
19('0:::D19C'C I
8dC:l
JL o
C'
s;l(.,l())C
JL "
8dGQ:8
-,
~ 8d9ffiro!
!~
0 0
L
C' C' 8dQIO)(:l")
CDQ.S
-- -n
C'
u ; Ycomm:co
tL -- T
0
L
19
r,;:c o o : C' cr,;:C' c G o cr,:c
'=~J:>!tj00j? 8dll?tQCJ:I'f>:"cqC:lJ?:C?t:-x>e:!l SJQJC!t10 SJGQ:>'Jffi::P2<71 8d::i:>1Dtj
c c c c . 1m c c. o r,;: c : . r,;:c
m 2 G:;o:>ro~')f . tr.lGe1'?C!8d'J!GCOJ?~:> ~:Gtl:>SG:::D'? o:lG::JJ?t:JCi
QU)~O io:lCO'J:
0 'l 0
ro::n:noc
C' C'C'
0G
'JC!ffil C' 0 C' C' 0 C' ~
~IOO){'f.)COffiO.GQ:>'JCQffi:::D:DO:"l1?
C' C' C'
IILL t,.C.:,- L .!. L Al C!,C,
-o ~ er,::;::: c
~ G~Gyt:j:yp:ro :-x>Go:>?O[~e1GO-Xl211
"Thl! word ' bona fide ' means, in good faith, without
fraud or deception ; honestly as distinguished from bad faith ;
openly; sincerely.
In the determination of the questiop. whether a landlord
bona fide requires his land for the purpose of erecting a
building thereon, the most vital point is landlord's s'tate of
mind at the relevant time.
In deciding whether the landlord does really entertain
honest intention or not one cannot apply a subjective test,
but it must be decided objectively in the context of facts and
circumstances relevant in each case."
C" C" C" C" C" G <:' C" C" C" '1
OY..9fLDO>::; o:~:~OJGO)"JO>JlO<r es~m::co: ~S G{o)":>yG~?C800C 01 r
9 C" o C" C" ~ OC" r,: 0' C"
( j) 8dK<D9ccq:~c GSd'XlYJ 8d<J.f: ti~~GOX::D211
"'Bona fide requirement' in section I I .(d) of the Urban

Rent Control Act is res'tricted to ' requirement to build '.
The true test therefore is whether the landlord really intends
to build.
The question of motive is hardly of importance."
-----------------~------------~----------~-------
( o) (1956) :a.L.R. p. 14. . (J) (r96o) B.L.R. p. x56 (S.C.).
(?) (r962) B.L.R. p. 55
BURMA LAVI REPORTS 731
which he had a plan approved by the Municipal authorities

and had taken necessary steps such as the purchase of bricks
required to construct a new building, and the engagement of
carpenter and masons for this purpose, it cannot be said
that the plaintiff did not require the premises in suit
reasonably and bona fide for the purpose of erecting a new
building."
<:.cc~cc c.cc~xhl~:r, 4bob:x.oc.ce~WAamXoeolecd:e3,::,b
~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~0 ~0 ~ 0 \ ~
CCcctciCbro
~ 0
d_!oro J:C.Wb'-Otof) roreroweroc.~rekcccc~~Ot:J OCOA:CCA :Ceo~~

.. ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ e ~
:2co
e
Jba:;:c.Pf)c.ore:4C2ccbJmdA:to~bo
~ ~ ~ t., ~ e ~
e2ccekh1
\O ~
wc.c.:coro
~
Jo~ahl:x:ec
. ~~~. o
<2A 1o~:>~hl~ :ccro:ccoecc.c.:cco~roC2ccc.c.:c.cc ~eo ~f) e.G; ~cccc:>~kc.c.: (x;A
~ ~0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~00 ~ J
-c3,rwco toccccaR :OlJbe~:cbco4-bcotn:>~ wccc.occMro :cro:dAe:cbco ..

o ~ ~::1 ~:::to \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~o
11
eroro ~ . r"1 v 1r
1 \:)~ccococrocro cccAceo <'lcoo~cn
J_ ,.
1 o~enco::>
b c.o:c.Joo:~
n l -~
~
r' }, v _'L
0 0'\.) 0.)
,, n , J _ 11 J_ _ n J_ ,,
0
ecoro Jc.A::> 0 ceo:w'-0
\ .)
:c.Jf)ro:wcoeroroJ
0
roocoeooro
.) .)
:c.Joo:cnco

eroro

c.M~ro ncccco~b~~ wC2cc4-~cnQ :ccoroc.c.:cco~rol2ccwcro~eo 4-boo

~ ~ 0 0 ~ ~::1 ~ ~ ~ ~
:cl;:>co ::>c~~eomb~~ccc~cc c.cc~::c.hl~:~ 4ba:cce~ (')(;cooccro
~ ~~o ~ ~::l o~~ ~ ~ ~ o
w
<'lroohi::>Pew C2cc:cP<'l1o:cb:oJ:::Rcc~~:cl;~co :~c.~~ahlwf:oh'IA wo~
~o .>~ ~ ~ o ~~ .> ~ ~ .>~ e~~ o
::>redero tn::>b J:hlohlw~ero o :>e~A.cbco :ccccckaoco ~ (e) co~ro
~ -> o ~ e~~~ -> ~ , ~ -> o, ->
ecc~::occ ~e:o~ 4b:oe>l5 e>l~chl~:c.P<'lh;:cbco ~ co:cP<'le:cbco d~lro
0 .) .):J ' :J :.J 0 0 .)~
e2cc:>~ JOe> :cPft:~btob::.ecbe>~ctc:Xoo~.s:cOro ih:~~::>c.hl~ ~a:ahl
.> .> w 5'::::J\.>O .> .> ~0 :::J ':) .> ~ ~0 ~~
::::~rero :>o:Xorow toM J:cco:xo:cr~\J:cbr...o ~~::>c.~e>ecc&ccceJCC 4b
~ .> ~o .> o o oo .:> o ~ .> ~ \e .>
:o~ohL....coba~~!=>c.CJ~ cc&11'):>otulllea:: eroAro Jcoocbeobc&e> 4-b~c~
~ ::1'-'-' ~ 0 . ~ ~ \ ~ 0 II," .> 0 .> ~ ~
:c\;ro'> fl:4-ero :c.ro:c.fe~to~ ~.hl4e>(.dbce:::~hl:o~roe2ccl; ccccccdb
.> ~ t., .>O ~~ .> ~~ ~o ~ o e ~
o'Xx.occee>cc::dhl b:c~~coe~ WA~soQ::>rero cccctoto:cbco ~il!oc~
~ ~ ~ .>~ ooe~ o~o~::l.> ~ oo ~~
w:.ore~WCo
o ~ o ~
ll:,)'
::,-o
t o(CJ::;J.!
~o
.
J ) :4-cc
~ w
lG~ olhene2cco64~
~ ~o ~ .>o
:e.b
~
Lb~e>::::chle>
.> ~
~::o :c.P<'lh:>:cbco
o
8~(6-SlhJ)
.> ::lo
~b M:eft
.> ~ .>
&ahl;2c.o
.> ::1 e
:Jbfl::.c:>ero
t., ~ o ~
4()(.0
.>
nCCccohl ~C~eJC.CCe>:>ioted::::lft :>ob_:ccccre C2cc4e>1JJ

~ .> ~ .) ~ .)00 ~ ""J ~ 0 ~ 0 .> ~
:~ro ::>4:0l h.ncw:>'hrotu cccch::cbc.o J:>gro(2cc(;A :olJo~cchl :>C.a?e>
~ e o . .>o~ o .> o ~~ .> o ~:::.t~o ~ ~
rohlc.oro F.,rcccfl we:cbco h>corero .>;ccreJm2cr:M ~bb ooo'or ~~'co
.> ~~ o .> o o ~ o L .> \ ~ 0 ~
rod~ a.>Jooroh.J JIG!c.coec.!>o ::::~mecc.oro ::::ch'Je>l;o&coM ooo'or !~11!1
.> t., .> 0 ~ .> .> 0 .> ~ 0~
0 00 0 y 0
h>:cb::c w:2:>c.ft~:2c.cc::>re ~c.~~ccro uC2ccoe>:2coe ~bcohl:re to1ol;A

o e~ e~ o .> ~ .> ~ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ t., o
:<'l~:>~t;b Je~c.<:ee>h> w;e>6 nC2a:ccce>4[, c.iiC2cc:cc~!;f) ecoc.c.:ro
~ .)00 t., 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ .> 0 ~\ ~
o=>o
0
'~ ;e>C2<'lP:.o4h>~bdvcoc.ce~ft
.> .> .) ~ ~
scccc0h::dxo 'Ccoccc~hl
.>0 .) 0 \ 0 ~
J,:&c.c.:
.)
c. a:~
1,c.-:uroe> h>:dOOJPeec:::~::occ J~::occcoo ~~:dm.:Pekhlb::, c.cc~tc
11
0 ~ .> ':).> .) ~
0 ~ 0 ~0 .) 0
u?cca:e>
cohl:~ toxcc:2coe
.) ~. .) .)
46ce&t.oC2ccJo\Jmb
\ .> .> t., 0
~Woo.:ccee>occro
.) .) .) .)
:.~c.ccecc
.)
CCCe>~c.hle>:(', t.Ofte.GG~;:Jrero CCcch.:>:cb;:o J~liijccb!;Ci>~ :~<:.~ebe:o@

.> ~ 0 0 .>0 ~ ...... .> .> 0 ~..... 0 ~ ~ 0 .)....J
ro~oco;e>WG
~ 0.) ~
:>toccccre~wbc.o
~ 0 \
J!c.ecJ::J:dxo
0
Jbro ue'~JGC
.;;, -J
AGbGe>OC
Sl.'ti0d'3'd M.V1 VW'timl Z!.

L S.DIOd3'8: ,A.AV1 VW~Hlg:
" " Cboo. 1 "' n 1 "' _, ,.. ,, .;__ '"] lr"ll:
n5>~ge~: C.flt'ec u5ggefl c.og;ccJ
ff>~ sc:::J~c.cc~socnfl~50'c.oc;o
~Mc.ore
.J
wcc<~:2<~
,:, .J e.>
6es2c.@:jo
.l o
c.0&b,:chc.oemeo
o o
M<ce'teoccc~oolo:dMcc&>lm
.:> J -- \. .l t; :J '$
loc.EOJec.ccec.co<(:J
.> ,_, .> :::.1
c.ccic.f(,<CCCo
.>
CCcoto!'
\ .>
l:CJe b .>colr>1-J
o
c.ccer::J~~eochleeo
. :::loo :.:J O~ldfl
i>
:~.,:chc.oemax.oc.~ @cc:2 b co18o o~o~ec ;cw<ll~~:ocr::-:lee.dbre~ccg

,y : ~ e .>o .:J \ O.l:::::l .> v
Mewre
.) .)
becClc.@~o
.) 0
a.>cc<f:C!0f
.3 .) 6.)
u@cc:ctt<!lhlec.oecc;;eco:b,
.) JJ:.l j \.
:@ro:c.c:;Jc.cc::>
.) :::b
e@~'l'-.emb::>l!omooh!;;le@cc"f.eo C.CC:X.C\100ioOOIC b ctceW ohlcc:c.ttwl:oc.o~:C! b
.> ' .J :;,o...J .:J ' .> 1.,.. o e .:> .>:.J ..,- .:> o
~che~:CJ
,c e
0 C.OCO~ cob,:c<liCOCo~
.) .> o '
oCJcc~:ol:l:c.oo1IJ~cccc
"':J o .):::::1 ~"" o-
bcocoo~:clxo
c.Mic;;~oSohlec~
, => .) ~ o
n~fl~ec
.> ,
c.cce:c.oo:@a>;;oo:chc.o
.J , .,
@cc~:belhcoool-.hl~
.) , .:J .)O':j
n@fll>
.)
lc.<JI:2~ E!~eo:~c.of\ec ::,(:J~ea;:r,.,l!oaJ o&l~CoC::Cflld,COfl5ou II wrec.ohl:k
.j :>', Jo .J ~ .J .:> .> :::1
u@ccro~coo
,;, \.: Wc.ootc.ol~ ~:~:c.Pfl
.> J-o o-~- Y
b,:dxoolhr~
o
1:hl:o~Q,e.d~es
eT .) -...J
toWoe<:ore
o .) .)
wccot:::t,.~
.) ., e:r
bes2c.@~
.) o .)@cc:c.Pe
e:cbc.ootro:d::c.o
.;o nctol~e:dsco
:;.-__.o, l:o:dfle:chc.oe&cc
o . lbw rc echcoo2
.:J
ok:ccwcc.
.l.)
:c@:x
..J~
w:d,b,:cbcoe~...s
0
1ee&C<C~;~
t,.; 0 0
no~;b.,,deb,:cbc.oe<'ow
0 0
:Xcxb:o::>
.)
~to~~ c.ode:~~:~co u@ccw&>mo ~,.J,,Xi!=:=J&.be 'c.ol:l....hldeec
.:s- 0'\c.: -.J ~ 0.1~"'0'"' .) ~ ..;__,j .) !)~'""-""::]~ 0 :::J"":),j,)
.)
c.bk ~o@ccQc.o&:occ b:,2o6C>R
., .) :>. .:>:l :@r.v:di'I:L;gec.cc~@
..__j.) .) .) ..J .) 0
o~:ew:@G
.) .) .)
woc.cc
C2~bo~ecok4~
.) .)0
w:@cowwoowroot;oi->
.) ...J .) .) .) .) .)0
:2~(.()(\);
0
cl,:d~(.b~bco<o(;!~
.>0 .) ....J
u@cccc::l
.,) .>:J
5.l.bewc.w~fw:lreec
.) &'
b:cr~&c.cc~ooo1::>
.)0
~~.o"""
.)
1o~P:!l~t;l:!"llhc
~ .),_J 5
l:o:cr~~ .)~b~eomo
0 ..)0 .)
&6
0
(I
11C2cc8,:@C>'t
.)
'l-.w -...J .) \ \
:!,~&cnoohfil~
.) ..)0.....,
lf;r::-:lob,1JJ:c~:C2oec
~::::'J.) ~ .) wdft&_,ooo
0
b
o!o 1o~Q~ .>ooecloec:cl~:dxoe&ec
~ ..L ~ t,.; o
w~oes~bfucnohl~
.:> .> .> _. o
u@cc~ooob
., ~bo
q;re
~
:Lb~~&O~rcves-rw~ o6 :~t.:>~?coo~gn?cecLoec d~:.bco~&eo ~eg>:iecc
u:ok:l~e'G
.)~0 \
bw f c C'icho~o<l
.,
o~c;.ccwcc :c:.el:cc-~l:e?, 46m::.oetO~-~ .,ohu10o8ww :bt>o6cm:boo "ls.oc:.ooc@hl

.:> .> .....tc O\..:> ,:.:1 ..., .> .> .> e " .J;J

( gcP~e~cbcoet'ow)
o o
o ~o
~:-
:4cccc:a
.)0 e
r
~':S'
.)
~~~re:~
~ .
:e..:lcc:(t)co ~~ :f~ccc.c~:~ ~~~:dxo 15'-~~~1'1~ c:.~co S'lre:~&:cbco
S1.1I0d3"8: MV'I YmOH tl

uC.ccecc:2
e
11 uu.&:w:c.fi=le:chcoe&.es
.::J o
uC2cc:~<2@bW(O
;; .J :J 0 0
0!:\c
.J
c.~coih.e-
:J
(;;c.roero~:cbro:;.~m)
.j .j
:c.rfl:bo:>bco2h;c.l'>~tJ.
;; 0.) ....J .)~
1h r$lVc lli&:::c.e:;~ o~ hcc;C!0
:; .) .)
nroo dcoPP.c.a>
;;
1~(1)
0
1(6\
.).1
oh: lell~l bdtJc I(GJ'COCIO{;
c.ec l..)0 .:> :J
o~ I05bP.c~
l.o 0 .> t, 0.>
i!tlf.C
~ l() nl>dc dcofftc.G

.>
XA~::>e!2 Wee uot;:A~CJbotre :occroC!fic.w:Gre~..c1lw~ ~; :ofel:to:l-oGo~wo
.) .> " , .> oe ;; ;; :, o.> o .> .>w o ;;
uollb dcc.lt'iCG>
.)
10c &,en
\
1(b)ccs
.)
!(,C':>)mcs
.) .)
1oh:
.)C.
1 ~ ~~~c dmi:c
.)O 0
o~ :;Mco
:J .>0.>
SL S..DiOdtl'ti M.__V1 VW'tiOH

Sl.'tl:Odffi:I M.V1 V.W'tl:ml 9L
Ho Lo
:~ccc.c:2
.>o. r e.
::>~
.J
3 L0
::lC.Be>::>e:2
" " e
":
LL.
SJ)I0d3:~ A\V1 VW'tlD.IT 8tL
{"
l,C
J
Q 0<"
e=:n~:
ol on
"A suit for the recovery of compensation payable by an
association, which was not carrying on business as contem-
plated by the Companies Act against its members is not
maintainable, even though such members may be Committee
members of the association at the time the agreement to
pay compensation was made.''
Oorei'G~hll:u;~
ulb~:::b ~,;)~0.)0
~:t:;:ttbcbax.oo~cbax.ccbASo
~&.j ,) ,)
1'.l:l:ohJG@ 110~~~
01.:>0 ..) \,\
sob c (\)~~ l~f~ c~tlc ccc~;re JtD obc Okc~:~30o.:x:b lgf~ rstlc .j.
II (e) f ~ ~~~fref300~ ~~~~ b~Vc *
S.L'd.Odmi N\Y1 VW'd.fl9" OtL;.

(r)
(c)
uc If
c.o:x;~ag
u@cc:~l:2@b&;..b
:,~ .) .) .) 0 0
~~ lrOc.~k ICC~flbubf
.)
CCOC.I'Ii@:2 tltJr .;] .) ;)

obtJc tbc.ro
.)
Jromec
J .)
I*
.)0 "' 0
of
.) :> ~
teco},
0 .) 0
IO!:ltJC
;)
t!x_a;
.)
tro~ tco~@h!kco~of
0 "
*
.)0 ;) .) o-.10 .) 0.)
o4romceocoroc.w
" .):J
uofT-c.occcoroec tlbtlc bcw*
.) .) .)0
IW~ tbt cfl~

eL :>
;.
j
:c.rllt:SIO
l. e
CCC.COfl u0Cr c.obct?
..>
iCbtbbc.ec
.)
lohl
.)0
leG~ l:c.Pflec.
HL S.I'~IOd3'a M V1 VW'tlO.H
"Where the accused breaks the lock of a house in the

abs~nce of a person in possession and takes possession of
the house, he uses criminal force to the lock which he
breaks, criminal because it involves the crime of mischief
and therefore an order under section 522 of the Code of the
Criminal Procedure is competent. "
o o co ~. co e co r,::co r.;:c- ~ c-e c- ~ .......,<;,...,. C'
-q
CC"
'JIOO~l: ~JCD~: <S~-:>:1:1c:!Jn:lj~ roroJL: OJCOO:G!P-:>C
C'
~i9 ~ ~co:> CDJ"~Ol: 20~2 lf!3Y
C'
C'
C'
C'
jJJ
(
:>
)
SX)' myt
OC'
Dl'"'t"'i:' G'f>CD
~C'
~J'fwr1c: Dttc
~OC:S
0 -0
e=o~~?O:
C"

:~~~ ~~'qO..l~ll :;c

J
Q('o
IDQ~OO:mcll
g)) (r.)blo:>~
(' GblO:>? C' ('~('
QU~~ ::xxDGo:>-:>s:l~IC:
C'
I!>GIDI-:>C:o:>c
('
blC..
('Q
0
e=~~oro
[
1 en -, " -- -L- u u o Jl
0 ('
- -, l
(' r,:: c ~
l 6
(' 0 C' (' 0
o1 ?II
9_ CDI Gblg?":l 'JO~t:)c: ~~~~ :>09?GO:>?CQ:U ~o:>oo-:>:G~? G~"?~GCO":>ID~
0 (' ~ (' Q r,~ C' (' 0 (' r;:;: r.;: (' C' C"
1jiDQl~l: <SJIDOO:t:j:l CCG9?CD Gfcxt~ ~~lj~l '[>~00:> CDJ~cxt: 20G!3
C' ( ) 0 (' C' 0 C' (' r.;: (' (' 0 C'r,._ ('
<llsbl jjj o m91 robl~ ~J'fO:>t:::bl2 t11!>G0~2" ~G~?tl ?:co2:
C' C" 0 C' C' C' OC' C" "' C' C" ( C')
:>~90 ~~I!>~~ co:>~: 0:>9?:~ro-qro-:>rr.u ~ f'l"'roocr 01 o '~ Off)OO? ro
(j) ~~~:~~-
" The only force that is contemplated by section 522 is
force as applied to the human body-the use of force as
mentioned is section 349 and 350, Penal Code. Hence, where
the complainant was dispossessed of his house in his absence,
no criminal force can be said to have been used to any
person. No order can therefore be made under section 522,
Criminal Procedure Code.''
('
:>~C::) .0:.~1!>0:>~ 1
('
Y!3Q())('~I a:x:o;CI)Q)G;())')O)I
C' C' 0
31
C7\ iJ G l et, ---L .A
~oro-.> '~ GOJ:tf~O o1 S3c.~p: (G) ~98~:~3-

" An order for restoration of property cannot be made
under section 522 . where -~he criminal force attending the
dispossession complained of U; used not against the person
dispossessed, but against the property in his absence. Section
522 applies only to criminal force used against the
person. . . ."
GJoS GJ'f~ co?:o:>~ 'feO~ ('I)J~cx?: e<-'GS q&~ :Jjj ( 0) Sd(;]l m~f.
C'QC' C' C'~ c r,:c c c co
<.>J'fO:>~C9f 'POo:>o:>t.j:t?S~ c;c;o Sd'JI t!0':f('I)J!lg~f~::D~ C\)('1)~ ~
G . C' o C' c r,: cr:::: C' o c o C' c r,: C'
ro2: o:>G:X.?o:>ro?:l ro~~ mcom DLC\fue~c:1 ~~~o:> m~c mcom DLGfU
c or,:r:::: c o C' r,:.:,!? <.> C' r:::: " cr:::: e> o r,: e> co o <!"
~~<"l1t!e!c:1 O?..~~o:> t::l~:G~?c: Ge~?mOj>t,e~cg o:>~~<i.( DLGfU9t cqmu
C' 0 ('
o:>~ ~9GU~2:; II
:)~c;~ ~,s~~ $dC\)()):t)~ o:>'P:~<&o:>~~l ~()')~~ o1' n'.HlJ~g ,~

C "'G (
~~s~~ 7.) G C' o
09cc:q:o~c-
C'
.. Criminal force or show of force or criminal intimidation

in section 522 need not necessarily be an ingredient of the
offence at all. The word ' attended by ' should include an
act done simult<J,neously with or immediately after another
act. If the commission of an offence is imm~diately or short
ly after, followed by force . or show of force or criminal inti
midation, the case will be covered by section 522.
Use of criminal force or show of force, or criminal inti
midation must all be with reference to a person and not with
reference to property.
Use of crimina]. force means actual use thereof. Criminal
intimidation connotes a threat use of force to another person,.
. show of force, therefore, must be something different from
these two. It may fall short of the use of force or of a threat
to use force. Where the accused or his accomplices having
entered upon the land do not quit the land when the true
owner protests against such unauthorised entry and are
ready to. fight,. the offence can be said to have been attended
by ' show of force '. Show of force may consist in the
physic~l presence of the accused, his servants or compani~ns .
in such a way J;hat the true owner is put to the fear that
if he tried. to regain possession by force, he will be met by
force.
In' SUCh a cas.e the dispossession of the true OW1ler fs not
complete till he appears on the scene, protests and has to .
g<? away. 'T he case is covered by section .5i2 and an order
..
for restoration of possessjon can be passed by the COurt
~~ oi:ok>?:o:>t~~~ gl~~c4:o1 ~~r m-,corm( ~) m~( ~)

c o c or,: c c ( ) G <' <'
fO ~q "tro~~i:!fo.> (i QX)C<X(o~-
It is enough 'that the comnrission of the offence is

11
attended by force or show of force or intimidation. The

words ' attended by' may include not only an act done
simultaneously with another act, but also an act done
immediately after another act. So, if the commission of an
offence is immediately or shortly afterwards followed by
force or show of force or criminal intimidation, the case
will be covered by this section."
" The period of limita~ion of one month :presp-ibed by

section 522 {1) applies to an order P,a5Sed by the trying
Magistrate, and dones not apply to an order passed under
section 522 r3) by any Court of appeal, reference or
revision . ."
~~ ~:~co?::;w~SXJI G~~?9cS~~ ~Go:>~CPI g))~~:~ . Ga;):>oS~:

C' OC' 0 G":C' C'A; C' C' C' . C' ' C'
~J<jo:>~:x>? a;)'=~~Of t:1cro:::~Go:9f G'=l~') 9o~:x>a? oxooc Grop
"[s ('. ~
G;:o:> '):ro~: g]I'J:O) 'f'~C.ro .
(' (' eoos
CPJ<;ot: (' . j j j (?) SXJI
~&'=I
. 0 ('
_s;>~
~C' r,:oC' C'. r,;: C' "
~J'jwt:J;;: Dt~~:x>~ . :;rq:(90XJG0~211
{9) I.L.R. (19~8) Nag. z96.

: : . '
1965] BtiRMA LA\V REPORTS 747
rm C' r::: C' C' C' . (' . . C' r;::c
=>eG~
Jdl;? ~el?C:t:Jc:'P1S o:>mGo:>QQJm~:~p: S'X)I G~:~~:> 9o:;1t:Jc:
rm o c c r,;:c c o C' A; c.
Qel'lorr ~'f>G<D:>~o:>2?, 9dQJC;tl4>G()')J':>CO?l C ?SJI G~~') 'JOO>Of 00<:p 0 0
BU'f~?O:
c c C' 'l C' o o C' ~ r.'? co
.g
Ga>:> O)<D<D:>;Go:>') Gmpc:a>QI:Go:l'?QGCU?()')~ ~()')Qdl:tj:l Grope: J
mroc:o:>
C' 0
mro:;:mG:.
OC' C' C' C' :>c: C' 'T'
:>: C' C' C'[s
0
e:ot~oro'l

A ~l w ocGc:nroG.scocG
t.-----T l GOI roc
A
coco:>:Go:>:>
Jl
(' 0 0 C' C' 'l (' (' C' C' . C'. ~. e:>1 \'n
002?,:1 0?~ on:Gmf>~Vt ::JdQI~C G()')J?C:::ldO?C:~ G~~') 90:;1~ OO'f>G<D?
0 C'
O)(:I(J)(X) C' <:
<-C:c,lll C'
(X)O:'D
o
::D?: 0)00?1::11?; 0
1::100)"~I G<$1'l'\Q::O:::DC' 4>9CCO:I:II');
G C' o
L 1. I I:!, U Jl o o t.:.!. l tJ
c o oc C' ~ C' cr;::C' r,;:c ~ co o<'
m91 o~2:~::o') m~cmcoro r:rt9o mJil:Gmpt:Jc: t!QJSI ro~ <?_C
OC' OC' ' ('~ C' C' ' C'C' C' . C'
roco:>m:>:l
" ;L
m.'iic
~..
mcom room
1.t. T
~:~Gmmo:>:::n
-r w. c1 G~:~cn:>c:~oQ:::n
oo -t :l
::;omGro:>
-- L-
C'o A; O'l C' C'1" A; C'r,:
Gmpc:~ro:>~l mei:f'' OO'f>G<D:>~:~p:m:n a_rp~ <.9W~;:>:~ Oi:m.J;>GeP
. " 'l " " " (' , rm(' c A; OC' ~
o:>etm~l~::roe:;: mJJl:GmJ?o.t ~'f>G<D'J~.;()') m~~:>:<.'mSJ ~ccom
4>l.S
Q C'
~:
~ :.- ":::: C' ' .
ro::::.>:;~l:lll:l:i.>l
C'.
GI,)(X)')QCJO)::O romGa>:>:r.>~:::n:l
C' C' 0
20G8()')
T I. 11. o 11 JJ 00 -. tL -r C.:, L
C'C' A; m~:gDtoo
ro.J.>0(.))0):>:9J r:'(not take law into own hands) o:>mC'
OC'
ro:::m C' o 0 C' OC'
c?.s~::: rom:a:::oo:>:> ::O'):Gmm roc
LTc..ITJ -ru., .o-r l '): \
~Vro:::n
bL
0 C'
(gc m~ o:m1
-o
~J.C::JU
cc:
,
C'
Q C' C' C' .. C' "!'f.': ' C' Q C' C' r,;: C'
m:>: 8d:Jfl':Jd2?, GO:')f::oqG::o:>:o~:l GO I [j~:X:~ 4>9CCI:l:gp:qc~:l~<D
C' C' . C' 0 C' () r,: C' C'
CO?:QJ:I.>3d91 'f'~?<D ()')J~t:q: 2UG8 <;lDI:I :Jjj 0 tJ~5Jf: CO:>:::O~
C' C' C' r,: C' or;::C' 0 f,;;C' \ C' , C' 0 C'
Sd:>lJ-"D m :U.U~:>:;~ [ja~t:Jc: I:ISJ::OtJ~ QU: e:rop 5;G0o:l2?,11 Gl:l~?
C' o C' . C' OC' o 0 C' C' ~ C'
')OQ~ ro'f'G00')()')::0') ::O()')~'f' ~:~ 2UG89d')l ro."D::0()')9J GQ:l')C
C' C' r,;: C' C'
~()')9f tJIDGCJ0-?2?,11
c- "''f.':'l rmc:- ~C' c:- o c:-c
SdX).'))G~ I d) I ::ldGel'JC:gp:Gel')~ G9d')."))~: 0~')~ IVO::~C o:>'f':o,I
~ C' Q C' . C' C' OC' 0 C' C C' C' C' OC' o
el; QJ~<DGO)') ID9CQJro;q ::ldl:lf.~ 0CG'f'mC!Jroom9f eo:;;ss;,91 1GC\f
('
G::O') ::ldG <'X:pc: 1::1"1
J
I
0~
c:Qm')

- .... 05 -,
C'o
c:!OQ.:l)
"
Q:>COGO)')<;i
T
GOO)')
oo
Q
-t
IJQ:O?:r.>
.l\ &.
C'_C:.
(\)())
l
C'o 0 0 C'
r::c ~oc:- r~ c c:- oc c:- o c c

Grop;s::: ~:~Dt~co:>B~ 1 oroo1t s:l~:~~ ~d~ro 9:n;JJ~- 11
b~:~tlc
J
1
.)
olre:&

:d:co
1r ~~ 11 v _1_
f)ecoe.c:oooee.c f)8WCO
0 :J
s~1!0dffii MV1 vmng 8tL. .

uc.o&es:crco:h:m:bc.oe&ec:
.) 0
uo:)c:doa@~cob'locdcoclb:>~
,) .) .,) ~.) :;) .)
~bcelb
.)
l:.o@ocO>hl:o8c.Pcol).
..) .>:J.>~.)

:llfw ,)ohl~~:J.,ote:)OC.ce~e.c
:3 0 0 ().,) l. .)
~oc~olucocce~ooole~e:cbcoe&e.c @oc:::c.ee:y..c .
.) ~.) .) .) \0 J .) 0
1 <> no ,, 1 J . . . 'If Q rr 2 ..,:X, ,. , ,, Q

C.OC:)~oo~ce:)ror~ ~~:=;roes g:~ocge,cccl5 ~ c.oc:)~g:' ~~oc:coo:.:~J.,()O
:oc~:):2codbcelb
.) :=l .) \.) 1:.o@occ.Pco:):DPco
.) ,) cocco~:ob
0 .,)
:@ooc.oc~~~obl
.) .)
'Gbooea:oo
.,)~ ~0.) .)
oc.
0:) c i:Ccoooe.c :oc.~:):2P8 rohl t():)@oc:~ore:) ::>c.ce:)e.c c.ocad:ococce:):X.ore
0 .> .J ~ .> l.~,J., .J O.)l. .> .J .> .> \.
~:cbcoelbe.c
0
ohloc&Jek->~:c.ooc-.lu'!(l2c@5oc.oco
.) :.:1 .) ::::::1 .) ~.) . 0 0
@oclbe:cbcoelbe.c
0
o~:rbco.
.)
.) 0
elbe.c 'S

IG:2PooOO>o-Hb/:'obl;a;oo
..> .> .> .J 0.>
'&eo@e~'&:@e
0 \ ..> .)
IGI:'ob~a;ooh;cbb~oc@e.cc'&:@8,
':) O.> 0 .> .> .J
,~:2rooOO>
~,) .)
ofoooco&.>ohlc.coroeJ
..) .) ,) .)~ ~
IO~HH":OOCOWbl:)ahl:oPec:c
:;)-.) .) :..:1 .) ~,)
oro~et!ne.ccocoh
.) 0
u@oc:4-cc@bl:o~
.) .> .) 0 0
crb dcoP8cO> ,r ~e.c I(e) OOCO>~ t4COGo& of ~ocob
.) \. .) .) .).)0.) .)0.)
us{~:~
~ ~
Iob ICO:)
.>o
r0 tooeco 'of :oero:coe
' ..> ..>
11 ( oo) o& r~A~4- rCbf!c:
rbc.e.c
.l
oro Ie.G~ rl;roc.e.celkbrocobcboo:c.~G
I.:>o ot, ..> t, ..> ,
of be'lkcroP<..cce~O>C.OCC.C.CflW
.> t... \t ~ ..).) .>
nco rolPecco:)c.o&:cbco
,J ,J ,J
:cfeJ:toobO>ook8~bl 10>fe cCtlc db~:~:c.cnc.w rcoe rcnw M o~:1:ofoe

.) &.lO .>~ .) .,)O ..> .)
11 b~8:oc.fD!:)e.c~bcet!n kcace:
0 .) -.J .) ,)
. ~dcoeJ:llrco 0.;,
oooc.ceee.c loc:cooorococ.ce:)
:> .) .)
axo:cbcoe&e.c
0 0
@cd:D:ob
,j 0 ;>
ot::locb(O:).
.>:::!
l:o@oc~ roe :oc.~~l!i8:oblcocbeJPco &coc.e.c~:oc.EOl:):CPeh> @ococ.ee:)ecC.oc:)-
o.) .5 - -w .;, ~ o .)::b o .> .) ::::::1 :> o .J .,
:c.ooolucoc.ce:)ol:ol'e
.) .J .l \
CO<x::cbcoe&e.c
00
r:Cdooofcocelb
:, .)
ib&@cc~&b
~.) :::::J al:Oe:cbco
O
.
et!nec tucocccoc.e.c:):OCr:;;]:)ICr~
0.).) .>::::::3.)
rfGlbbco~cbcoelbe!::
~ 0
tococc

IOeeGCIOC.~eJ:2Pft
..L--:>-.)~.) 0.)
.
:hl:cl:l:oo
OJ ~ .>o S' IG:c.oc:2Pe:@c.o:hllY...o
.> , ~
obhl:e~ 000
.) .>~ ,~
IOele; :@roeooooco&lohlc.coro~-
~ w .) o .> .> .)~
nc LO :Occ~~~c.orro~IS~o,.
~"' o.>
O>blo!uoc
.>:.l.l s- .> ~:)e.Elfte.c
ruc.c<.oc. tteooc~oh>b
.>o o ' ~bo
oRO>hle.c:c. r~o~oO.
I.)::J.>:I .J .Jo
j~:L~J.,C:) 1:1
:c.:::J:~
0 ,.
:;c.oc;;ctX_fc.e.c'!>
1 . . . 11
~~:~coe.c
"
r~J.,OeJe.c$1~
,. ,
cog.q~:axo~coec:
.1. . . 11
11 ~~ 1 hl" b b r , " Q 11 '::1 , , 1 ,

c.occc~ 1~::::Jr;;oo~ce~~ =e-Jco :$1 :Lo ~OC.O:.:~:)COC.C.C~ ~cc~~:coro:coe.c.
f Lo !:C,co:g
----
Gs~c
oftk:cbc.o efue.c
.)0
,..

rc:booefue.c rbec
rbe.c:c.PecoPeecc:)cooc
.J .)
cb:oPe:oc.~eJe.clkou
:J .)~
ualec.ohl:be
,) .):I
t~ 8COC:)odwe.c :beJobO>:cbc.o ~ocoo:)@hl c.oroto:cbcoettJe.c
;.).) .) ;)6 .:J .)~ 00
6tl SJ}IOdffil .!lAV1 VW~DH

S.DIOda~ .MVl VW'B:OS: OS?,
C.OflCW~:roocob~ t:~co:cro~ ICC' c.OOro:~ax.c6l tobt ~: ra~ ,15:::1!)']1a: ce.~
6 6.) 6 .) .) .) .) .) e-1 o'J.:>o .)
C2cctoe:dxodnro
..) O ' o .. o
~~k:cbcodbro
.:> 0 o
t:>&,fl5o
.) . .
- @ro:2:~~
6 .
~wll'B
.:> ~

.
nC2cco~orobJ
.) .:> 0
~b:co:2o
.) .)
IG:croerJ~ci,
'5' .:::J
tta:'ro
.:>
todm::hl
<> ~
ccc~tb :crocct()(.()cb~
1...:>
cbcra:~:liPw
.:>
:2co to~e.c:2co
6..lv 6
@o::~
.:> o
_1._ ,, n _, ___ 11 hi~ i!. Q ~ ~:;p' n 11n
~:w:o~_roro .?~ao=coc.o~ro~ 15~ (')?gc>. :g:::J~cre~ro ~~~~t3JC.<.~: tco
~cc::b(J)hl
..)
r:Xo(~-eds-.l!v) .)oroa.Xo
v .)<~ .) .)
:>hlc(oroe, rcccctnfl
.)~ \ .)
::>bccc~ttw
.:> .) 0 .\
::c.P(')(;c.Pw~:liPco ccc~:tbO>R IG:2rrooO> :;l:2wa:cre~ro r:obccce'Cc
.:> 1.. .:>~ '5' .:> .:> .:> 6 .:> .:> .:> o "
w :cf(') .
..~crco~JllPco
.)
ccc~:toohl
1.. .)~
e O~:>hiQ~ @cc~I('B
.),).,
I
.)~~ .) .) b:::~
s I:Xocbcohl:re .) ~ 0 0
n~i~C'o ( s~-eds:u;t) :coccc~5ra.;~:i!Pco

1J m~:'l:,:>,e~ :>cre~ro C2ccfDJ~wcree> oooPe &:e:cbcoeibes @cc
0 ""' 0.) 1.. .) .) __,.) .) .:> " 0 .)
:>cre~ro ~eKOro b 0~ r ccc~~doa.;cre~:::;ooPe &:b::cbcc~&ro
.) c .) ;:j.) .:> .) " 0 0
r
<.flSDJeec
n
w~es 51b~~;~
hi , 'J v 1r 11
:cO>:~O> ~~coe-~mro~ '5c;:j~co::~g~g::
IR ~ ,-1
u@ccoPee~
.:>
rocccfb:>~
'1..)
::::c~~cra:
.);:j.) e,~o::(')
.)
4b::oo>::.o0 wcb~::Jo h.Jbcos ~~coPeobO> ccce>:crocofiPe'Cc~ :::kifl
.).).)
,I
.)
1! v .
:~coes :co~ro
' .) 066.).).)6
&m .) 00
b
.:>
co:. ~ 1 '!B'f e:cro~~;~ 3co:~5 ~ c. o 1~ :o~~:Q

r hi , v 1 b ( ) /_ 11 , ,I
_:c.cnc.es 1co:;, t(oo)cnes

. ..:> .)
8~o:;,:&,Po:;, .)~
.)
~hlcc:::>~refl
.)00
toe2ec@R:cbccfl
.:> .:>~
cco~fl
.)
cPe~::oie. ::>co:cf, t'G~~@w~ ~~:cP(')a;Peecce>cucc rcb:orJ::::;c~ew~ro
__, .:> .:> '5' 6 .:>O .:> _, .:> .:>:::1.:> ;:j
.@ ccbcoc McoPeobO> ccce>:c;.roco~Pe :&If?. co:Q~:;,l~e> lk@o ~&e:cbco
_, 6 e.:> .:> .:> e .:> ~ ~ o Yo
eCbm
-o .
IIII~P:xoroc.oclb.JeJ
::> -~b \ .) .) ~eJ::::>m:ce,
::x ~ .)
~hlcccccm'l bemcPoo.:
.)~ .) .) r~ecc
~
wee
.:>
tcb:orJ::>cQe>es~ro
..>::1 .) ~ cfia:!cccohl:eerecn
.) .) ::.1 o&,~eoes coccb
:J 0
w:Mn'S 0 0 0
(o@cccrw?J:iiPw:tnco
.) .) 1., 0
h>:1'l:>tee>x~es
0 0.:>1.. .)
~ccobJcucree>:.~ooPe
.) .) .) .) \
toe:cbc.o
0
eeoro

@cc::>cree>eG
..) .)
ccce>l;fl::.O(\)
0 .)
b (.)eJ .r ccce>~otoa:cree>~oore
~.) .) .) "
&'l:o:cbc.oeeoes w:~~e>~e>l;c@o tl:)to:~b :::>&,cb~e~es 1bro s;) (')Gb

0 0 o:J 0 :> 0 .) .) .) .:J .:>
Goo2:.oec :be>:::>b~:cb::o ~:::>cco~@hl !boom tc:&ll'B ~hlcco*Prue>(') cote
.:> .:> 6 .:> _, ~ '5'.:> o ~ .:>~ _, o
ro:cbcoe:&ro tcbw'l:ocofiPe bwG~(')eG ~b:o:;,:d~m6l:recuP6l ccch>:::;cceees
o .:> o .:> e 6.:>0 ..> .:> 6 ..> o .:>
ccce>\;(')(.()ro b Oe> f ICC'J!J(') :::JrJcofireg.fle.G ~b:oe>:dkc~6):rea:r~
o .:> " :.3 .:>:::1.:> .:>o .:> .:> 6 .:>
~:C:oeco:>cree>es ~to'l:o:cbc.oemec t:hlreeo enccccO>t::J ::>Qda.;~:llrw
o ..> Yo o eJ .:> .:>~ .:>:::J:.>
~hl:ces::::>Qcobro r~:b:::>tee>occee;es <lit::.l::::;rero co::w:::cceees ecce!;
.)~ ~:::J.) 00 0 0.)1.. .) . .)~.) .) . 0
(')CDCo
.)
b oe> r ~ccoroa.;ccee>:::>boPe cooa:c~e> I CC~fl ::::>Qd:c 'JlJ :::cere>
..) .) .) " .) ..) \ 0 .) ::'b ~ .:>.
l.SL SD:I0d3'B" M V1 VW)Jf19.

0OC'
L
o
C' 0
C G :J)(J)(J)I C'G 'I C'
~q) :::nG::r.J')O) SJo:>o:>a:> CI:Q"':QO:
t.J 2 ll , ll OJ~I -Ill
X C' C' C'(C')
(C 3ZI:I:D'::l20J ~
C' S 'l C' C' 'l C' 'l9 ( ) G C' o C'

'i)<)OJ0~014>?<iG'l ~<:;. O~?CX>6'f9('f.)OI6'f~91:1$il?OI~ j <D9C<X(:~c-
" The ordinary rule of law is, that whoever has got the
solum- whoever has got the site is the owner of everything
up to the sky and down to the centre of the earth."
o o 0 o 0 0 C' C' 0 C:. C' "'C'O 0

WUj(Q::r.l'f>:Qo:._roi fr.lo;?QOJ'{J:O:l_q[::D~ CJC:~~Il s;>GOO':>C GQIC"t~~
C' c o r,;:c c c ' ( ) g c o c
mJil~G:np::n~q :;q::nt}c; '?<mro~:~c: ~c; mGro ? <D9~~:~c-
" One seeking an injunction against trespassers on land

mqst be in act~al possession as well as entitled to the
possession."
A; r,;: c c o o c c r,;:c o c 0
~~ ~:t}o:>CO')!QJOOW91 SJ~Q{Jj'f>gQCQ::D~ a:JQJGl~jG:Gy'P~ CC1o:>
l L
C'OOC' OC' C'O ~ C C' C' C C[;, C' 0 C
a:>:U~<{c:;qc~~~Gl~.~pc: <X>C1FGW':>C .::D('))G::l:>O:>Ct:J9r C\:l_GC"'~II
(.))~
. c-r;;;c .
. SdQJC:t}l!)

Gy'{J::D~I
c r,:r,,c
Gr::JtJc"'q::r.JO)J
c-' r,,c
G.<XX))')t:IC~(J)C\)0~~ <PO
c c .c c
a:>Je:~ ~::n~ o8:~:(~)Gro~(aS) eoG04>?~t; <D')"'J~,.~ ?f0 rJ?,~- .

" Is it possible for intrusion by things o~er an aircraf~
to amount to trespass? If the injury.is direct and immediate
and th~ air-space is in the plaintiff's possession, the answer
must be 'Yes.'."
O(!~j of the right of possession, he who has the better title or

right is considered as being in possession ; and the other is a-
e:CY.>'i)tilii ~J trespasser."
c
~<; .
c:Of<!J:tli
ol ?II
o:1~coo1:1 GOJI 81 Q:>g8 Go1(~) . G'}80:>':>8Go:>-:> ( 0@~0) Goo~(~}

C' C' (!
tU<:SO':>~UO":>CJJOO;-=> 000 ~C- .
" A trespas~, being the disturbance of another person's:

possession, cannot be committed by a person who is himself
in possession."
~ 'r~ C! C!O C' ~ C' C' C'
~91 G'J:~')gG<91 t:J~JCD8:l91 CDJf5JGr::D~ Gc::J~romo1~
;r
s:lGO
~~
G~())')t:JC
C' C' 0 o 0 C' o o 0 C'O OC! o<'r,::<'
~roro~1 s:l~~ro~:a:w~ ~s:l~~oxp:~~ s:lOjlCD~ roro51 q::~::~c:
J:::C' A; 0 0 (' (! 0 (! 0 0 (!
tlq)Gy911 s:l~~o:>~:C\:(0? CDJjl:Gmp:n~l ~<JO':(O) s:l~~O)~gQ~OC.
C' ('~ J:::C'C' C!\C! (!
mJ ll:GmJ '):0~0[191 ~ro~:t:lm9yro~: Q<D2:Go<:~~ 11
S.DIOdffif M.V1 VW~DH
. II .)(}~:2
e :~hl5~b:~esn
e.::J 0
11 :S.cc(}:2n
.)0 e
n?ccc.~~~ta?b ~ (Jco~so~
.lcbco) tJ_0 cc C.G 1bC_ ~ec so~dOI:;OOC!soo.ocb 1e CCtJc r_rcoe?;t jf s~
u~cc~e;Pco}oo ~~ (c)
!l-'r , , . n . ,
-oc l'lyo *SX'5'COSOO.;x;o
r ..J:l, r n " hi " lf hi'
C.I'I:5'~COI'IIe::>~o~~ ~~~~~WI'I~~g:> 51CI:>t 01~ro co
It hi.-.., ,
:::;~<CCOC..)
~"
bl~~\)hl
:.J .J:l rbeo&e
0
b ;;,CGI:lleeto
jt., 0
:c.wezcbco

r-:OO:!lGCJ
~
COC\X.OCI! w&c roc.co<e
- ., - ~ :J 0
::hlococde@
&~, ->
zhlolx>"JIJ e b C!():Ole~
, e1, :_j :~ jt,.;
~cocccooMe b &&h> e<bococorer, IO~ece:<bco
~:~ ,) , o :~ :J :J '""
::hi~Co@cc~ b ..I,J:J ~hl:..J:I.h;,~~.e Wcoc.ro~ b ~:cbcon ucorecohl:l:e

&1 . .) 0 ~~ .)~ ~0 .) " 0 :J ~ ~ :J
n<X!ccecoAPe~I'IW
:J ,, .)0
:::;~rob.>~6G~rco
)"" 0 .)
1a!COioccXo:c.ri'IWOOC.(X)$(o
J - - t,.; o .:> .:> o .:>~~erCOG
e ro r ~wooc.roe
;, ;,O~ll'l~o6:>w
:> ~:J cooc.ooe:oel'l
.=.
1.)~6oc.ce~:OeG
.) e.)
orco oC: co&esGe~hl
.) e
ohla:::6~e
.)~.):I o
toolcccoc.bl~Ghl
.) .) ~ .)~
16w blCI'IOb
.)
:r:;;]cooc~
G.j, coCoo::&:!ccdo1lJ
:J .) ,)
oc.ec~~b:decbwc
~..) 0 ..)
ohloc.;le:le h>&:C!
.)~.) .-:1 t., 0 0 0
c:c.IJec ohl:ob
~ ,)~,)
u .)@ccecoMe~<'lec
\.) .)0
~bG~erw
:>
eco:hleco
e'J tu:~r<'IWcoc.roe
0 .) :J
,J.bG~ercowcoc.ro~
s . :J .) ?~
..,
:.)l'l:::::::1.)
r:;;Jotowococode>
5 .)
ol6eoc.ooe:o~<'l
.) \:J .
.~6oc.oo~:o~orco
..) .) . ..)
ooc !>~woohl
,) .>:..:! :ob
:J
~6c~ePco
:J
:J :J j .)~.) ,)~ 0 .) ,) ~
c
<(\) b oococ.roe> M:Ah:lotoes ohla::;~&;~ ~@cccoc.ble~GQ I bw bi l'lcb:~coa:::..,cb
J:.l .) ~.)
.)cororoe!Ccco6:)llJocesebcbwc
;:J .:) ':j~ .) .
ohlcc:hlobcttle:r
.)~
e cue:Cbco
6~.) .) ~ I.,;
l:dbcrococ.!Eu::>
0 .)
r
::>~
.>
Sl'd0d3.~ M V1 V1t\fdOH 9Sl

" Where more than three distinct offences of criminal

breach of trust are tried together in one trial an illegality
vitiating the trial is committed."
u~ooel!oec
~
w"~
o~so
c.oc eooMell:l
~ ~
sc.c.oe~f,:~~bdx.o:>@,e~<:ecb
i:j .:Jo .;,
~roe~l'l .;&
1OJ :>
0 .J~;~x.~~dx.o
o
IG~e
.:>
octlc T1
IICC ~kc~l!oec a5oo:cbc.o l~te bsilc .
.-, _ T n "{ _ II_

uec<ceooalew~ ~ocooceme
1
w ooo'b <>:>e c.oco:c:eoecow
1 ] ___ 11
til__ )C
o'soo::~:oe oou o :>::! o~:co
0 ]"'
r1
~
w~oco CLY.O::O :c e:ox.o w:

r,., .Jo
1 __
oc:ox.o ~:ox.o:>oo
r1
,:, "' o o
_1 _ __
--o-
~11

.1_ __ IL
n en ' " in t n
.) ,) ,) .) - .~)6 J 0 .)0
CJJCCOO
.:>
=G:ox.o I X ] e>CO~
1 .]_ ,_ -
0
0
\
_,_,
.) 0
1_1_. , .
0 0 .)
t ,
OIW UU ~ :>e> lCJJe:t:>IC.It'ICLJGO'ltOC.G ,)O~ICO
p
I ;) \,: j-
f1
~.)0

" l c
CJJGO\'OCG sc.o ooo 1:1 oe
o ,. ., (' , ___ 11
loeecc.o:eaecc:c ro:ox.oecow
) r 1"1 _,
:>lrCOCLJ 1c e:ooc.o
_
:> .)O .> o J J..; o e o- .> .)-:...:. o
~'l<n
0 S'CCOOO ICe>
r
COOO:C.@ffiCJJ~IO
, bCJJGie
n
IS~
, _'L
!C.GCOCJJOOIC.OC.O
,
~l:>t'IIGI
2'!L .LL __ '?__
CCS'OXUW
j .J"' W .J :>oY,:, .:J J.; .Joj - :. .:JOe ~ :J
u: .)~.)
ot;;Jwrnc:oo
.)
'l:u:c.ra~w~
0 .)0
bC.oi> w:&el!nw--: oQ~bo~es o&:>~e~w co:~:cbc.o-: :>Qre:ocks :o&:>eo

e .> :Jo .)0 :J .>:I .) .>
<lG~sel!nw
,)
toboc h~wro~ 06:c.ra:~o
ooo .)
~m:~:cbc.o
:l
o&~bc.~
.) 0
cCc .,cb
.)
:k~rco.,:c:hco
.>
* (zcPf)~zcbco~&>ro) r Lo~re1s~
M
uwb
~ , cc
~ ro~J
:ro~cc:2
e
Sl~Odml MV1 VW"B"09 09L

0
e: ~Gto :
&d
GOTO\iu1 Jll
0 C' OC'
DOXDO)CII
l l
BURMA LAW REPORTS
e:o:>Gro:
:;.d
J
Gt3T~Jc6 ol Jll
..
e:o:>G~
('
:.c .
c;;sTdio1 jll
~ (" ~ (" (" (" (" A; oo <"0 (" <"

:Ya~<>971Gt::j?c:[j<>Jro ~~ ~2:~ O'j~G('f.)?C)O)I 001?0 ~~OOlCI
(" (" (" 0 0 ("((") (" 0"' ("((") ( ) 9 (" ("
G'POJU> ~~ ~f~:Ya?S !Ttl('f.) 0 ~fGOOSOI'jO 0 0 jCQ{:5-
" One of the first and highest duties of all Courts is to
take care that the act of the Court does no injury to any
of the suitors and when the expression 'the act of tile Court ;
is used, it does not mean merely the act of the primary
Court, or of any intermediate Court of appeal, but the act .
of the Court as a whole from the lowest Court which enter.-
'tains jurisdiction over the matter up to the highest Court
which finally disposes of the case."
Co C "f' C' 0 C C C Q G 0 G
oeli~ Gad?ro~:mro~: GSI C>J~O?~C c:p~J'fo:lG:::D? Sro~fl{ e::oGro:m
CA\ ~o 0 o C CO f~COC C 0 C CO c;:
~GO)Jf<>SJ g)I1J:~ ad<fcOOCcx:>?:::D~CJf ~t.,C:1CG8d?C ::D(I)JO)UC~Gf~lll
e:o:>GO'd: Q ,.A\ 0 oc Q 0 Q c 0 c A\ c oc 0
&d~; e:::r.>Gro:m ~~:ro~~ro9 cn9~<"q <Xl')O) 'JU~C:Si ro:>:::n~ 8d~;!ot
J l
GST;o)J~ 01 .Jii roo:>2J.j~G09f
cr,;: c c o
C\fadOG::D?
c
ad?~C><"q
o '1 c c
1J?G~OIG::X>?ro~:
'o
~'j::D5JGfc;JJ II
~<::
c ~ r,;:c e c c '1 c c c
~~~~ ro~~O:::DJ.j~ e:::r.>Gro:ml ~c:C>J')f OI!'J~:::r.>~J:ro-:>:::D~
G c
~c ro~m ro-:>~e>
oc o
roc c oc
~ Go:o:>c:acc;;
-:>c:c o 'o' ~ c o
~::X>:J.>QC>~ 11 o:>ro:~ro,cro:
J o L A L Jlo -[ IJ o l
oc c o c r,;:c e o c oc A\ c
eoGS ad~~ 901 f~: j ro91 8dU200CO)?~.Jtj~ e'':>']'[<"q '}O~C:Si cx:>?:']f
c
ldO)o:l::D~~-:>m-:>:~.s~
L c
c
J JT
c _c;: II o:>UC
0 c c c
IDG::D-:>ro::n:
L
'"
c Gro::>mc.:mro~roG
-~ .ll
c 6 ?C:c C:c
'1 c ' r,: c oc c '"A\ c
'P~J':>:ad']Ol:']~:::r.>~:co-:>:Go:>?Gr:J'~ S"J~o:>2 GCOCOo:>cSi 0G9?C:~:;>J'JG::D:
0
r,;:ce c;: r,: c oc c r,;:c A\ c ' or,; c c o o

o:>tJ<?2:o:>Gro:~u Gr:l'~ ro~oc tJ~G;>S~ ~20?~ Di.CX?U9~20f ~o:>1)?G:::D-:>
G ~ o o C" C' '\ 0 OC C C 0 0 ' Q
e:::nc;;ro:ro?:l g)j~:m 8d02;;J~C ~20?~ ro~~C>J';!OOQ2<"q 0o:>Go:>:<:~ o:Jq:>:
c c'1 0 A\ 0 r,: c oc 0 0 r,;: c c A\ 0 c 0
~.Jo:l'Jl;>m;>G'}:rq G~~::Y ro~o1 Gr:1<?ro0q 8d'J(JQ8dl.j~Go:~c:G09J ;;Jo;;cq
c o r,::c r,;:c e o c '"A\ c c ' cocA\ c
;;JJLU~G0t:JC:ro?:J.j~ C'':>9~0f oomromSJ ~GOO::>C~m::r.>l ']O~C:Sico?:'Jy
o:>CGU~
c _<:. II c
Gad?mc.:m
-IJ
0 0~
CX>::D '"'" !'" 'Y' tJ c ~, c 'Y' ::r.>mCc
(I)() c:ro?: C GS I QI~O) CC:SdGO I
L l L L
0
9'"
o 0
o c
romo:>~(J)
c
. rorocro c Be c o o c o oc
c~?:~~m 0: ~Gro-:>c: 0:Q'=lGo~~~ 11
oc c o
o:>G::D-:>
L C:.L J C..:.LL L-1 oC oL
1:::::: c r,::c ~ o o c c ' o oc c c o
ro~roGepc:t:lc:c;p~J-:>:ro'l m 1 ~:m adq(;;J~qc '=~~0?~ ro~~.;;.J'to:>~2roL
6 e e o c oc A\ o r,;:c 'Y' c .lt ce
~o:>'JGo:>:'=l C''J'l~Cif 9o~c:~ co-:>:~~.JtJ<? G$1 C>J~ ro-:>: rom~L:oJm~:
c c 1:::::: c 0 A\ 0 ' 0 0 oc c 0 c "~'1:-: 0 c
;>4>;>-:>G4>9r roG~-:>c:~~~~ <X?O?~ ~:9oomc:'=l1]o:>C?Oi G~tt:l~Go::n211
or,:c C' Q c 0 <.' C' 0 A\ Q 0 0
'Qt;fi Gad?o:l<i):m e:::r.>Gro:::n~ cqrou~::D?C>Ofcq~GO:~~'J']~~

C'OC'~ ' C' C'~ C' C' (' C' C' 0 C'
e~oooc:
-l L
~ro-:>:::n1 oomrom Gro?:::omoxn~-:> '=1-:>:o:>c:o:>:-no:xJroo:>-:><:::n-:>
liJ C.:.J J A C L L
f~ C' G ~ 1:-: C 0 C' o C' A\ C' hC 0 ('~ C'
tJ?:ro~:l e:::n<:ro:<:~~~r:J; ~ro~ GOOCOQ)C;:yG9?C:GJCX>?:t:Jc:rq ~JCP~c:
. (' r,: ' r,~ o . C' o c ~ C' c _c (' c A\
m<P2~DLGo:>:::r.>t ro~Q~~t:l:~<Jo~c:~oo?:~;;~sGo~ u ~r' :Dmo:>S~
. C' C'
Gro(I)O):;Gc:oc:C>J <'c:m0 ~ooc:c
0<' oO('~
ac C~'
roro::n QOJICC ro~:t
<' o 0 C C
c.:o:>o:>co:>.c: .
-[ ll l l o L C. L o JJ C 1J L 6
c:
CO?:o:>:i1GCI)(I):;()O<.l)GC
' C'
!"> j"''O ffi
0 0 .
ad(X)QO)o:>:e>
0
GS I Ql~ad?:l
0 ..,. ('
COO)CI
C'~
13. 6 t. \"""' ..) l II. -L lJ L :'1
0 C' 0<' 0 ~ ('~gj
C' oc 0~ C' c _<:. 11
ooo:G~:::r.>l
'
roo:>oom
ll Jl l
oo:'
l
o:JCI
0
:"1
:o:>:::oo:JcGro?::
U L
:;oc:c
l o
oo?:Qso:>cGo<:n
-IT o
. 0 ' 0 0 c 0 .
u:>C>co(X>::nroc:c
. t,.toot.. L , o
~
. '
~co-:>:::nt Gro?cQm ('
~
C' C' c
~c~ro-:>: c
o
C' 0
s:roc~ro
, IJ L
OOOJ(I)(J)
c C'~
o 0 G .~ ('G <' ~ C' 0 r,;: C' hC
q;l~OO),'f=ot e:o:>GSJ:ro?:l rorot.ll:oJm~I?:t~Pt1c:q J.j~G0:::D~SI Gro?ro
C:
o
'i):<J?_ G&pOJ~ ..q
c c ~f~OO'JOOOCJ?
c o o c: (c) c o 'l. c: (c) (:;:>)'
E> ~fGOOSOI~E> E>
o o c
C'
~C~:~C
t'. . C' e <' !;\ o e <' r,: <7~ c r;:
QJ':fCDCX>?:~~ OO~:E>')CG'J: eoG0\{0091 g)18d1(<"q 0'J C~:ljo:>t:JC:I)l
C' C' c (' c c
o:>~9i(~y::D iGOOJ?~~:J?(J)GU II
9
C:CY)GS'3:
" That which is sold in a judicial sale of this kind can be 1S
nothing but the property attached, and that property is con- GsT;)J4S o1 J"
elusively described is and by the schedule to which the
attachment refers.
If by mistake the wrong property was attached and an
order made to sell it, the only course open to the decree-
holders on the discovery of the mistake was to commence
the proceedings over again. They could not turn an authority
to sell one property into an authority to sell an another and
a different one."
..
e:::r.>GOOl
" All that the one has gained . and all that the other has sl
J
lost is due to the agency of the Court and, therefore, no G3TO>J~ o1 j 11
injustice is done in restoring the party wrongfully dispossess-
ed without stopping to investigate the rights of the party
who has thereby gained the possession. He is in no worse
position after his being put out by the Court than he would
have been if the Court had never acted and the Court
cannot, without putting him out, undo its own wrong."
A; o t;;: C' C' C' o C'O C' 0 C'
0?t::U ~:[jo:>~J(1)(1)J GCO:>ro~roJro~::D2Uj> ~9G0~211
or; c ~ c ~ . c o c ~o c ~ ( ) Q C' c
CQt;jCI ~9 4>f0 ~~J':>: ~::. o:lOJOffS ~mr,_:o 9<1tJJ?: j ~CCX{:qc -
" The rule that a bop.a tide purchaser at a sale held under
a Court's decree or order which is subsequently reversed is
not affected by the reversal and the remedy by way of
restitution does not lie against him, has no application to
cases where through a mistake or material irregularity of
the Court the property has been sold, such as when one
property has been attached and another has been sold or
where the property is sold on the one date whereas it ought
to have been sold on another date. In such cases restitution
is ordered not strictly under section 144 but under the
inherent powe;rs of the Court under section 151, Civil Pro-
cedure Code."
A; r.;: c c c C' c r: 'l cr; <: . c o c~
U?t~ ~:erooo:>:~Jrororo2:1 roooroG:n:>t:JoJ oocr:~cqfO~Jro~ Gro?ro~
J1 C..:.-1. (.p::rx:lGO'.J~
rouoS8.:t>::&n C !I
1L-- ~J
o ?c>I
0;1G::D. "L:'
G::mt:J~O)~c GOJ::r.>?:tJ?: ~~9<1~J?: ~c;c c~
OOo:>S fOOc c)
( o:>
tJ?9o19 o19il~J?: (?) ~9gc4:0lt-

" It would be inequitable and contrary to justice that . the
judgment-debtor should be restored to his _property without
making good to the auction-purchaser the moneys which have
been applied for his benefit."
A; r.;: c <: . <: c r,;:c c o
U?t~~:tlrooo:>:~Jros:l91 . axp:"lJro~tCf'R:> tloo~;;1 roU[~oxp:~
Q c c o c c c .<:: c r.;::c r: c oc o
2~~~mro:>:J _ GCDCDrocGcpc:~JOfro::D~ <pet~~:[jOOO)~ Gr:J~<?ro~q
(9) ~ j\)1 ~~oS \'0~ CroJ)II

oc c: c: ~
(j ) GOO~CSn'j :>e?( '-19'j00 ~9 11
u@ccbio~
.:>
t.occcc:coorewrecohl:ee
o.:> .:> .:>~
lb:tc~ll:oc~wro
~ .:>
w(8[
.:>o o
~CCCCX\)eB 1bf~c I~CeGI;?~IeB~ uobr SOCC(()(\)eB UC II~C soccmcoes
oc) :cP~:C:o:)b e .:> :::J
::)c:ED]~<Phl@~~~~cnoee:)COC:Oco~
.:> .......... .:>~.:> o .:> .:> ' .:>
ICCC~CCfuiG:o~COCueBCWeB CC~ II g:)Ct:;J~0hl@~co~:thco :)lf:o@fu
eo ~ .:> o o .:> ~ .:>~~b . .:> e
w:l!> IG:o~cnwrocwro :cro&cnoC:ec:oroe> 1wPcoco:)c.t;e>6)tte> 1cc1IJ~d~l
'5' .:> . .:> ' .:> '1. .:> e ' ~ .:>:::.L
:tc~Pwc4wro
.:> .:> o
I:CCcoccce:c0:20::)tt~<Xl
.:> .:> .::> .:> .:>
w:C:o:)b0
o .::> e,
(c) .:c.rC'IesiO 6.o6c.ft
1.. el.. ,
(cc) .)
co41GCOC.O .;)~~ 8C. rftWIO 8C.C'I8CCCrO$ IWC.CO~COCO:chco COCCWC:OeB
v cb .) hl," .),. 1 ..-,
(.;
rn n
.;) .:l
hl, , 1r Q , , Qll
.;)
i'JCO so~:~~g::> II sccc:coosoftlesoleso~=~ mg~=s:::JSO~g::> ff':5:::Jcn~o

:@~o(!o::)hla:;
.:> .:>~
:C2c:o:c5Jccc~wrowr6)(0o
.:> .:> .:> o , .:>
cc'J.IJ~@coro
\ ~ .::>
wbwe:;:)&:>dnro
o e e.:>
oltofucoo
.;) .J
ohlccc~CCC.CC
.:>~
e>xhld~
.:l ~ 0
w&:)hleB
.;)~
ebre::)<b~:)COCOC:Oe>to:@go
.;) .;) 0 .;)
1;)~:i!h<bco

'Goro11Ji!ibc.Q>t.obwe:;
~.;) ~ e 0 e
flCOhl:hl~~e&ro
e &.::> ~ e1
:)&:>:C:o:)b<P~
.:l .;) eo
unoohl
::f j~
:Co:)b(j)
.:> e
(s:1)
.J
:c.Pftwlo
1..
coQ601o4o
.;, v ,
~~ oocoo4ft
.::>
, e
c.~:Co:)b\ll~cc~4b
.::> e.:> .:> .::>
:c0:20
:J
Jchcc:oroe>t!\'cocc
;)
h>:dft:ooob1IJ:cwro:wro:l!>wc.ro~
~ 0 0.) o.,)
ur Lo ~re1st:>
r
s~
:eseJcc:2
e
S.DIOdtrd MV1 VJAn:IOH 89!.

2::J:JGcr:>:
c
~c
G!ll~lu1 Jll
2::nGs;;t
t.8
J
~sr~J~ u1 jll
n.)cob, ,
of ron;:>~
: ;
Csflc ~ :!~J
tLL Sl.'tlOdffil M V1 VW'tlfla

n(~)~c~n
u:x:.rro~coce~:2 u 11 cu~eck:dscoe&ec
.) 0
.> " o e
S~1IOdffii M.V1 VW~flH zu.

ooo:Cbro @cc:oQ~nlreA~e.smcob &b:J u@ccln~nlPMcx:o wnlPec. o .J o :>
~cc:oc.hl~b:>re:ocb~
:> :> ~ \ :>
w:C2<k,<bC::bPero
o .J :>;j :>
&oo~wc.
Oo e :>
~~:hl~b&b:l
e'Jo o o
II C2ccl ()
:> 1,;
~b&e <bt:::le.s&:~a:d:soo:cbco H~f)cc:o!:> &:Xxod~ <Xlcc:~f)A IS~
o o :>~ o 0 :>o :> :> y-e :> :> .JO:> :> Et:loo...t;
u:>@cccococ!Eo~
, :>
tnl(d:oof)Jf;\t>hlw'
1,; :>o:> ~:>~:>
o
cce.s ~~~coc4~
:> :>
ccccnbco2c@3n
:> :> :> o
ccce~~~~t:::l:tJmhlwPn
;;>~ &h ~:>
~l-:ico:::l4<:o
,. ~
u1noboA:cbco
"':>o:>
:C2coo~oc4e~
:> 0 :> :>
0
C2cc
:>
nlPec<b::>IC>eJet:l
:> :>I,;
ccce~ooA:cbro.
:>
&eoto
0 \ 0
ucccclnemhlwrnoof):Cbcooowco~
:> 1,; \.J ~:> :> :>
0
:@roC2cc:or:IM:::>IO~ tcCBXC w:<Xl&n5ceco(L)(.Il)gto ~cr:;Je~& II <XlccrnOihl

:> :> :> :::), o :> l,; o :> o :> :> e .J :::::1 o :> l,; :> ;j
5c~e~ccce~ooA:cbco <Xlccnlrec<b:ocbe~e.sf)5n ccce~e:oo:ochle~b:>&oogw

:>::::3 :> :> :> :> '1. .J~\oe
<D:~Af) I(l~ CCCeJte5C ~eJ('()CCel Ill Oe~~~e:::>beOb:::>O:cbco to:@goCo
0.:Joo..t. :> o :> :::::1 :> IJ \O :> :>o .JO:> o :> o
o :>o~oogw
e ereroccce~brne~
:> L, o :> IJ
w:@&nOIC::bPee.s
o :> :> ;j :>
61Eo:hleen1Pe
:> e'Jo .J nlrec~
:>
:,:>roe~e.s (e) co~e.secce~wcc
viJ :> :>
&oocc<Xlccoo~
0 :>0:> e
wodcoe~cococ~~:a
:> :> 0 0
'!..{ SJ.)l:Odffil JIAV1 VW'tlfig

gccSG~Pe:~~ 1bes bC flgbo~o2soes :r=rc~e~:sa~o
~ecsoc~~ ~~g~~:5Pees S2ccrggo:rb co~~aCbco~'!.'oecn
. nOJP~Se.c~bot:loos:co:C!<D
~ .) .)~.) .)
~lo:c.PA~e.c .)4b!;blobws
... 0 0 0 0
coPebew?J-
.) 0 .) ~
:ot:l:oro:ol';oo~wc.lru~
~:~., .) .) .)
'l:owr;eooc.heo
0 .) .)
t?.cc<D:lnA&ok:~ c.<"o:c.PAAco:ll-o~obeo'h c.ccs:c.cx)&~oc.coel'lc.e.c 1beo

~ -- 0 . ) .) o .)O 0 .) .)0 .)0 .)
(r)CC AGhcso2we.c:o@.&:oc.l::ls:@;o-n
.) .) .) """' .) :.:1 .)
AGhceoawe.c
:J .) .)
:beobetc:bco
.) 0
:,oc.ooo@l::l
.) ~ ::J

( :cP~e
o
:cbcoe&ro)

~<Kc:ce
d 1..,to .:>o
M
.)
#:)~re:g
~~&:dxo 'rt'l~sct'l~COSOlce .)olPe:h.ll:bdxo
o:::J
9L.!.,
si~Odtru M Y1 y_w'tlflg
~ ... . 11 u.)w&>w:C:roo:cbcoe&ea
..; . -- . 0
ualcc:4rd@bto~
.> .:> .:> o o
- (c0c)
.
o0c t4c.o~dW:nbc.es
.> ,.,
10~
.>o
Jes5 uc:raec~oroc.cooce
- e
M -~ ~ ~
:c.rae&~oroc.coccolP
-- t..: .)
ub~o

rcobcetld~c
.>
Jbc.es
~
1o"l:s
.)0
res5 1c o:c.4wac.ooc.flch
t..: 0 0 ~
o~ .c
.)
mc.4wtchcocc
l, o
_ uobf 1cobce
\. .:>
~~ ~!;\Ctlc tbc.ro
.>
1~
.>o
leG5 ncc:~chhw
e o
Of roc.au4
.) .J
uCol.'i~
Joobst'l
.>
JQC~C
~
1bc.ro
..)
10hJ
.)0
1es5 uc.rflwO'fccobc.GC:.C0465G
.) e.). e
o-f
..)
C IOGCOGCObl!ce
t.t O.)
ua:!eccelbtoo!<t .) .)
f>W(u4bo!Joce:c.~:2G
~ o "' .):::b .>
iGioJh:h1:2rcoo~
S"oo C{j .> :>
o~@ccocce@ccacc
.> .> .> ..) ..)
4b:oe oto:c.feoec.ccoocc
.> ..) ..)
c.cc5k:oc.coe
0 .)
o(!.o:c.rt'l~ro
.)
J oooo@~o!Joce:c.@:2G
.) .> .J:::J.) .)
S'.:> .;) .) .) .)0~ u@cco~)J
ll'wcccooo~@cco~m~'~ .) .>6~
ao!Jecoroto:cPe&sc.ccek~ 4b~btobcoccorekco;t co:c.re:; cbokcocc o&,:c.~
.;)~o.) 0 0 \. .) 0 0 6 6.) 0 .) ~ .)0 .) .> 0
~eccck~
.:> O\
,l;a: fb ech
.>
coo2coro
.>
oec.cccocc:c.!J:ccn
,., ,., ~e
ucoreoot:l:l:eaooo
.J ,.,:J .>
u@ccdcoto:4rd@bh>1:D
.) .) 0 .) .) 0 0
dbf lc.occcnroro rbbtlc .J
b
l., C.eG ~~~ , leGe n:c:.sawt,n
~ 4" ., ,:c.r._l'IWLOC.ACOC.
$C:OGC05c:..,~;o~ ~12 ,. ~.IG5GCCWC:OC.1:'
"'' ;
uutlf ,cr (!oro r:kob<J> :c.~cococo . ~co4acoPuc.4tc o~ c.o~ccobc.ec.cc
\ .) 0 0 O.> . 0 ..) .) OO.)
..
n&tlb rcobse
..)
..>~~~ cbtlc Jbcec
.) .#.
Jo"l:s
.)0 .
leGe n:c.Paw ..)
M' chc.4\>ebecocoooo1-\chc.coiuccce
- .) .) (., .
o~c.coreeGoroc.cob~
.) .) .) o.
..., , , )fJ Q' o 1:
1; o n , rr
_?C.W5:Jco:J sococpcroe fjJcp3es
IISCCCJ~SJCO~:~:::J?f~103CO
r v-,,
TI , ft , ,., @
_rc12eecsccc:~:~roS'ec:~ cl'lo:c. e%-":~ccceg::~., cc:5
!:> (
<~P!~ l!:llll pnop ?
)
olb:>do')(Jwt;ecodees
.;J ;, ~.) .,
'b:~:~c->W:~
'5' 0 .) - .)
c.oo:de~m:l:; cococ.coeco:Bcd!c:c.l:l~
6~ 0 . f' 0 ::1 0
.:J
obko~~::>!:> oc.esebel'l:o!:l~~:cbco&k wl!de:oc:be:@go oc.t:ijoccceCPt:l~ .

~ .>o .:>o ~- ~ .:> ., ~o ' o o .> .> .> :=:1 ,) ;jo
i1 C2cco5o~JlJ::>QI:e~:c:bco
., .>o:J .l~o \
4bt;6J::>bc.cc~:~och:>5
,:,0 .)..) 0~,)
cotoe&
.) 0
J:o!:>ccc~tobe:~:@goc.ccefumo
.).,} 0
1:c.es&
0,) ,)
n .1 ...,., ] 1r oeoceooccJe::>oo5:
n: rr
co::>C.colel:le
le:oro~:.:c<J>o:>ro:>etXC
o , , 11 n , .1_ @'"
O>o o
oco:cr,t'l:@'"O>OC.cceco
11
.:J .> :J ,\.co
o :J o .:> ..>o .)0 .:J .J .> .J ,
coo::>Sco&&coo:@~o
.;) .> .) .,
oi!:oc.ccOc.~~c.cce~-el;
.> .:> ~ o
(ar~q
.JO AlUSlll!M.) c.cce&k ., .
o o-
11 @~o~bk
., o
tn@cc:cceb\; (,{pado~d "~ ~~ uoqsj~.I ur)..:hi
.> o O'J
:2rcoo~o~:c.re:@ao
.) .) .) .)
e2ccco~re:ocb5@cc
.) .) 0 ..) .)
(<~f~Il
.
JO AltlJ1ll8M.) oeobeoh e2cc:c.oolb
.) ,:,6~ .>0 . .>
4oc.coe~c.es

C.cce&k
0 0
r'b<J>t:J46celbtn@cc:cc~4~\;
~,):b ..) . 0
(apq
.
jO AlU8l.l1l.~) oeol:ebb
.) .)0 .)Q
~cc5:c.oo&.<joc.coeec.es
J
:R:::IrcoooM:cPei@oo
&J~ ,) .) .) .)~ccco~re::>cbe
.) 0 .)
o'Co~:o!:>
.) 0.)
rbes
-
.'!;' :c.rl'l:ko6~ o>tcore:.l.c.5hl (f) CC t'lG0Ceo2coes:okJ:oc.hleb:>:@oo s@ro:dilc.cce
., e .:> .J
:c.&;O>t:Jc.cC.co~~e
.>:J\ 0
J ~
(dtqSJaUMo)
'
e2ccokoh
.J
" .:> .)~.) ~ ' .) .>
o(!.o:cP(;,:@&occceco~re::>cbe
.)0 j(j .) .) .:J 0 .)
:::1.>
~oo:o!:>
.JO .)

S.DIOdffil M V1 VW"llilH
78() BURMA LAW REPORTS
0 . - .. . c
t~~:Grop
~g .
e;:l)~r~l r 1; 0 ( ~) .~ c "' . ~ ~ ~.
"{'}<X>? o:> O~G~Jo:>?t<? G::n~OIO??~![O?Cro0?~90~f?~ ~~ !nYJ?:
(::i) -~~~:of--
.. Section 42 does not require that the pliin~iff should haye
a right in the property which is the subj~ct7matter of the
suit. Any rigbt as to aiJ.y property referred to in S. 42 is
not any right in the property. An agreement to sell i~
favour of a person gives him a r,iyh,t as to or in -relation to the
property which is the subject of the agreement."
~ r,;: c r,;:c G r;:: c c c c c r;:,_ c
q~~:l:jmo::)':n::Dtl<?l ::D:t:::l:>: ::Dro::n:>~<? ~ro2uGn t?n~ <tJ ~c t:lli-~:
ro?:::n~ (Right as to any property) ~ ~::n~~:> (Right in the

property) ~~d>JJ (Right ~s to, or in relation to the property)
~ r,;:c r,:;;::: c "1" c c o c
q~ tiiDGt,~pc: GOI ~C::D~~ ~'JGO~~ II
c c ' r,: ' r;:::c c c c

CXX!Ifl o~~:"tGtl:>c:t:::lc: ~roeoGe <lnG ~~ ~e-
.. In the absence of a contract to the contrary, the buyer

and the seller of immoveable property respectively are sub-
ject to the liabilities. and have the rights, mentioned in the
rules next foliowing, or such of them as are applicable to
the property sold;

(2) The seller shall be .!leemed to co:qtract with the buyer
that the interest whi<;h the seller professes to transfer to the
__buyer subsists and that he h~s power. to transfer the sam."
~~~ ~~:>:cm:QJos,~ : ID<S.roJ2:~'. ::n;;c?~~~~~~~

(J) .~9~~=~~- . . ..
""In th~ absence of ~y contract to the contrary, th~re is
un9er section '55 sub-seetion 2 of the TranSfer o( Property
Act, an implied ~ovenant ~oi title on the part of tbe .venqor,"
.~- .:- '.: :: "\

BURMA LAW REPORTS 78t'
" In dealing with the declaratory suits, the Courts'. have in

recent years laid s.treSs not so mu~h on tbe qilestio~ o tlieii"
I I
(?) ~:g:-9")-:xll oe79 1 ~~-J9?.11 , I
1.-\
(<f) c;;:g1#1:g")91 oer~l i.lsc{ar~jl
maintainability as that 91! propriety and utility of question-

ing relief by way of declaration."
O?t~' ::q:~o5oo:>:OJ~8, . ;;o~::~~ 1~ ~~~![:o3: (j) ~9t~:~t-

.. In dealing with a declaratory suit stress is not to be
laid so ll).uch on the question of its. maintainability as on
that of the propriety and utility of granting relief by way
of declaration. It is therefore, not a question of a Court
. having power to grant a declaration in the sense of its having-
jurisdiction or not, or whether such. a suit for declaration;
was maintainable, but it is the exercise of discretion by a
Court and whether the exercise of discretion is necessary
in order 'to set at rest any doubtful claims and to see that
the exerc\!ie of discretion is not futile but useful so as .tO>
declare ti:l~: ;iights of parties."
:.... ~
,A; or,;: C: . r,;:c: G h C: C: C: C: \ 0

O(t9J 8;lroeoo:3 '{OCJ 9J !);)'P ~Oll
;;q:ljmoo:>:OJtl~' OJ:t::l:>:OJroOJ:>~
C: C: C G C: OC:
G 0 0 C o\ 0 . ~ c; . 0
OJ2l !);)~CJp:~l OJroaqcq>~:CJp:rol ~ro:;:q;;uro oOX]q 9~9;;1 ~aqGOJ:>
c: oC: . ~oc:
~l.lf
0
~ggJ:>:m C\J('})Q c:
L ..
c
~COJOJI
ll C.:,
g~oc c: c: c: c~ c: c-
~COJOJ~C ()())OJ()) I (!):>:(!>:>: :;:oc
Lt" C:,Jo t::,
r::;:c: c c: . c: c 0 c c: 0 c: c:
ElcOJe:;<;OroJ !);)~CJJ?:~ Gmx:;;qGOJ:> OJroOJ:>~~CJJ"):q Go:9;; OJ~.
C' c c: c c: c: r,~ oqA; c: c:r:::c: c: 0 c: c:
OJ2:;1 <JOJ<;iOJ~~<;; . OOCOJ2:C:J:I '{'aJ . Q)egQ)")::;:oceJC9'f "1~00J8~
- c: r,;: c: c:
\lil:;:o9f ljQ)G()OJ~ II
a3<Jmo1:J
lJ
:rirooo:>:~.s::~:
lf
o1 o ~8 m~::~ro::~~~s::~:
J o T G lI
o1 o (tS) ~Qtro::
1 L
~ ~6~:~~1 ~ro?ro:>~ or!:p(,)J::l& 1~ GOgro?oS o1 OO~J::ll ( ?_)

9 (' 0 . C'
G?~c<Xl:~c-
.-
" There is difference between 4 suit for the cancellation

of an instrument and one for a declaration that the instru-
ment -is not binding on the plaintiff. When the plaintiff.
seeks to esta~lish .~ title in himself and c;:annot. establish that
title without .~;emoving ~m insuperable ob?tacle such as a
decree or .a deed to whkh he has been a party or by whi~h
he .is otherwise bound, then quite dearly he mus~ get -that
... . decree
. . or deed
: . . cancelled
. . : .. void.. in toto,.. and
or declared . his ~
c . .
~$~~ J9~"
c
~$90':1 -- oe<7 1!..
~pOXD.f : ~o J0<:)) u _
suit is in substance a suit ~or the cancellation of the decree
or deed notwithstanding the fact that the suit may have
been framed as a suit for a declaration. On the other hand,
when the plaintiff is seeking to establish a title and finds
himself threatened by a decree or a transaction between
:third parties, he is not in a position to get that decree or
deed cancelled in toto. The proper remedy it). such a case
is to get a declaration that the decree or deed is invalid so
far as he himself is concerned, and, therefore, he may sue
for a declaration to that effect and not for the cancellation
of the decree or the deed."
"To grant relief was discretionary with the Court. and

unJess that discretion is not judicially exercised, there ought
7S4 -BURMA LAW REPORTS
. to be no interference by a superior Court in regarcf to the
exercise ~ of j~isdiction." t~:
mg;-oogr;;:o$oo'
-u.~ ~ l. t'J
Jgo:>r.:, 'i-A'a: s;J(J)~:::J)d)c.')s
~: t'fo b.JJ"il tl
~agro-
cl T L1! .
"Although the plaintiffs had sold the property to

U Maung U, yet -they were expressly and impliediy:..'Iiable
.on their warranty of title. Accordingly they :had a : :locus
standi to file a suit under section 42 of the SpeCific Act, to
remove any cloud cast on their title_." ~.
_;-:;
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION

Btfwe Dr. li1aung Matmg, C.J., U Chit and U Se11 Thinn, JJ.
.ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. c.c.

BURMA (APPLICt.NT) zg6s
Oct. 8.
v.
MESSRS. BURMA TRADE FEDERATION LTD.
(RESPONDENT).*
Burma / ncome-t.a.'\' Act-uhtther $. I 5 C applies to tlte facts and circumstances-

qutstivn of fact and ljl!tstion of lazu
The respondent Mc:;sr~. Burma Trade Federation Ltd. had various

sources of income including those from the manufacture of wnbrellas and
the ~:mufscture of umbrella component parts. The Company claimed and
was granted by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-ta.'C (appeals) an
exemption allowance from tax under s. 15 C or the Income-tax Act for the
assessment year 1958-59 on the ground that it had made an outlay to set up
a plant for the manuf.1ctuce of component parts which it had pr.!vio~sly
imported from abroad and assembled in Burma.
The Income-tax Department raised objection to the grant of the allowance.
Held : When the proper legai effect of a proved fact need to be weighed
a question of law comes in. but when the facts speak for themselves 2nd do
not call for the assist~~ncc of legal princiP.\f.s and interpretation, th~ facts cannot
be converted by force of imagination a!oTie into question~ of law. The only
questio~ which w2.s before the Appellate Tribunal in considering the assesste
Company's claim to an exemption allowance was whether the Company had
started a new industriai venture. The finding that i t had was one of f11ct,
arriv~d at after examination of the evidence.
Sree Meenakslli Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of lnccme-ta:c, Madras. (1957)
31 I.T.R. p. 28, referred to.
U Ba Kyaw (Assist~nt-Attorney-General) for the -applicant.
U Paing for t.he resppndent.
DR~ MAUNG MAUNG, C. J.-This and Civil Miscellaneous:

.Application No. 10 of 1965 have been heard together on
request of learned co.unsel ~or 'f?oth sides. The facts and.
-circumstances involved in the two applications are shnilar,.
only the assessment year being different.
* Civil Misc. Application No. 9 of 1965.
55
c.c. The respondent Messrs. Burma Trade F~deration Ltd.

1965
had various sources of income including those from the
.i\DDlTIONAL
COMMISSIO- manufacture of umbrellas and the manufacture of
~ER OF !N-
.COMB-TAX,
umbrella component parts. The Company claimed and
Burma was granted by the Assista11t Commissioner of Income-tax
e~.
:MESSRS. (Appeals) an exemption allowance from tax under section
BURMA
TRADE I5C of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1958-
FEDER.\TION
LTD.
59 on the ground that it had made an outlay to set up a
plant for the manufacture of component parts which it
had previously imported from abroad and assembled H1
Burma.
TI1e Income-t ax Department raised objection to the
grant of the allowance, saying that the Company already
had an umbrella manufacturing plant and the " new plant "
was in fact a splitting up or the r~construction of the old,
so that sub-section (2) of section .rsc would come into
play to deny the Company an exemption from taX. This
objection .was heard and rejected by the learned Assistant
Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who went irito the
facts carefully and found that the Company had invested
_large.sums in installing machinery and training technicians
to make component parts of umbrellas which it had
imported from abroad. The objection was agaln taken
pefore the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal which came to
the sam~ finding. The learned Tr~bunal pointed out that
ther~ was a new industrial undertaking, not merely a
. reconstruction of a business alr~ady in existence.' It also
. took the view that the Government had probably wanted
to encourage industry and the . exemptions from ta:x to
.new industrial enterprises were granted as incentive. The
n~w plant installed by the Company must also have helped
to save. the country's
. foreign exchange.
The ~ncomC:.tax J?epartment applied to the Appellate
Tribunal for a statement of case to this Court to pose the
:question ali to whether the provisions of section r 5C of
BUR,~~ LAW REPORTS 787
the ~urma Income-tax Act would apply to the facts and
circumstances of the case. The Tribunal rejected the
. .
app11canon, agam . t h at as t h e f act t h at t }1e .-\DDlTIONAL
. tak'mg t l1e v1ew co:.1Miss1o-
Company had put up a new industrial undertaking was NER oT' IN-
coMl!-T"x,
dearly proved no question of law arose for reference. Burma
v.
U Ba Kyaw, the learned Assistant Attorney-General, ~~s;;:;,
submits that the question of law does arise, for an inference T~AoE
. fEDE RATION
would need to be drawn from the facts as found, and th1s LTD.
involved the application of relevant principles of law. He

invites our attention to Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. Com-
missioner of Income-tax, Madras (1).
U Paing. learned Advocate for the respondent, argues
that the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)
and the Appellate Tribunal have come to the same
conclusion as regards the admissibility of the assessee
Company's claim to exemption under section I5C on a
concurrent finding of facts. The simple .question of fact
which the appellate authorities had to examine was
whether or not there had been a new industrial under-
taking. On the evidence adduced they had given an
affirmative answer, and the Company's claim fell neatly
within the ambit of rsc. Citing a host of rulings, U Paing
points out that the Chief Court does not disturb findings
of facts made by the Appellate Tribunal unless they are
unjudicial, capricious or perverse. A question of fact can
become a question of law only if an inference has to be
drawn from the proved facts involving the application of
legal principles.
Of course, when the pr9per legal effect of a proved
-fact needs to be weighed a question of law comes in, but
when the facts speak for themselves and do not call for
the assistance of legal principles and interpretation, the
facts cannot be converted by force of imagination alone
into questions of law. Here the only question which was
(r) (1957) 31 I.T.R. p.z8.
788 BURfviA LAW REPORTS
c.c. before the Appellate Tribunal in considering the assessee

1965
Company's claim to an exemption allowance waswhether
ADl>niONAL
COMMISSIO- the Company had started a new industrial venture. The
NER OF !X-
COME-TAX,
finding that it had was one of fact, arrived at after
BURMA examination of the evidence. We fail to see how this.
"
MSSSRS.
BURMt\
finding of fact can be turned into a question of law fit for
TRADE reference to this Court.
.FEDEMTION
LTD We would therefore dismiss the. application which is.
before us.
CIVIL REFERENCE
Rejorl Dr. Maung2Maung, C.j., U Kyaw Za11 U, and U Chit, JJ.
ALI HASHIM MEHTAR AND OTHERS (APPLIC..<\.l'ITS) c.c.

1965
v. Sept. 7
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BURMA,

RANGOON (RESPONDE~.*
Refe;ence against the ordH- of the Jncome-ta.v: Appellate Tribunal-'lohether
the income of the applica111s constitutes income from the business-whether
the assessment be made as a11 association of persons.
The assessees were trcin::as of Yenangyaung. They were assessed to
income-tax individually under the head of" business". For the year 1961-62
they were assessed as an " association of persons ". They contended that
:the assessment shouid have been made und~r the head " property" nnd the
'tax imposed on them individually inste::Hi of collectively.
The Income-tax~Appellate Tribunal has put the following two questions : -
(a) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the case the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the income of the applicants
'from the oil-wells constituted income from the business ?
(b) Whether there was material or evidence on the record for the Tribunal
to come to the conclusion that the applicants who had all along been assessed
individually constituted an association of per.~ons for the purposes of
assessment for the assessment year 196r-6z?
The answer to the first question is in the affirmative. Even though one
-of the heirs may have managed the oil-wells while the other heirs take no active
part in the extractive business, the nature and the chat,lcter of the op.eration
still remains that of a business. It is true that profits which were gained
from the oil-wells flow really out of the. land in which the oil-wells are situated,
but the oil-wells by themselves do not yield tbe profits. Manual labour
and machinery have to be put to work to extract the oil which must be put
tl!{ough various pro~.:e.sses culminating in the winning of <Profits. Here, the
heus. themselv.::s, thr<?Wth ,9nc ,of ..their co-heirs, have managed an.d operated
the oil-wells, and g.ivided the profits.among themselves an active carrying on
-of business, rather than acquiring gain by a merely passive ownership of pro-
perty:
The finding that the oil-wells cons~itute a business and ~ot property for
purposes of taxation paves the path for an answer to the 2nd question. The
co-heirs have sha~e~ mutual rights and obligations in the business, the risks
-of los..~ and the prospects of gain through. the yeats. They may. not have
combined in a formal assoc~ation as a partnership firm but the fact rem~s
* Civil Reference No. 59 of 1964 against the order of the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal of Rangoon in Civil Appeal No. 57 of 1963.
790 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965.
c.c. that they stand in the business not as individuals ],~t collectively. Therefore
1965 the answer is in the affirmative.
ALI HASHIM In l'<! The Kaladan Sooratee Bazaar Company Ltd., Moulmen, xo L .B.
lVlllHTAR ANDR. 309 ; The Commissioner of Income-ta.-.;, Burma v. Suratee Bazaar
o_THERS Compcmy Ltd., 9 Ran. x54- ; Km{!htsdale Estates v. The Commissio11.er of
v.
THE CoM- lncorne-ta:.:, (1955) z8 I.T.R. 6so, referred to.
MISSIONER OF Lahore Ice Factodes Associati<m v. Commis1icmer cf Jncf'lme-ta.JC, A.J.R ..
lNCOMET.~X, Cr935) Lah. roo, distinguished.
BURMA,
lt\NGOOX.
U Ngyi Peik for the applicants.

U Ba Kyaw (Assistant Attorney-General) for the respon-
dent.
DR. MAUNG MAUNG, C.J .-The Income-tax Appellate

Tribunal has put the following two questions to us :
(a) Whether upon the facts and circumstances of the
case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was
right in law in holding that the income of the
applicants from the oil-wells constituted
income from business ?
(b) Whether there was material or evidence on the
record for the tribunal to come to the conclu-
sion that the applicants who had all. along beeri
assessed individually constituted an association
of persons for the purpose of assessment for
the assessment year r96r-62 ?
The assessees, Ali Ha5him Mehtar and others, were

twinzas of Yenangyaung. For many years they were
assessed to income-tax .ind?-vidually under the head
" business ~. They made no protests then. For the year
1961-62, however, the Income-tax Officer, Magwe-Minbu
circle, -yenangyaung, assessed theQJ. ' as an " association of
person's " ~nd this drew vehement protests fro,n them.
They did not have any quarrel regarding the quantum of
income foun'd for taxation, but contended that the assess-
ment should have been made under the head "property;.
and the tax imnosed on assessees individually instead of c.c.
' 1965
collecnvely. The assessees have gone on appeal to the -=
.
Ass1stant commiSsioner
. . of Income-tax (Appea1s), Nort11ern MEIITAR
ALl HASHIM:
AND
Range, i\:fandalay. and to the Income-tax Appellate Tri- oTHE'RS

v.
bunal but without success. THE CoM-
MrssroNE.R oF
U Ngyi Peik, learned Advocate for the assessees. sub- lNCOMB-TAX,
BURMA,
. mits that the oil-wells belonging to the twinzas have always RANGOO"'.
been regarded as ancestral property and the oil-wells
in question fall in an area which has been marked off as
beyond the pale of State authority. U Ngyi Peik takes us
on an historical excursion on this subject by referring
us to an order passed by Mr. H. P. Todd-Naylor, Financial
Commissioner of Burma, in Revenue Revision Case No. 7
of I9<>9 There the Financial Commissioner, after dis-
cussing the status of twinzayos and twinzas of Yenan-
gyaung, came to the conclusion that an area of land in
the T\1\ingon and Berne reserves which had been allotted
to twinzas and twinzayos was not State land so that a
claim to a site on the reserves was not on~ cognizable by
the Revenue Courts. It was pointed out in the order
passed by Mr. Todd-Naylor that the hereditary twinzayos
held their rights under certain restrictions, such as that
on the right of transfer to anyone by a twinzayo, and
prohibition of the use of improved machinery except by
pe~mission of the Chief Commi:;sioner.
The order which U ,Ngyi Peik has dug up from the

archives for .our benefit confines itself to the narrow ques-
as
tion to whether land allotted to the twinzas fell within
the jurisdiction of the Revenue Courts. U Ngyi Peik does
not explain how land allotted to the twinzas on condition
that transfer could only be made to twinzas has come into
the hands of the assessees. Nqr can U Ngyi Peik describe
the status of the twinzas. and their sites in later years and
after Burma's independence under a constitution which
expressly declares that " all land belongs to the State "
c.c. vide section 30. In any case whether the oil-wells are
1965
bobwabaing, as U Ngyi Peik submits they are, or whether
~a!.l~s:~ they have ceased to be such bobwabaing, is <:>f little rele-
o~s vance to the question whether income from the oil-wells
THE CoM- should be classified as income from business or as income
MiSSIONEit OF .
INcoME-TAx, from property. That U Ngyi Peik concedes.
BURMA,
Jt?NaooN. Next, U Ngyi Peik argues that income from the oil-
wells is clearly a benefit accruing from the land and should
therefore be regarded as income from property. To
support this contention he invites our attention to the
definition of land in section 3-A of the Land Acquisition
Act, which says that " land includes benefits to arise out
of land. and things attached to the earth or permanently
fastened to anything attached to the earth". Similarly,
U Ngyi Peik points out " immove~ble property " includes
land and benefits arising out of the Jand and things attached
to the earth, etc., within the definition of section 2 (29)
of the Burma General Clauses Act. Under section 9 (r)
of the Income-tax Act ".property " consists of any build-
ings or lands of .which an assessee ~ owner or in respect
of which he is entitled to receive rent or revenue in
money, kind or services. The "property" envisaged by
the section does not include, U Ngyi Peik stresses, " build-
ings or lands appurtenant thereto ". By way of an ill'Qstra-
tion. U Ngyi Peiksupmits that In re. The Kaladan Sooratee
Bazaar Company Ltd., Moulmein (I) the question was dis- .
cussed at length as to whether the bazaar company carried
on business when it let out houses and bazaar stalls belong-
ing to it. I( was rl,ll~d that the mere fact that the com-
pany was incorporated.un:der the Companies Act and kept
an office and a staff ofrent collectors, clerks, etc., for the
purpese. of letting out houses and collecting the rents did
not. convert the income earned by the company into one
derived from bu$mess. It was held that "the method of
(x; ro L.B.R. 309.
acquiring gain is passive by owning property and not br ?9~5

the active carrying on of a business ". In the Commis- A Ll H.~sHtM
sioner of Income-tax, Burma v. Suratee Bazaar Company MEHTAR :\NO
Ltd. (2) a Bench of the High Court, delivering opinion in oT:~RS
an income-tax reference, had occasion to decide how the ~:roN~~~;
annual value 'o f bazaar property let out in stalls should I.NcoME-T.'IX,
BURMA,
be calculated. The High Court, however, proceeded fron~ RANcooN.
the common ground that assessment of income-tax was
correctly made under section 9 of the Income-tax Act:
Here, however, we do not have a simple case of letting
out property for rent. The facts are on record that the
oil-wells are worked under the management of one of the
heirs and the net profits are divided among the heirs in the
proportion of their shares in the inheritance. Oil is ex-
tracted by employment of manual labour and machinery
and the crude oil is then put on the market. The net
profits are calculated after the transportation expenses,
taxes, wages, etc., are paid and the manager has received
his 25 per cent fee. For these reasons, U Ba Kyaw, the
learned Assistant Attorney-General, points out that all the
essential ingredients of " carrying on business " combine
in the case before us. U Ba Kyaw also submits that the
assessees had to take out a licence from the Government
to operate the oil-wells, which shows that the assessees
.are engaged in the business of extracting oil for commer-
cial purposes. U Ngyi Peik counters this by saying that
a house-owner in Rangoon would need a licence to dig a
tube-well in his compound to draw water from the depths
of the earth, but that does not make the operation a busi-
ness. We consider, however, that there is a clear
-difference between extracting oil under a mining licence
for the purpose of selling the oil, and pumping up water
that lies beneath one's compound for domestic consump-
tion. It is not even clear to us that a house-holder needs
(:z) 9 Ran. 154
c.c. a licence for operating a tube-well : all that he may need

1965
is permission from the Munic:::ipal authorities to sink the
Au HASHIM well 0
MBHTARAND
,oT~s U Ba Kyaw also refers us to Knishtsdale Estates v.

Tn:!! CoM- The Commissioner of Income-tax (3) in which it has been
MISSIONER OF
INcoM"-T.>...x, ruled that income derived from tea estates is income front
BURMA ,
RANGooN.
b. usmess. He pomts out t hat an analogy can be dr avvn
0 0
between operating tea estates and extracting oil from the

oil-wells. Organized effort is applied and the final fruits.
of the effort are put on sale.
In the light of submissions made by the learned Coun-
sel on both sides we would form an . opinion that the
aJJ.sWer to the first question put to us should be in the
affirmative. Even though one of the heirs may have
managed the oil-wells while the other heirs take no active
part in the extractive business, the nature and character-
of the operation still remains that of a business. It is true
that profits which are gained from the oil-wells flow really
out of the land in which the oil-wells are situated, but the
oil-wells by themselves do not yield the profits. Manuar
labour and machinery have to be put to work to . extract
the oil which must be put through various processes.
culminatii?-g ir~ the winning of profits. If the land and
the oil-wells have been leased o ut and the heirs sham
th~ rent it may be a diff~rent thing. Then perhaps,
the heirs may be liable ~o . taxation on the rents as.
ac<;:ruing from property while the lessee who actually
operates the oil-wells, may. be liable ~o taxation for
the income he derives from the business of extracting
oil from the land. Here, however, the heirs them-
selves, through one of their co._heirs, .have rilanage~:l and
operated the oil-wells, .and : divjded the profits among.
themselves..:....an active cariying on of busil).ess, rat4er than
acquiring gain by a merely passive ownership of property.
(3) (19.55) 28 I.T.R. 6so.
BURMA LA\V REPORTS 795
This brings us to .the second question as to whether the ~~~5

heirs have been correctly assessed as an association of per- ALl fusrm,r
sons. Our finding that the oil-wells constitute a business Mr;rrTAR ~
paves th e path oTBr,n.:;
and not prope_rty f or purposes of taxat:J.on fJ.
for an answer to this question. The co-heirs have shared ~~roN;;~;

mutuaJ rights and obligations in the business, the risks INcoMil-TAX,
BURMA,
of Joss and the prospects of gain through the years. They RANc ooN.
may not have combined in a formal association as a part-
nership firm but the fact remains that they stand in the
business not as individuals but collectively. U Ngyi Peik
in_vites our attention to Lahore Ice Factories Association
v. Commissioner of Income-tax (4) in which it has been
ruled that a firm, for the purpose of the Income-tax Act,
is a collective term for a number of persons who enter
into partnership with one another. It is true that the
assessees in this case have not joined in any formal part-
nershi'p. Th~re is, therefore, no question of their register-
ing as a firm under section 26-A of the Income-tax Act ;
which is why the Income-tax authorities have found them
to be. for taxation purposes, an association of persons
rather than a firm. U Ngyi P'eik cannot say that because
they are not a firm in name nor one registered under
section 26-A, they must invariably be regarded as indivi-
duals .for taxation purposes. The fact as found by the
Income-tax authorities is that they are not. We cannot
say that the finding of fact is without foundation. The
authorities had taxed the assessees for many years as
individuals, but that was due to an error. When the error
is discovered, it can and should be corrected, for errors are
not s~t right by repetition.
We would therefore also answer the second question
put to- us in the affir!llative.
l'Qe costs of this reference will be borne by the
assessees. Advocate fees K 170.
----------------
'<4> A.l.R. (1935) Lah. 100.
796 BURMA LA'vV REPORTS
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION

fle,fore U Sein Thinn, J.
c.c. DAW PEGGY (a} DAW TIN TIN AND oNE (APPLrCANTs)
r96s
Oct. z7. v.
DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, RANGOON AND TWO OTHERS
(R ESPO~DENTS \1 . *
Criminal Ptocedure Code s.sz6-applicationfor transfer of c.1se--whetlter cvnfron-

tatian of a witness with his previous statements to be recorded or nct.-
dis!lllOtvi,;g questions in t-ross-examinatian no ground for trfllisjer r,j case.
Helrl: It is nowhere laid down that when a prosecution witness is confron-
ted with his previous statements made to t1e police during the cow-se of the
investigation, this fact must be record.:d eithe1 in the diary of the proeeediogs
or elsewhere in .the record.
Held juyther: It has been held in many cases that the mere fact thnt
the trial Magistrate disallowed questions as irrelevant is no ground for transfer
of the case ; and that when the Magistrate in disaUo"'iog questions in cross-
examination did not make a note of the same it was held that such omission
is also not a ground for transfer of the case undet" s. sz6, of the Criminal
Procedure Code.
Abdul A.ziz v. Ganesh, zs Criminal Law Journal u8s ; Lal Bahadur v.
Emleror, 39 Criminal Law Journal $z7; Dewan Singh v. Emperor, .A.I.R.
(1940) Lalt. szS, referred to.
Mazmg Kya"u A:ve v. The Uni<m uf Burma, (1953) B.L.R. p. 1 14- {H.C.) ;
U B:J Kllin (applicant) v. The Union c,j Rurma, (1954) p .191 (H.C.j cli5til1!::-
uishe:l.
U E Maung for th.e applica~ts.
U Mauna Mauna for the.respondent No. 3
U SEIN THINN, ].-This is an application under section

526 of the CrimL11al .Procedure Code filed by the applicants
Daw Peggy (a) Daw Tin Tin and U Hla Gyaw for transf~r
of Criminai Regular Trial : No. 832 of 1965 of the 8th
Additional Magistrate, Rangoon in which t1l.ey are standing .
trial under section 420 of the Penal Code. Four out of
* Crimina~ Misc. Application No. 23 of I965. Application und..r s. sz6
-of the Criminal Procedure Code for t ansfer of the case.
BURMA LAW REPORf.S 797
five prosecution witnesses have already been examined in c.;:

~ :.
9
the case. A similar application which was dealt with by
. - DAW PEGGY
the District Magistrate in his Criminal Miscellaneous Appli- (a) DA,,.-
cation .No. 239 of 1965 met with no success. The trans- ~~~- J~~
ferhas been sou2:ht

~
on

the following grounds: .;_;,
DISTRic-T
MAGISTRATE
. (r) That in allowing some prosecution witnesses to RANGOON r
AND TWO
be confronted with the previous statements oTHE.Rs.
made to the police, the trial Magistrate failed

to record about this fact in the proceedings.
(2) That in examining two prosecution witnesses
U Hla Maung and U Than Aung, the trial
Magistrate did not record their answers fully
-especially those regarding the sale of a pair of
diamond bangles.
, )t is settled law that the main principle underlying

transfer of cases under section 526, Criminal Procedure
Code is that the accused must have a reasonable apprehen-
sionthat he will not have a fair trial. But equally settled
is the law in that it is not every kind of apprehension that
will entitle the accused to get a transfer. The apprehen-
siqn of the accused must be reasonable and that it must not
be just fanciful or imaginary. . It is therefore necessary for
n1e to determine whether the alleged apprehension enter-
tained by -the ~ccused is _based on tena.ble ground.
The fust ground put forward by the learned counsel
for the applicants may lightly be brushed aside as unrea-
so~a~le for nowhere it is laid down that when a prosecu-
tio:ii- Witness is cohfro_nted with his previous statements
made to the .police during the .course of the investigation,
this ' fact must be recorded either in the diary of the
prbteedings or elsewhere in the record. I have carefully
exaril1ned the evidence .given by the witnesses concerned
arid I find that th~ statements.
.
given by. them in connectio1:1
?9~5 with their previous statements to the police have been

-P-
DAW EGGY
recorded. This is also not denied by the learned counsel
(a) DAw for the applicants. His only grievance was that the Court
T1::0 ~::S should have made a n~te about this in the record of tl'le
Drs~iucT case. I do not however find any necessity for doing so,
MAGisTRATE, although it is the practice with some Courts to record
R,\NGOON
AND Two about this either in the diary of the record or in the
oT.HERs. deposition of the witness concerned. Even though the
Magistrate may not have recorded this fact it will be
apparent when the statements of the witnesses to the .
police are proved that they had made contradictory state-
ments. The Court can then draw inferences in accordance
with law.
As regards the second ground, the learned counsel fpr
the applicants during the course of his arguments, before
me was unable to point out how the question regarding
the sale of a pair of diamond bangles could be reley~nt to
the facts in issue in the case before the trial Magiitrate
_in which the allegation against the accused was in respect
of a diamond ring. According to the learned counsel for
the applicants the question whether a statement is relevant
or not could only be determined at the terminatio!l of the
trial. This is really an astounding proposition of law.
Section 136 of the Evidence Act empowers the Magistrate
to ask the party proposing to give evidence in what man-
ner the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevant, . It is
not made out jn the _record of the. lower Court that the
trial Magistrate had refuSed to record the statementS made
.b y the witnesses which were relevant. It has been held
in :many cases that the ~ere fact that the trial Magistrate
disallowed questions .as irrelevant is no ground for
transfer of the case ; and ~hat when the Magistrate in
disallowing questions in cross-examination. did not make
a note of the same it was held that such omission is also
:not a good ground for transfer of the case under section
526 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Please see Abdul

Aziz v. Ganesh (1); Lal Bahadur v. Emperor (2) and Dewan
DAW PEGGY
Singh v. Emperor (3). (a) D.~w
Tr~ TrN
In the present case before me I find that the learned i\1\'D ONE
Magistrate had done nothing which was not warranted nxs;aJCr
by law ; nor had he behaved in a manner not conducive IVI~;~~:~e,
to the proper administration of justice. One of the allega- O'lH!'iRS.
AND T\vo
tions against him as pointed ouf above was that he failed

to make a note of a fact for which there was neither
statutory requirement nor administrative instruction to do
so. Another allegation was that he failed to take down
all the statements which were made in answer to the
questions put by the accused's counsel. In his explana-
tion to the District Magistrate, the trial Magistrate has
frankly admitted that he did not take down all the state-
Jnents but only such of them as were relevant for the
purpose of the trial before him. In the circumstances,
I fail to see how it could be said that the trial Magistrate
.. had done anything to occasion reasonable apprehension
()n the part of the accused that he will not get a fair trial.
I am not unmindful of certain rulings of this Court
in which transfers of the cases were allowed on the ground
that the accused entertained an ~pprehension that he
would not have a fair and impartial tri~l. But the facts
and circumstances obtaining in those cases were entirely
<iifferent from the present one before me. For instance,
in the .case of Maung Kyaw Aye .v. The U:qion of Burma
{4~ the transfer was allowed on the ground that the
Magistrate in disposing of the case in his chambers was
likely to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of
the accused that he vy-ould not have a fair and impartial
trial. . It is therefore clear that the act of the Magistrate
in dealing with the case in his chambers.being contrary to
(I) 25Cr. L.J. I r8:;. (2) 39 Cr. L.J. 527.
(3) A.I.R. (1940) Lab. sz8. (4) (1953) B.L.R. p. II.j. (H.C.).
800 BURMA LA\V REPORTS
the directions contained in paragraph 22 of tile Burma

Courts Manual was such as to raise a well-founded fear
D~:) ~~~cY on the part of the accused that his case would not be tried
'f~~:!J: fairly. In the case of U Ba Khin (applicant) v. The UJ;1i011
" of Burma (5) also the transfer was granted on the. ground
DI!;TRICT
MAGISlR<'.TE, that the behaviour of the trial Magistrate was such that :ii.t
~:0"~\~~ could cause reasonable. apprehension in the mind of the

oTHERs. accused that he would not get a fair or impartial trial.
In that case it was made out that the trial Magistrate
appeared to be on very familiar terms with the com-
plainant and it was for this reason that the High Court
held that the case should be transferred. However, in the
case under consideration I do not see any reasonable
. ground for .supp~sjrg th~t the applicants did really enter-
tain any apprehension that the Magistrate had been pre-
judiced in favour of one party. The application for
transfer was also not made promptly. The witness in
respect of whom the Magistrate is alleged to have not fully
recorded his statements was examined as early as 2rst
April 1965. But the transfer was applied for only after
a lapse of several days. This laches on the part of the
applicants is also a factor to be considered against them.
For all these reasons I would hold that the applicants
are unable to make out a case why the .Criminal Regular
Trial No. 832 of 1965 which is pending before the 8th
Additional Magistrate should be transf~ried.. 'fheir appli-
. cation is accordingly rejected.
(S) (1954) B.l..R. p. I91 (H.C.)
CRIMINAL REVISION
Befwe U Sein Thinn,J.
:.:.
DAW THAN TIN (APPLICANT)

v. Oct. 4
DAw MA NGE (RESPONDENT).*
Pe7Uil Code s. 420-wdering further i11quiry under s. 436 C1. P .C. to be used
sparingly with great circumspectwll-fmther inqtt.iry in case of perverse or
illegal decisicu.
Held : The powers vested in the District Magistrate ordering further inquiry
under s. 437 should be used sparingly and with great circumspection.
The jurisdiction. exercised in revision is an extraordinary jurisdiction and
is to be used only in exceptionalca&es where the circumstau.:es dead)' warrant
~uch a course.
Held further : The Additional District Magistrate has clearly gone wrong
in directing further inquiry in tht: case decided by the lower court which
was not in the least perverse or illegal.
The Unon qf Burma v: U Po Cheiu, (1963) B.L.R. p. 111, referred to.
U Po Tha for the applicant.

- for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-In Criminal Regular Trial No. 147

of 1963 of the Township Magistrate, Paung, the applicant
Ma Than Tin was prosecuted under section 420 of the
Penal Code on the complaint filed by the respondent. The
<:omplainant'scase in a nutshell was that during the month
of June 1962 the applicant on the pre~ext of her visit to
Rangoon. borrowed some jewellery and.that on-her return
fromRangoon she failed to return them in spite of several
demands. The learned trial MagiStrate after examining
the complainant .and her witnesses discharged the appli-
cant under the provisions of section 253 (r) of the Code
of Criminal Procedure; In his order of discharge the trial
Criminal Revision No. 97 (B) of 1965.
t Review of order or'the Additional District Magistrate of Thaton, dated the
Ioth day of April 1965, passed in. Crimuial Revision case N9. 68 of 1964.
56
802 BURMA LAW ;REPORTS
Court came to the decision that the transaction between

the parties was of a civil nature and that no prima facie
DAW
...
THANTlN
D ....w
case under section 420 was made out against the appli-
cant, his ratio decidendi being that the jewellery were
MA Ncli. handed over to the applicant for the purpose of raising
a loan which was to be returned at l1er convenience.
Being dissatisfied with the order the respondent went
up on revision to the Court of the Additional District
Magistrate, Thaton,_who in his Criminal Revision Case
No. 68 of 1964 direc~ed a further inquiry under Section
436 of the Code of .Criminal Procedure. It is as agamst
this order th<!-t the present application for revision is filed. .
The ~earned Additio-nal District Magistrate discussed
at some lengtJ?. the evidence obtaining on the record of the
lower Court and pointed out, though not quite correctly~
that the trial Magistrate had based his finding only on the
evidence of U Pan N"yunt (PW 4) and _Ma Boke (PW 6)-
according to whom the transaction between the parties:
was purely a case of money-lending. He observed that
U Pan Nyunt might have some reason to side with the
applicant although it is not stated what that reason was.
As regards Ma B0ke, the learned Additional Distrjct
Magistrate was of opinion that she owed a grudge against
the respondent who }lad pointed out that the jewellery
worn by Ma Boke's daughter on one occasion belonged
to her (the re~pondent). But this assumption on the part
of the revisional Court is not in the least warranted by the
evidence ob~aining on the record of the case. ..
I have very _carefully gone through the evidence obtain-
ing on -the record of the lower Court and I find that the
only witness w:ho could support the complainant Was
Ma F~tim~ (~W 2) the complainant's own sister. U Chit
(PW 3} who was alleged to be present when 'the tra,n- .
sact!on took place could only say that he sa w the respon-
dent hand over the jewellery to the applicant. He did
not seem to hear what passed on between the parties at c.c.

1965
thaf tirrie. In the circumstances I am of opinion that the
I DAw
learned trial Court was perfectly justified in holding that TliANTt~
!1.
no prima facie case was inade out against the applicant DP.W
under section 420 of the Penal Code: MA Nog.
... Novy it is settled law that the p9wers vested in the

Dist~!ct Magistrate ordering further inquiry under section
437 ~hptild be used sparingly and with great circumspec-
tiqil: In the case . of Sheocharan v. Emperor (r) it was
poirtted. put that the District Magistrate cannot set aside
of
the.. qrder discharge if there be no irregularity, illegality
or, "impropriety in the proceedings and that where further
enqui ry is directed it does not in all cases mean taking of
addition~l evidence, btt't may be rehearing and reconsidera-
tion of the evidence already taken. Then again in the
case of Sheoprasad Ramjas Agarwal and others v. Emperor
(2) it was held that it is both legal and proper for a District
Magistrate to set aside the order of discharge on the ground
of misapprehension of evidence, but it is not proper to do
so unless he is clearly of opinion that the misappreciation
is so flagrant that in effect the order is perverse or mani-
festly u.nreasonable or foolish or prima facie incorrect.
In Kundan Lal v. Manohar Lal (3) Dalal, J. went so.far as
to say that a further enquiry may be ordered only in cases
where a Magistrate has not taken sufficient trouble or "has
_cpme to a perverse decision. It is also observed therein
that ~ Court of .;r:ev;ision is not entitled to order further
inquiry .m.~rely ~r the reason of disagreement with the
conclusion of a M~gistrate. Thus it is quite clear from
. the ruling cited above that the jurisdiction exercised in
revision is an extraordinary jurisdictiOI_l and is to beused.
only in exceptional cases where the circumstances clearly
warrant such a course. The principle propounded i.n th~
. . (I.) A.I.R. (1926) Nag. p. 117. (2) A.I.R. (1938) Naq. p. 39
(s) A.l.R. (1929) All. p. 588.
c.c. rulings quoted above is also cited with approval by this

1965
Court in the case of The UJ?iOn of Burma v. U Po Chein
DAW
.THAN TIN (r) where the following headnotes appear: "The prin-
v.
DAW t:iple is where the order of discharge is one which cannot
MANGE. be said to be either perverse or prime facie incorrect and
there is no suggestion that any further evidence is forth-
coming, no further inquiry should be directed UJ}der
section 437 of the Cod~ of Criminal Procedure ". In the
present case before me the learned Additional District
Magistrate has clearly gone wrong in directing further in-
quiry in the case decided by the lower Court which was
not in the least perverse or illegal. I would accordingly
allow .this application and direct that the order passed by
the learned Additional District Magistrate in his Criminal
Revision Case No. 68 of 1964 be set aside.
(t) (1963) B.L.R. p. III.

BURMA LAW REPORTS 805 .
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION
Before U Thet Pe, J. .
c.c.
DAW THAN NWAI
v.
(PETITIONER)
-
r96s
Oct.J4<
MAUNG MAUNG OHN GHINE AND ELEVEN OTHERS

(RESPONDENTS). *
T rust Acts. i+-appoi11tment of new Trmtee or Trustees---whether it shcm!d h3

filled up or not.
Held : The sol~ question that arises for consideration ;in the present pro-
ceedings is whether there had been a vacancy in the post of trustee and if so
whether it should be filled up by the Court. The answer must clearly be
t hat the Trust has been without a trustee and the need for filling up the vacancy
is apparent in th<: face of refusal by respondent No. z to continue his work of
managing the Trust as agent of the beneficiaries so as to)afeguard the interest
of the T rust and all the beneficiaries.
Tirathdas Dharamdas and another v. Sh. Parmeshwaribai, w/o Kundanmal,
A.T.R. (1943) Sind p. 223 ; !11 re Safmia, Goregaonkar and Senjit, Sltiwamdas
a11d others v. B.V. Narurkt~r and others, A.I.R. (1937) 13om. p. 374 at 378>
referred to .
. Khatom Jaunat Bibi v. Syed Wali Ullah and another, A. I.R. (1949) All.
p. 310 at 315, referred to and followed.
R. Basu for the petitioner.

B. K. Sen for the. respondent No. I.
U Sein Bu for the respondent No. 2.
U Kyin Htone for the re~ondent No. 3
U T HET PE, ].--This is an application under section 74

of the Trust Act 'for appointment of new Trustee or
Trustees in respect of the. Trust known as U Olm Chine
Trust.
Civil Misc. Application No. II9 of 1964. I~ the matter of U Obn Ghine
Trust, and in the matter of Bum1a Trust Act (Act It of t88z).
80b BURMA .LAW 'REPORTS
~;;5 The undisputed facts of the case are that in 1908 the
DA;-THAN late U Ohn Ghine of Rangoon created a Trust of his move-
NwAr able and immoveable properties 'for the benefit of himself,
~~'N<> his wife Daw Yeik and his children and other descendants;
~!~<T ~~ and he appointed his wife Daw Ye:ilc and his daughters
Bi'iiVEN
OTHERS.
Daw Mya and Daw Nu as trustees. All the three trustees
are now dead and gone, Daw Mya having died on or about
3rd October 1910, Daw Yeik on 13th November 1939,. and
Daw Nu on 8th July 1957
It transpired that on 13th June 1946 Daw Nu, the then
sole surviving trustee, and other beneficiaries appointed .
Respondent No. 2 U Aye Maung, also a beneficiary, as the
sole liquidator, Attorney and arbitrator of the Trust and
that U -Aye Maung had been managing and liquidating..the
estate until recently when he informed all the beneficiaries
that he would be unable to shoulder the burden of
managing the estate beyond 3oth June 1964 on account
of his old age and failing health coupled with his bereave-
ment over the death of his wife.
In support of the need for appointment of a trustee
or trustees the applicant states that since the Trust is at
present without a trustee capable of representing the Trust
legally, the only property left in the estate namely Building
No. 191/I99, Sule Pagoda Road, Rangoon, is. exposed to
great risk and hazards inasmuch as rents are hard to collect
while taxes have to l:>e paid and costly repairs h~d to be
made without delay... The applicant further contends that
the said building is more than . 6o years old and needs
extensive repairs involving a Jarge sum of money which
is not commensurate with its income and that all the bene-
ficiaries agree to the ~aie ..of.ihe property which ~an only.
be 'done with t4e permission of the .c ourt on the applica-
tion by a trustee or trustees inasmuch. as the terms of .the
Deed of Trust enjoinedthat .the said building can only be
sold after tP,e. d~ath of th~ . applican.t .a.n d ;r~pondents
BURMA LAW REPO~TS
Nos. I to 4 who are the children of the author of the Trust.

1he applicant volunteers to serve as a sole trustee or DAW 'fffA..'<
jointly with any other trustee if the Court appoints more NwAl
th~n one trustee. She further submits that she would agree MA~c
to anyone being-
~ppointed as trustee so long as the
"-
MAuNe O.HN
GRINE AND
required security is furnished. EJ.EVEN
oTrWRS.
This application finds support in 8 out of I I hene-
ficia~ies but is stoutly opposed by the remaining 3 namely
respond~nts Nos. I, 3 and ro on various grounds amongst
which it has been contended that the provisions of section
74 pf th~ Trust Act did not apply to contentious cases
which should be decided by way of a regular suit. The
decision in Tirathdas Dharamdas and another v.
Sh. Parmeshwaribai wjo Kundanmal (I) has been relied in
support of this contention. At page 225 of this report
Dayjs C.J. bas .tbis to. say:
"Moreover, referring to the words of S. 74 itself, it would
appear that a petition is to be made by the beneficiary when
a vacancy or disqualification occurs. The petition follows
a vacancy or disqualification which is a condition precedent,
the existence of which is not dependent upon an adjudication
by the Colirt in the same proceeding. Even in S. 73 the
word 'opinion' is used. My conclusion in the matter is
that Ss. 73 and.74 are not intended to apply to contentious
or disputed cases, where proceeding by way of suit is appro-
priate, but to cases appropriate to a summary procedure
where the facts are n6t di.sputed or cannot reasonably be
disputed."
In the instant case the fact that all the trustees appointed
to U Ohri Ghine Trust a re dead and that there is no one
to represent the Trust legally is not in dispute. In this
sense the present proceeding cannot be said to be a con-
tentious one wh~re .intricate points of facts and law are
required to be thrashed out. .
(t} A.l.R. (t"9+3} Sind p. 225.
c.c. Apart from that the decision in Tb:athdas Dharamdas

1963
and another v. Sh. Parmeshwaribai wjo Kundanmal. (1)
DAw TH:\."'
Nw.'l.t supra has been dissented in Khatoon ]annat Bibi v. Syed
f).
MAUNG
vVali Ullah and another (2) where B. B. Prasad, ]. has
MAuNG Otm remarked,
GHINE A..'lD
ELEVI!i'i
OTHERS. "It will be seen that there is nothing in S. 74 to limit its
aP.plication only to non-contentious cases. In fact, when
S. 74 gives power to the Court to appoint a new trustee on
the ground of unfitness or personal incapacity of an existing
trustee, the proceeding in its very nature cannot be non
contentious. Indeed, even in the case of appointment of a
new trustee in place of a deceased one, the matter may be
disputed by rival claimants. It is true that no right of
appeal is given by the Act against an order passed under S. 74,
but the order is revisable. It may be that the Legisla'ture
deliberately provided a speedy procedure for the appointment
of a new trustee by S. 74 The interests of a trust demand
that a trustee should speedily be appointed in circumstances
mentioned in S. 73 S. 74 therefore gave a speedy remedy
to the beneficiaries to have a new trustee appointed. I ex-
press no opinion as to whether or not a regular suit for the
removal of a trustee and the appointment of another person
in his place is maintainable, but even if such a procedure
is available for the removal of a trustee and the appointment
of a new one, it is an alternative one. The beneficiary may
either move the principal civil Court of original jurisdiction,
by a petition under S. 74 or may bring a regular suit under
S. 9, Civil P.C. : .
. . .
I am in respectful agreement with the above remarks.
Another argument adyanced on behalf of the opp9sers
is that since the respondent No. 2 U Aye Maung all along
had been acting as a de facto ~stee the necessity for
appointment of 'new trustee or trustees does not arise in
the. present case. Admittedly U Aye Maung has acted
as the sole attorney, arbitrator and liquidator of the Trust
with the consent of all the beneficiaries but that did not
(2) A.I.R. (1949) AU. p. 310 at 315.
B~A LAVV REPORTS 809
make him a trustee in the legal sense. His status was no ~f:3
better t.han that of the agent of the beneficiaries and the -
manager of t l1e Trust w h IC. h IS . different f rom t h at DAwNWAI
. quite THAN
of the trustee within the meaning of section 3 of the M~~No

Trusts Act. In this connection it would not be out of ~~c ~
place to quote the remarks of B. ]. VVadia, J. in the case OTHERS.
ELEvEN
of Ih re Sabnia, Goregaonkar & Se~jit, Shivramdas and

others , .. B. V. Narurkar and others (3) where the difference
between a trustee and the manager of the Trust has been
lucidly explained thus,
In my opinion, management of property does not
necessarily make the manager a trustee in law. Trustees
are managers because they have to control and manage the
trust property, but all managers are not necessarily trustees,
though they may be answerable in the general sense of the
word for mal-administration. For instance, an administrator
of the estate of an intestate has also got to manage it, but
be }~ not a trustee within the meaning of S. 3 Trusts Act. "
In rhe instant case everyone agrees that all the trustees

are dead and gone and the respondent No. 2 U Aye Maung
who had been managing the affairs of the Trust as agent
of the beneficiaries has ceased to function his management
over the trust property. The need for appointment of new
trustee or trustees under the circumstances is therefore
irresistible.
Another submission made on behalf of the opposers
is that the application is not bona fide inasmuch as it has
been made at the instance of respondent No. 2 U Aye
Maung who has failed to render the accounts of the Trust.
It must at once be pointed out that the question as to .
whether respondent No. 2 has failed to render true and
correct accounts of the Trust has no relevance to the pur-
i>ose of this proceeding. If the respondent No. 2 as the
agent of the ben~daries has failed to render true and
(3) A.l.R. (1937) Born. p. 374 at 378.
-810 BURMA LAW REPORTS
correct accountS the beneficiaries as his principals can call

upon him to do so in appropriate proceedings. The sole
:D"'NvT THAN question that arises for consideration in the present pro-
wAr
v. ceedings is whether there had been a vacancy in tbe post of
_M};]~~~i.N trustee and if so whether it should be filled up by the Court.
-GHII\.TB AND The answer must clearly be that the Trust has been without
ELEVEN .
oTru;Rs. a trustee and the need for filling up the vacancy is apparent
in the _fa'ce of refusal by respondent No. 2 to continue his
~or~ of rria~aging the Trust as agent of the beneficiaries
so as to safeguard the 1ntrest of the Trust and JU. the
beneficiaries .
. In view "of the absence of general agreement amongst
the beneficiaries over the question as to whom they should
appoint the trustee and the attitude of distrust show'n by
' the beneficiaries amongst themselves, I am of opi~ion that
it is _a _fit case where I should, and do hereby appoin~ the
Official Trustee as the sole trustee of U Ohn Ghin:e Trust.
The parties will bear their own costs.
BURMA LAW RPORTS 811
CRIMINAL REVISION
B~/<>r~ U Chi1, J.
GULBAHAR (APPLICANT)
v. Sept. 29.
THE UNION OF BUIU\.1A (RESPONDENT). *
Foreigntr's Registration Act s. 5 ()-applicollt o11d o11rtstors i11 Burma for 3
. !(t!nerations-.:z citi?:en wilhin th~ meatting of s. 4 (z) of the Union Citi::enshi-p
Act.
Rctld :Ordinarily no application for revision will be considered if filed more

than 6o days after the date of the last order passed unless it is accompnni~d
b y the explanation of the Jela}' and the neces~nry affidavits. Although the
Sessions Judge's record did not show that any order was passed in respect
of the delay in filing the revision application, it appears that he exercised his
discretion in condoning such delay in admitting it.
H'ld further : The applicant nnd her ancl!stors have been in Bum"1 for 3
generations, and the applicant us well as her parents were horn in Panmmung
(Panmyaung) which is in Minbya Tuwnship, Burma Proper. The app!icnnt
cannot, therefore, be deemed to be a foreigner and as such it is not necessary
on her part to hold a Foreigner's Registration Certificate. In other words,
she must be deemed to be a citizen within the meaning of s. 4 (z) of th<:
Union Citizenship Act.
Mr. M. A. Subhan for the applicant.

U Kyaw Gaung (Government Advocate) for the respondent.
U CHIT, ].-The recommendation of the Sessions Judge,

Hanthawaddy and Rangoon Town District, Rangoon, dated
the 14th June 1965 to set aside the conviction and
sentence passed against the applicant Gulbahar must be
accepted.
Gulbahar was prbsecuted under section 5(1) of the
Foreigners' Registration Act in Criminal Regular Trial
No. 335 of 1964 o~ the Court of the uth Additional
Criminal Revision No. roz (b) of 1965. Review of the order of the
uth Additionall\'Iagistrate of Rangoon, dated xst day of August 1964, passed
in Criminal Regular Trial No. 335 of 1964, as recommended by the Sessions
Judge, Hanthawaddy and Rangoon Town District, Rangoon in CriminRl
RevisiCin No. 131 of 1964.
c.c. i'v!agistrate, Rangoon, because she did not have a Foreigners'

1965
Registration Certificate. During the course of the trial
GULBAHAR
v. Gulbahar stated that b oth sh e and h er parents were b orn
JF~~~~~ in Panmraung village and that her grandparents also settled
and died there. She therefore claimed to be a statutory
citizen under section 4(2) of the Union Citizenship Act.
The learned Magistrate accepted the fact that the applicant
and her parents were born at Panmraung village and that
she and her ancestors have been i n Burma for three
generations. However, the learned Magistrate held that
Panmraung village was in Chittagong and therefore, the
applicant must be deemed to be a foreigner and as she did
n,Qt possess a Foreigners' Registration Certificate at the
time material to this case, he convicted the applicant and
sentenced her to pay a fine of K 30 o:r in default to undergo
one month's rigorous imprisonment. Being dissatisfied
with the said order, the applicant Gu!bahar filed a revision
application in the Court of Sessions, Hanthawaddy and
Rangoon Town District, Rangoon, to set aside the
conviction and sentence passed against her by the lower
Court. At the time Gulbahar filed that revision applica-
tion it was obviously time-barred by over four months.
Therefore, she filed an application and the necessary
affidavits explaining the delay in filing that application.
OrdinarUy no application for revision will be considered
if filed r:rion~ than 6o days after 'the date of the last order
passed, unless it is accompanied by the explanation of the
delay and the necessary affidavits. . It is noticed from the
Session~ Judge record that no order was pas5ed in respect
of the delay in ;filing the revision application. But it.
appears.that when the Sessions Judge admitted the revision
application he. exercised his. discr~~on .in condonil).g SJ.lCh
delay. .. --.
. The learned Sessiops Judge, after hearing the arguments

advanced by Mr. Subhan and the Government Advocate,
BURMA LA"vV REPORTS 813
came to the conclusion that Panmraung village, according c.c.

1965
to Burma Gazetteer submitted by Mr. Subhan, is in Akyab
District. Therefore, petitioner cannot be deemed to be a G uL:.AHAR
foreigner, but she should be deemed to be a statutory Tas UNxoN
OF 8 UR!\H
citizen of the Union of Burma under section 4(2) of the
Union Citizenship Act. He therefore recommended to
the Chief Court to set aside the conviction and sentence.
When this case reached before me I had the oppor-
tunity of hearing the arguments advanced by Mr. Subhan,
the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate. Mr. Subhim in the course of his
addre.ss produced to the Court Burma Gazetteer, Akyab
District, Volume B, No. r, wherein at pages 52 and 74
.Panmraung (Panmyaunggyi) is shown situated in Minbya
Township, Akyab District. In order to make this
assurance doubly sure I directed the Government Advocate
to get a report and, if necessary, . an authorized Govern-
ment map of the Ak.yab District from the Immigration
Department just to ascertain the correctness of the said
relevant extracts from the Burma Gazetteer. After some
time the Government Advocate produced to the Court a
report from the Immigration Officer, Ak.yab to :the
Immigration Department, Rangoon and an authorized map
of the Ak.yab District. The said report shows that
Panmraung (Panmyaung) village is only six miles from
Myohaung and it i~ in Minbya Township. 1he report
goes on to say Myohaungmyo is known to the Indians as
Pa-tri-kella meaning the city made of rocks. It is also
envisaged from the authorized map that Panmyaung in is
Minbya Township.
. .
The orrly point for consideration be~ore me is whether
Panmraung (Panmyaung) is in India or in Burma. From
the above facts an~ circumstances, it is clear that
Panmyaung belongs to Burma proper and is hi Minbya
T ownship. Therefore, the applicant Gulbahar cannot be
814-
c.c. deemed to be a foreigner and as such it is not necessary on
1965
her part to hold a Foreigners' Registration Certificate. In
GoLBA.
v. HAR other words, she must be deemed to be a atizen ' within
THllBUNioN
OF URMA.
the meaning of section 4(2) of the Union Citizenship Act.
Thus, her conviction under section 5 (r) of the Foreigners
Registration Act was clearly wrong. Having accepted the
recommendation of the learned Sessions judge, I set aside
the conviction and sentence passed against the applicant
Gulbahar, and I direct :that she be acquitted as far as this
case is concerned. I further direct the fine of K 30 if
paid be refunded to her.
. CIVIL REVISION
Before U Thet Pc, J .
ISivfAIL EBRAHIM ISMAIL (deceased) by his L/R c.c.

1965 '
Mr. HASHIN ISMAIL (APPLICANT)
sej11-
v.
E. M. GORA AND SIX OTHERS (RESPONDENT).*
Apprrint;n<>nt of Receiter-apprehension that ihe uo/~f pr()j>er~} to be hzjeopordy-

. trustees disputing each other's autlwrity-0. XL R.. I c:P.C. .appc.inttnent.
of Receiver rn:er property nut Stlbject-motter of pending mit. .
Held : Ir is clear from the certified copies of the judgment and the plaint
filed in this ca~e and activities of the applicant in other connecte9' cases that
aftl!.r exhausting al! his efforts to wreck the Wakf itself be has now com~
forward as COtrustee in the present proceedings and chaHenged the authority
of respondo::nt No. I who claims to be the Managing Trustee of the Wakf.
Under these circumstances it 'WOuld be but natural for the. origi~al Court
to apprehe.1d that the W:1kf property is in jeopardy unless a Receiver is appointed
to take charge of the rents for the benefit of the Wakf and its beneficiaries.
It must be pointed out that tle Wakf property is in actual possession of the
te~ant and the question of injury to anyone of the parties .cannot therefore
a~ise by appointing. a Receiver to collect the rents. I t is, in fact, in the interests
of the Wakf and of the persons interested in it that the Court should take charge
of the property when the trustees themselves have been disputing each other's.
authority.
Swale v. Swale, 52 E.R. 1233, referred to.
Held further : There is nothing in the wording of Rule ~x), Order XL of
the Code of Civil P~ocedure to forbid the Court from appointing a Receiver
o,er the property 'which is ~ot thesubject-matter of a ptnding suit.
A.R.A.R.A.L. Chettyor Firm v. U Si11 ,A.I.R. (19}5) Ra.n. 398 at p. 399 ;
liariRam v. Firm.MadduMalDurga Das, A.I.R. (1938) Lab. p. u, referred to.
U Tun Tin for the applicant.
U Po Tha for the respondent.
Civil RevisiC)n No. 30 .of 1964 llgainst the de~ee bf the District Court
of Mo~ein in. Civil Appeal No. 28 of 1963 ,dated 6th.March 1964.
U THET PE, J.-This is an application in reV1s1on

against the order of the District Court of Moulmein con-
J:=~ firming. the order of the Subdivisional Court of Moulmein .
IsWu-r. appointing a Receiver in respect of a house.
(deceased) BY
L/RMR.
H JS
~~ The brief facts which h,ave given rise to the present
v. proceedings are these :-The house known as No. 6o,
:E.M
AND GORAL'
srx ower Mam . Road, Mou1mem,. 1s. th e property of a pnvate
.
oTal!Rs. Wakf described as Sara Bi Bi W akf. In Civil Regular Suit
No. 30 of 1955 of the Subdivisional Court of Moulmein
the present applicant, Ismail Ebrahim Ismail (now dec;:eased
and represented by his legal representative Mr. Hashin
Ismail) in his capacity as a co-trustee, instituted a suit for
ejectment against Messrs. 0. S. S. Rahim and Co. from
the premises in question for non-payment of rent and :the
suit was .contested by the tenant on the ground that he
had obtained the lease of the house from the Managing
Trustee of the Wakf, the respondent No. r, E. M.. Gora.
The S\.!.it underwent many vicissitudes and was still pending
when the respondent No. r, E. M. Gora,. sued the s4ine
tenant for ejectment from the same premises in Civil
Regular Suit No. 36 of 1958 of. the Subdivisional Coutt of
Moulmein. In the subsequent suit filed by the respondent
No. r, the applicant and one .Ahmed Mohamed Sara:tair as
Trustees of the Wakf, applied under Rule ro, Order I of
the Code of Civil Procedure to "implead them as parties to
the suit; and their application w~s allowed on 19th
J~nuary 1959. On the. next day, i.e., on 2oth January
1959, the tenant confessed.judgment.in the previous suit,
that is, Civil Regular Suit No. 30 of 1955, which was
accordingly d~creed in favour of the applicant. There-
upon, respondent No. r had to institute a suit, being Civil
Regular Suit No. 6 of 1959 ..agai~st the tenants, the
applicant and Ahmed Moha~ect Saratair to deciare and .
set .aside the decree in Civll{R~bilar ~uit No: 30 of. I9S5 .
as fraudulent and coliusive and ultimately, made an
,application for appointment of a Receiver in respect of c.c

1963
.the premises in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. I I of I96I
Which, aS mentioned abOVe, WaS decided in faVOUr Of the l:~~~M
respondent No. I both by the original as well as the (d!::;~d)
.appellate Courts. sv HIS L/R
M.R. fusHIN
It cannot be gainsaid that the appointment of a Is~tL

Receiver is within the discretion of the Court. This dis- E.M. GoRA
AND SIX
cretion must, of course, be exercised reasonably and oTHERS.
judicially upon well established principles of law. In the

present case it is clear from the certified copies of the
judgment and the plaint filed in this Court as well as in
Civil Regular Suit No. 38 of I958 of the Subdivisional
Court of Moulmein, that the applicant, as one of the
beneficiaries of the Wakf, had unsuccessfullY. applied for
the sale of Wakf property in Civil Miscell'imeous Case
No~ I6 of I949 of the District Court of Amherst and had
also filed a pauper suit in Civil Regular Suit No. I I of
I95i of the saine Court for declaration that the deed
creating the "V/akf was not the Wakf-nama and for parti-
tion of the property amongst. the heirs of the author of
the invalid \Vakf. After exhausting all his efforts to
wreck the VV:akf itself he has now come forward as co-
trustee in the present proceedings and challenged the
aut:hority of respondent No. I who claims to be the
Managing Trustee of the Wakf. Under these cir-
cumstances it would be but natural for the o:dginal Court
to apprehend that the Wakf property is in jeopardy
unless a Receiver is appointed to take charge of the rents
for the benefit of the Wakf and its beneficiaries.
It mus.t also be pointed out that the Wakf property is
-in actual possession of the tenant and the question of
injury to anyone of the parties cannot therefore arise by
appointing a Receiver to collect the .rents. It is, in fact,
in the interests of the Wakf and of the persons interested
in it that the Court should take charge of the property
57
818. BURMA LA.W REPORTS
when the trustees themselves have been disputing each

other's authority. Thus, it has been held in Swale v.
l:J;;~M Swale (1) that when the trustees are at logger-heads with
Is.M AIL
(deceased) BY
each other the proper course is the appointment of a
HIS L/RM:R. Receiver.
HABHIN
IsNlAtL
v.
It has been argued on behalf of the applicant that the
E.M. GoRA lower. Courts erred in appointing a Receiver inasmuch as.
~~~;~ the questions involved in the two pending suits, namely,
the right to eject a tenant in one case and to declare and
to set aside a decree on ground of fraud and collusion in
another, have nothing to do with the subject-matter over
which a Receiver has been appointed. It must however,
be borne in mind that there is nothing in the wording of
Rule I, Order XL of the Code ofCi\oil Procedure to forbid
the Court from appointing a Receiver over the property
which is not the subject-matter of a pending suit. In this
connection .reference may usefully be made to the decision
in A.R.A.R.A.L. Chettiar Firm v. U Sin (2) where it was:
held that:
" The rule does not say that a receiver can be appointed
only of property which is the subject-matter of a pending
suit. What it says is that if it is found just and convenient,
the Court can appoint a receiver of any property, provided
the plaintiff or the defendant has a right thereto."
The above decision ~as been quoted with approval in

Hari Ram v. Firm Maddu Mal Durga Das (3)
..
For the reasons stated above the order of the lower
Courts cannot be said to have been passed by them without
jurisdiction or with . material irregularity which 'w ould
justify interference by .this Court. The .application in
revision, therefore, fails and is . dismissed with costs.
Advocate's fee K 34
(x) 52 E.R. IZJ3 . (2) A.I.R. (1935) Ran. 398 at p. 399
(3) A.l.R (1938) Lah. p. IZ.
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL
Before U Sein Thinn, J.
KO SHEIN GYI (APPELLANT) C.C'.

196!
v. Oct. 30.
MAUNG NYUNT SEIN (RESPONDENT).*
Workmen's Ccmpensalion Act- s. IIo-:-limitation for imtitution of proceedings.

Held: No reason whatsoever could be assigned as to why the respondent
had failed to make his claim within xz months from the date of the
occurrence of the accident. It was only after a lapse of 2~ years that the case
was instituted in the Office of the Com."'lissioner. and in the face of the plaiD
provisions of law which prescribe a definite time limit within which &uch a
claim must be made. There is no alternative but to hold that the claim of
the respondent is time-barred.
The Consolidated Tin Mines of Burma v. l'rlaung Tu71 E, I.L.R. Ran. Series,
Vol. IX (1931) p. uS, rE-ferred to.
U Chen Po for the appellant.
- for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-This is an appeal under section 30

of the Workmen's Compensation Act against the order of
the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation by which
the appellant was ordered to pay the sun of K 5,292 as.
compensation to the respondent Maung Nyunt Sein. The
facts of the case are that during the year 1962 while the
respondent 'Yas in the employ of the appellant as a car
dr-iv.er, he met with an accident resulting in sustaining
severe burns which, according to the medical report
reduced llis earning capacity by 70 per cent.
The main ground of appeal before me now is that the
claim of the respondent is barred under section r o of the
Civil Misc. Appeal No. 36 of 1965, against the order of the Workmen's
Compensation Commissioner of Prome in Workmen's Compensation Case
No. 2/6s, dated 23rd July 1965.
~URMA LAW ~PORTS
c.c. Workmen's C<?mpensation Act. The order of the Com-

t96s
missioner appealed against is silent regarding this question
KO SHEIN
GYI of limitation. However in the repon filed by the Addi-
"
MAUNO
tionaJ Commissioner on which the C9mmissioner has
NYUNT apparently based his order, it is pointed out that section 10
S~lN.
of the Workmen's Compensation Act is not in keeping
with the Socialist policy adopted by the Revolutionary
Government. The reason given by the Additional Com-
missioner is that the right of a worker to get compensa-
tion is guaranteed by Explanation 3 of section 4 of the
Act No. 6 of 1964 of the Revolutionary Council. But
section ~o of the vVcrkmen's Compensation Act does not
t~ke away the right of a workman to get compensation.
It 011ly prescribes a time limit within which a workman
must make his claim. No ..doubt if there is a real breach
between law and policy it may be competent for a tribunal
to adopt such an interpretation of the law as would con-
form to the policy adopted by the Government. In a
recent casedecided by the Bench of this Court of which l
was a member, namely, Civil Reference No. 2 of 1964,
the learned Chief Justice has pointed out that gaps of ten
exist betwee;1 law and policy and vvhen this Court finds
that it can throw a bridge between the two without doing
violence to statutory interpretation, it becomes its duty
so to do. But it must ever be bo:rne in mind that only
when different interpretations are possible that a law Court
is competent to adopt one which is in conformity with
the Government policy: It is not the function of 'the
Court to legislate. if any real hardship or inconvenience
if caused by adopting a construction whi~h the wording of
statute conveys that obviously is a matter for the legisla~
ture to correct ~nd not for the Court to interpose.
I have gone. through the r~cord of the learned Commis-

si9ner to find out whether .there was any sufficient cause
o n the part of ~b~ respondent to make )~is claim -~fter the
~ 0
821
. . .
expiry of the statutory period of I 2 months ; but i find
none. In The Consolidated Tin Mines of Bur.ma Ltd. v.
?
:: ~ :.;..+-- . ~
KP. SHEIN
Maung Tun E (I), it is laid down that: ~-. {;Yl
: ..:w;... :
"Under section 10 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, M ...UNG
NYUNT
a workman must institute his proceedings for compensation SEIN:
before the Commissioner within six months of the occur.-
rence of rhe accident. The fact that he is illiterate and
. ignorant of .the provisio.ns of the Act is . not sufficient cause
within the. meaning of the proviso 'to section 10 of the Ac~
for extending the time in his favour."
In the present case before me no reas6fi\~hats6ever could

be assigned as to why the respondent had failed to make
his claim within I 2 months from the date of the occur-
rence of the accident. It .;.,as only after a lapse of
2 Y2 years that the case was instituted in the office of the
Commissioner and in the face of the plain provisions of
law which prescribe a definite time limit within which
such a claim must be made I have no alternative but to
hold that the claim of the respondent is time-barred.
Another ground put forward by the learned Counsel
. for the appellant is that the learned Commissioner erred
in admitting .the. medical ceitificate of one Dr. Prakash as
evidence and acting on it without calling the said doctor
as a witness. This is also a good ground to assail the
order of the learned Commissioner in view of the rulings
in the case of Maung Tin Maung (r) v. Union of Burma
Airways (2), where the following head~notes appear:
"One Maung Tin Maung (r) sustained fracture of left
shoulder .girdle and five ribs on the left side as a result of
the injury which he received and the question for decision
was the compensation for loss of functional capacity. The
Commissioner awarded 1 0 per cent as such loss, basing it
on a medical certificate in the proceedings.
(r) I.L:R. R~. series, Vol. IX (t9JI) p. u8.
(z) (1952) B.L.R. (H.C.), p. So.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
822
c.c.
--
Held; The Medical Certificate is not admissib,Ie in evidence
g6s in the absence of the evidence of the doctor granting such
Ko SHEIN eertifica'te. Opinion expressed in the certificate is inadmis-
GYI
a
sible in evidence."
MAUNO
NYVNT.
SEIN. However; as this appeal could be disposed of on the first
ground I need not coll1Ii1it myself in giving a decision on .
this point of law. Therefor~ for the reasons set out above
this appeal is allowed. The order passed by the Commis-
sioner for Workmen's Compensation alluded to above is
set aside. In the circumstances of the case I would make
UO order as tO COsts.
CIVIL REFERENCE
Before Dr. Maung Maung, C.J., and U Sti,. Thbtn, J.
LAw su (APPLICANT) c.c.

1965
v. Oct. 6.
NAING HPA PAUNG IN (RESPONDENT).*
Slwn States <;itJil Justice (Subsidiary) Ortkr, 1906-Ruu 18A-subltituud

by the Slwn States Civil JUJtice (Subsidiary) Order 19o6 (AmendtM~t)
Act, 1961-ultra vires of tM Sta~ Lugislature--as regards 2nd appuJI to
tht High CO'Url---"f'tstriction by s. 102, C.P.C.
The question referred to is :-" Is Rule 18A of the Shan States Civil
Justice (Subsidiary) Order, 1906, as substituted by the Shan State Civil
Justice (Subidiary) Order, 1906 (Amendment} Act, 1961 ultra tJires of the
State Legislat\lre, in ao far as it affects second appeal to the High Court from
appellate decrees of.the District Courts i~ the Shan State ?"
Held : Gaps often exist betweea law and policy and when this Court
finds that it can throw a bridge between tho two without doing violence to
'Statutory interpretation it becomes its duty so to do. In that epirit it is decided
that second appeals will continue to lie to the Chief Court from the Appellate
judgments and decrees o the Courts in the Shan State, restricted only by
-s. 102 of the Civil Proc~:dure Code.
Ko Kyin Wain v. U San Myi11t and tme, Civil Reference No. 1 of 1960,
decided by the Chief Court on 1sth October 1962, referred to.
Mr. S. L. Verma for the applicant.
U w in Maung for the respondent.
DR. MAuNe MAUNG, ].-The following question has

been referred to us :
"Is Rule 18A of the Shan States Civil Justice (Subsidiary)
Order, 19o6, as substituted by the Shan States Civil Justice
(Subsidiary) Order, 1906 .(Amendment) Act, 1961 ultra vires
of the State Legislature, in so far as it affects second appeals
Civil First Appeal No. z ef 1964. Reference made by the Hon'ble
Justice U San Maung undes Rule 25 of the Appellate Side Rules o Procedure
(Civil} fot: the decision of a Bench or a full Bench.
BURMA LAW REPORTS
. c.c. to the High Court fro'm appellate d ecrees of the District
196s
Courts
.. in the
. Shan
.. State?"
LAw Su
v.
NAING HPA In Ko Kyin Wqin v. U San Myint and one (I) a similar
PA~q IN.
question was posed in reference to a Full Bench of this
Court and the opinion rendered was that notwithstanding
the provisions of Rule I8A of_the Shan States Civil Justice
(Subsidiary) Order, 1906, which enacted that there could
b~ .n9 se.c ond. appeal against the appellate ju~gment and .
decree of a Superintendent, second appeals would lie to
-the High Court of the Union of Burma. Before the
opinion was framed; and after the question was posed in
:reference, the Shan States Civil Justice (Subsidiary} Order,
.:~ 996 (Ainendmerit) Act, I 96 I, came jnto fon::e . on th~
~rsf of February 1962. Rule r 8A. as .amended p.ow. rea~}
"r8A (}:) An appeal .from a d~cr!=!e or _other in aqy .suit
, , or . odginai proc,eed,.ing in a Court of Resident of !:!. valu~
exceeding five thousand kyat shall lie to the High Court.: ;
lie .
(2,.) A S~COJ.?.d appeal shall to the High Court from: a~
appellate decree of a Resident's Court whenever that decree
.varies or reverses. oth~rwise than as 'to costs the decree of
the Court below~ provided that the value of the: cause
exceeds five thousand kyat.
(3) The period of limitation for an appeal to the High
Court under this Rule shall be nine'ty days."
Second appeals to the High Court, and now to this

Court, are generally governed by the. provisions in
sections roo and 102 of the Civil Procedure Code. Under
th.e latter section " no
second appeal shall lie in any suit
of the nature cognizable by Courts of Small Causes, when
the amount or value of the subject-matter of the ci~iginal
suit . does not exceed K 500." The question now is
whether because of the interposition of the new sub-rule
(1) Civil Reference No. xof. (196o) P,ecided by the Chief Court ' on xzth
October 1962.
.
(2) of Rule r8A, as amended, the value of the subject- 5~
matter must exceed K s.ooo, instead of K soo, in order to
make second appeals to this Court competent.
LA"f
. v.
su
NAING liPA.
Mr. Verma, learned Advocate who has filed an appeal PAVNG IN.
in the Chief Court at Mandalay from a decree passed by
the District Judge at Kyaukme in a suit where the subject-
matter is valued at K r,ooo only, submits that we should
either ignore th~ new sub-rule (2) or hold that it can exist
side by side with section 102 of the Civil Procedure Code,
the latter being predominant. Second appeals to the
former High Court being regulated by sections roo and
102 of the Civil Procedure Code, it was not within th~
powers of the Shan States Council, Mr. Verma argues, to
pass any law which would have the effect of curtailing
the appellate powers of the High Court. The Shan State
Council could make laws for the administration of justice
in the State, Mr. Verma concedes, but restricting the
appellate powers of the High Court was, according to him~
a thing which lay beyond the State's power. If it was
deemed desirable to reduce and restrict the appellate
powers of the High Court in regard to appeals arising out
of suits tried in the Shan States it was the Union Govern-
ment, not the State Government, which should have
moved.
The arguments advanced by Mr. Verma are attractive
and interesting, but we should not forget that a right of
appeal is a creature of statute, not a fundamental and
irrevocable right. Just as one statute may create a right
of appeal, another may reduce or remove it. Also
section 1oo of the Civil Procedure Code clearly lays down
that second appeals shall lie to the High Court only where
it is not " otherwise expressly provided in the body of
this Code or by any other law for the time being in force. r
Thus section roo does not create a rigid and unalterable
right of access to the High Court by way of second appeaL
..... lk:t~.. _r.' i
:826 BURMA
..
tAW REPORTS
. . '
~~~ 1t makes room for othet provisions in the Civil Procedure

Code or other laws to lay their own conditions on the
LAW Su ,
o. nght of appeal.
NAtNG HPA
PAUNG IN. The test therefore is whether the amendment to the
Shan States Civil Justice (Subsidiary) Order, r 906,
introduced in 1961 by way of a law made by the Shan
State Council is a valid " any other law" within the
meaning of section roo of the Civil Procedure Code. If
the amendment is valid as such any other law then there
can be no question o{ conflict between the law made by
~e Shan State Council and the relevant provisions of the
Civil Procedure Code. There ca11- then be no question as
to whether the amending of the Shan States Civil Justice
(Subsidiary) Order was ultra vires the . constitutional
powers of the Shan State Council.
On this point U Tjn Ohn, learned Law Officer for the
Union States, sheds considerable light. He submits tha_t
the Amendment Act of 1961" passed by the Shan State
Council and promulgated by due constitutional process is
valid law since its coming into force on the rst February
1962. No question of constitutionality can now be
raised. Since the Amendment Act is good law it can,
under the provisions of section roo of the Civil Procedure
Code, restrict the rights of litigants to go to the former
High Court, or come to the. present Chief Court, on
second ap~eal. The restriction wo~ld be both proper and
valid.
U Ba Kyaw, learned Assist~nt Attorney~General, who
also appears as amicus curiae on our invitation, takes
the same view.
. .
. The question which is before us is ~n its final analysis,
more th$-Ii one of pure law, for it involves policy in a good
measure. One of l,lS was a member of the Full Bench
which gave the decisio_n in Civil Reference No. r of 1960,
. . .
and our brother U Chit, then the Assistant Attorney- c.c.
1965
General of the Union, assisted the Bench as amicus curiae.
LAwSu
The old Rule 18A of the Shan States Civil Justice "
(Subsidiary) Order, 1906, contained a proviso that "no Nt;:=a If:. A
second appeal shall lie from the appellate judgment and

decree of a Superintendent to the Commissioner." The
powers and functions of the Commissioner later devolved
on the Director of Frontier Areas Administration and
after Burma's independence the High Court became the
.appellate authority. Despite the proviso to Rule I 8A
however, the Full Bench decided that in the interest of
uniformity in administration of justice throughout the
Union, a goal to which we have been constantly striving
together for more than a decade, litigants in the Shan
State should also have -the same opportunity enjoyed by
their brethren in the Union to come to the High Court on
second appeal.
U Tin Ohn submits that The States Court Act of 1953

is operative only in the Kachin State where the court
system is becoming well-established. The Act has yet to
become fully operative in the Shan State in which the
Courts Act has still to be implemented. In the ab$ence
of an established hierarchy of courts in the Shan States,
the Residents, the Assistant Residents and the Township
Officers are administering civil justice under the Shan
States Civil Justice (Subsidiary) Order. Steps are being
taken, U Tin Ohn says, to establish a uniform court
system under the Courts Act in the Shan State and when
that is achieved litigants will have the right of second
appeal to the Chief Court under sections 100 and ro2 of
the Civil Procedure Code.
We must say that from what we have been able to

see of the w<Jrking of the Residents, Assistant Residents,
. and the Township Officers in the administration of civil
-
justice, these officers have been doing their work remark~-
ably well. Also we do not consider that the right to come
..~'!~su to the Chief Court on second appeal is an altogether
NPArNo- H PA unmixed blessing. As U Tin Ohn points. out, coming on
AUNG 1N. - -.
second appeal to this Court invo}ves tr9uble and expens_e:
and some of the suits that are .filed in the Shan State are
of a simple nature. Mr. Verma, on the other hand, sub--
mi~ that if second appeals are shut out where the subjec~.:..
matter _is. below K 5,900 then few second appeals woulc;i:
ever be filed for most of the suits are for values less than.
K s.ooo. Even though a suit ~ay be of a small value
questions of law that arise .may be of such importance
that the Chief Court should examine the~ in the public;:
interest and giv~ decisions which will afford guidance to
the tourts. in the Shan St~te.
If we have to give a strict interpretation of law on the
question that has been referred to us, we would say that -
the Amendment Act of 1961 which introduced the new
Rule 18A .in . the Shan States Civ_il )ustice (Subsidiary)
Order, 1906, fell ~ithin the. competence of the then Shai).
State CounciL On the other hand, a Full 'Bench of this
Court had already ruled before that that second appeals
would lie to the Chief Court from the appellate judgment
and decree of a Superintendent in th~ Shan State, despite
a proviso to the c;ontrary in the old rule x8A. It is a
known fact that steady steps are being taken towards:
building a uniform court system in the Shan State. When
that court system comes into flower, the question that is
now before us will only be of academic interest. If we
hold now that aftttr the rst of February 1962 second
appeals to this Court from the appellate decrees passed in
the Shan State can only be entertained in this Court if the
value of 'the subject-matter is K s,ooo or above, we shall_
in our respect fo-r the letter of the law, be offending its
spirit and the clear objective of the Government and the
Shan State Affairs Council. We shall then be saying in
<effect that second appeals wiH lie to this Court if they are c.c.
1965
-of K soo value or more, and the rights to appeal had
LAW Su
.accrued before the Ist February 1962. After that date v.
and until the court system provided for by the Courts Act NAt NG HPA
P AUNG IN.
is introduced, second appeals will o~ly lie if the value is
K s,ooo or above. That situation would be confusing as
well as, to some eyes, discriminatory.
Mr. Verma submits that while second appeals of
K s,oo~ and above would be negligible in number those
which are below that value are not too many either. If
we therefore open access to this Court to all litigants in
the Shan State who wish to come up on second appeal we
may have a few dozen such second appeals and no more.
That few dozen will no doubt add to our burden, for our
dockets are full and our lists are long. But this Court is
here to serve the people and we appreciate that it gives
the people a measure of satisfaction if they can come and
lay their causes before us. Non-discrimination is the
key-note of policy in every field of governmental activity
today. To ho1d that all people in the Union, but not
those who make their homes in the Shan State, can come
to this Court on second appeal when the subject-matter
is K soo or above, would certainly have the bitter taste
and bad odour of discrimination.
Gaps often exist between law and policy and when
this Court finds that it can throw a bridge between the
two without doing violence to statutory interpretation it
becomes its duty so to do. In that spirit we will hold
that while the question does not strictly arise as to
:whether the amended Rule I 8A of the Shan States Civil
Justice (Subsidiary) Order is or is not ultra vires. second
appeals will continue to lie to the Chief Court from the
appellate judgments and decrees of the Courts in the Shan
State, restricted only by section 102 of the Civil Procedure
~ode.
SPECIAL LEAVE APPEAL
Bejm-e Dr. Maung Maung, C ..'J., U Chit and U Sein Thin, .'JJ.
c.c. MA KHIN MYINT (~PPELLANT)

1965
v.
Sept. n . AH SHU (RESPONDENT.).*
Union Judiciary Ac:t, s. 6-definitiou of tenant in s. 2 (g) of the Urban Rent

C&ntrol Act.
The appellant filed a suit for ejeotment and for- damages for wrongful
use and occupation against the respondent in respect of a bouse and its site.
She was unsuccessful in the lower cou1t and the rst appellate court, but on
:and appeal the suit was de~reed with costs in her favour under the provisions
of s. II {1) (f) of the Urban Rent Control Act. On nth May 1959 the respon-
dent vacated the pr!mli~c~. There after the appellant filed a suit for recovery
of K u ,500 a: damage6 for use and occupation of the suit premises against
the respondent. The Additional District Judge held that the respondent
was liable to pay only K 4,538 and the appellant's appeal against thi~ judgment
and decree was di~issed. Hence the present appeal.
Held : A tenant who remained in occupation of the premises after having
ceased to be n tenant in what~oever manner his tenancy might have
been terminated is a tenant holdisg-over and as s.uch falls w.ithin the purview
of s. z (g) of tht: Urban Rent Control Act, and it also inclu!les a tenant against
whom an ejectment deere is subsisting but who has not yet vacated
the premises.
There hos not been any appreciable change as would either restrict or
widen the scope of the term "tenant" as defmed in the old Act of 1948 and
in the existing Act of 1960. Ther<:!fore in spite of the alteration in the language
the law as explained in ths rulings decided under the old Act still helds good
in so far afl the term " tenant" is concerned.
Mrs. D. M. Singer 'v. 1'hB Co1ztroller of Rents and three others, (1949) RL.R:
p. 143, (S.C.) ; Sis Tek and another v. LekJumy B1'os., (1952) B.L.R. p. 180
(H.G.) ; B .R. Kamdar v. The Assistant Co11troller of Rents 'a11d others,
(1950) B.L.R. p. so (S.C.), referred to and followed.
Mrs. Comt,mae Min.~ Writ~ v. A. M. Kha11, (1951) B.L.R. p. 169 (S.C.).
referred to.
U Tun Sein for the appellant.
Mr. R. Chaube for the respondent.
* Speci~ Leave Civil Appeal No. 9 of 1963, against the decree of the Chief
Court sitting at Mandalay in Civil First Appeal No.4 ef 1960 for special leave
to appeal under s. 6 of the Union Judiciary Act.
U SEIN THINN, ].-The salient facts of the case lie c.c.

15
within a narrow compass and only a short point of law
MA KHI~
arises for our consideration. Inso far as they are relevant MYINT
for the purp:)se of determining the question is posed before o.
AHSRU.
us the undisputed facts are as follows : -
In Civil Regular Suit No. 45 of 1953 of the Township
Court. Mandalay, the appellant Ma Khin Myint filed a suit
for ejectment and for damages for wrongful use and occu-
pation against the respondent Ah Shu in respect of a house
and its site hereinafter referred to as the suit premises.
The suit having been dismissed the appellant went up on
appeal to the District Court but to no avail. On second
appeal to the Chief Court, sitting at Mandalay, the judg-
ment and decree of the lower Court were set aside and
the suit was decreed with costs in favour of the appellant
under the provisions of section I I (r) (f) of the Urban Rent
Control Act which clearly contemplated relationship of
land-lord and tenant between the parties to the suit. It
is rather obscure from the . materia,ls placed before us as
to in what manner, if any, the appellant, as the decree-
holder took out execution against the respondent, the
judgment-debtor. However, it is apparent that on 1 rth
May 1959 the respondent vacated the premises. There-
after on 19th February 1960 the appellant filed a suit, being
Civil Regular Suit No. 7 of 1960 in the Additional District
Court of Mandalay, against the respondent for recovery
of K 11,500 as damages for use and occupation of the
suit premises, the claim as formulated by the appellant
. being that the respondent was liable to pay damages for
wrongful use and occupation of the suit premises at the
rate of K 5 only per diem from 27th January 1953, which
was the date of the ejectment order, to 1rth May 1959,
when the respondent actually vacated the premises. The
learned Additional District Judge held that the respondent
was liable to pay only at the rate of K 6o per mensem
:832 BURMA LA vV REPORTS .
c. c. which .was the standard rent fixed for the premises. He
1965
MA KHIN
accordingiy passed a decree against the respondent for
: MYINT K 4,538 only with proportionate costs.
v.
AHSHU. As against this judgment and decree of the Additional
District .C ourt an appeal was . preferred which was dealt
with by a Bench of two Judges in Civil First Appeal No. 4
of 1960 of the Chief Court sitting at Mandalay. Two
main issues were involved. The first relates to the ques-
tion whether the respondent occupied the suit premises
from 22nd January 1953 to I nb May 1959 as a trespasser
or as a tenant of the appellant ; and tP.e second as r~gards
the rate at which the respondent was liable to pay for
his occupation of the suit premises. After a careful
scrutiny of the facts and of the law pertinent's to the case
the learned Judges came to the conclusion that the res-
pondent's occupation of the suit premises for the period
under consideration was that of a tenant and that he was
therefore .liabie to pay only the standard rent fixed for
the premises. The appeal vvas accordingly dismissed.
Hence the present appeal under section 6 of the Union
Judiciary Act.
In spite of the several grounds mentioned in the memo-
randum of appeal the only point that is canvassed before
us now is that in view of the ejectment decree passed
against tbe respondent he could no more be termed a
" tenant " within the meaning of section 2 (g} of the Urban
Rent Control Act. According to the learned Counsel for
the appellant section 2(g) does not embrace the case of a
tenant against whom an ejectment decree has been passed
even if he might have.been a tenant prior to that ~ecree.
His line of contention was that as soon as a decree for
ejectment was passed the respondent by virtue of the order
passed in the case ceased to be a tenant even though he
might have remained in occupation of the pJ::emjses, and
that his . status as .and. from the date of the decree was
BURMA LAW REPORTS . 833
that of a trespasser and not a tenant. We are however c.c.

1965
:unable to subscribe to this view. The word "tenant" M
MA KHIN
used in section 2 (g) of the Urban Rent Control Act has MYL.'iT
. tl.
been very lucidly explained in the leading case of AFJ SHU.
Mrs. D. N. Singer v. The Controller of Rents and three
others (I) where the following head-notes appear : -
"Held: That the following classes of persons are
termed tenants within the meaning of Act :
(a) A person who takes a lease of any premises and
occupies them himself ;
(b) A person who is permitte:i under section 12 of the
Urban Rent Control Act to occupy;
(c) A legal representative of either of the above two;
(d) A sub-t~nant; and
(e) A "tena.nt-holdiny-over. (italics is ours).:'
The learned Counsel for the appellant would however have

the Court hold that the word tenant-holding-over dqes not
include the case of a tenant against whom an ejectment
decree has been passed. No authority whatsoever could
be cited for this view and his only contention was that
.the definition given in section 2 (g) does not specifically
refer to such a p_erson. Needless to say, there is abundance
of authority on the subject and we need only to point out
a few. In the case of Sin Tek and another v. Lekhany
Bros. (2) it was held that there js a distinction between
the meaning of the word " tenant " in the Urban Rent
"Control Act and the meaning of the word" tenant" under
the Transfer of Property Act ; and that a tenant-holding-
over after the determination of the tenancy is a tenant
within the meaning of the Urban Rent Control Act but
he is not a tenant under section I I 6 of the Transfer of
Property Act: Then again,. in the case of B. R. Kamdar v.
The Assi~tant Controller of Rents and others (3) it was
(x) ( 'N9) B.L.R. p. 14:i (S.C.). (2) (1952) B.L.R. p. 180 (H. C.).
(~) (1950) B.L.R. p. so (H.C)
held that the term " tenant '' in the Urban Rent Control
Act means one by whom, or on whose account rent for
MA Knn," the premises is paid, or the legal representative of a tenant~
MYiNT
1}. or a person deriving title from a tenant, or a tenant-holding
AH Smr
-over. Thus, it seems clear to us that a tenant who
remained in occupation of the p~emises after having ceased
to be a tenant in whatsoever manner his tenancy might
have been terminated is a tenant-holding<>ver and as such
falls within th~ purview of section 2 (g) of the Urban Rent
Control Act.
The learned Counsel for the applicant also makes most
of the fact that the definition of the term " tenant "
appearing in the old Act of 1948 is not identical with that
appearing in the existing Act of 1960. It must clearly be
so for the first Act came out in English while the second
Act is in Burmese. However, after a careful comparison
of the two sections it does npt occur to us that then~ is.
any appreciable change as would either .restrict or widen
the scope of the term " tenant " as defined therein. There~
fore in spite of the alteration in .t he language the law as
explained in the rulings decided under the old Act stilt
holds good in so far as the term " tenant " is concerned.
'yVe are greatly impressed by the argument put
forward by the learned Counsel for the respondent that
the term < tenant " used in section 2 (g) of the Act shouid
be read with reference to the context of other sections irr
the Act as well. He invites our attention to sub-sec:tion (2}
of section 12 of the Act where the word" tenant '~is used
although it postulates the case of .a tenant against whom
an ejectment decree has aJready been passed. .We are
accorilingly inclined to the view that the word " tenant "
in section 2 (g) of the Act also includes a tenant against
. whom an ejertment decree is subsisting but who has not
yet vacated the premises as m the case of the respondent
before us.
It may also be mentioned in passing that the Urban

Rent Control Act was first enacted with a view to allay
M ... KBIN
the plight of the tenants during the period of shortage of M YINT
housing accommodation in the urban areas as an aftermath o.
AH SHu
of the Second \:Vorld vvar. Vve could clearly envisage
the case of a tenant who in spite of an ejectment decree
against him was unable to immediately move out of the
premises due to lack of alternative accommodation.
Would it then be fair if he w~re to be allowed to fall a
victim to rack-renting without being able to avail himself
of the remedies afforded by the statute which was primarily
designed to safe-guard his interest? We do not think
this was ever intended by the legislature. Therefore, jf
such a strict construction as has been placed by the
learned Counsel for the appellant be employed in constru-
ing section 2(9) of the Act ~t would surely defeat its OV\fn
object. Vve are fortified in this view by the ruling in the
case of Mrs. Constance Minoa w riter v. A. M . Khan (4)
where the following observations are apposite :-
"The Urban Rent Control Act was enacted to solve the
bousi:r.g problem consequent upon the scarcity of residential
and ot1er buildings after the second World War. The
normal rights of the owners have been restricted in various
ways : and to the incidence of the contractual relation are
super-imposed many terms never in the contemplation of
the p<mies. The integrity of the con"tractnal relationship is
consequently affected by the Act. In interpreting Statutes
such construction of a Stat ute shall be made as shall sup
press the mischief and advance the remedy."
Therefor~, in the light of the findings arrived at by us

this appeal fails and is heyeby -dismissed with costs:
Advocate's fees being assessed at K 85 ...
(4) (1951) B.L.R. p. I69 (S.C.).

SPECIAL LEAVE CIVIL APPEAL

Bf#ore D1. Maung ]\1:aung, C .J., U Chit and U Seiu Thimi, JJ.
c .c. MA TIN AYE AND ONE (APPELLANTS)

1965
Ocf. 8. v.
U SAN KYU (a) U N~'A NINDA AND ONE (REsPoNDEN1s).*
/
Japanese Currency ( Ef!aluation) .4ct of 1947-:ohethq~ it. has retrosp. ctivtt operv._tio1l.
In the year 19.:15 the suit land was 1110rtgaged by the first respondent and his
late wife Ma Khin to Maung Htwe (deceased), father of the appellants, for
. a sum of K r,4qo by way of usufructuary mortgag::. Sometime afterwards
the mort.gagors offered to redeem the land but to no av:il. They then filed
a suit for recovery of pos.>ession on the basis of fleir title and it was decre,e d.
On appeal the District Court confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial
Court. In the second appeal as well as in the Civil Appe.a l the appellants
were unsuccessful.
The question which arises in this. app~al is : -"whether the Japanese
Currency (Evaluation) Act of 1947 has retrospective operati!)n so that a
mortgage of land in the year I9+5 involving a sum of Rs. r .400 in Japanese
C urn:ncy could be equat~d with a mortgage forK 70 as calculated i;l accordance
with the Schedule under s. 3 of the Act."
Held : As pointed out b)' the learned Judges of the D~nch which decided
the Civil Special App.:al No. 3 of 1~61 of this Court it is settled law that no
retrospective operation could be given to a statut<:- unless it is t:Xpressty statej
to be so or unl es3 it clearly aris:!S by necessary implication. Neit:1cr expressed
nor implied provision for the r.:trospective operation of the Act can be found
in it.
Ko !.1amtg Tin v. U G(m llrlan, R.L.R. (t9~-7). p. 149 at 156; J~!m William
Cree v. Vi.Jlet F.!itr!!l>cth Cree, B.L.R. (1952) (H. C.), p. 53 ; 1\1mrs. Burma
Cvrpcrati.m Limited v. The Unioa of Burma, (r953) B.L.R. (H.C.), p. 'I-OJ ;
U Hoke Scin v. The Contr::Jller of Rents, (1949) RL.R. (S.C.), p. x6o; Bab:1
. Ram Das v. U il1!!;mg Gyi and f,:;ur ot.'zers. (1959) B.L.R. (S.C.), p. 179,
ref.:rred to.
U Hla Pe (2) for the appellants.

U Hla Gyaw for the respondents.
U SEIN THINN, ].-Simple as are the facts of the case out

of whi~h the present appeal arises a la\v point of consider~
able interest present before us in the following form.
Special Leave Civil Appeal No. 11 of xg63 against th~ dt:cree of ~he
Benc!l of t:11! iate Higi1 C'Jl!rt sit<ing at Mandaiay in Civil Appeal No. 3 of
xq6o, dat~J 13th July rQ62.
Whether the Japanese Currency (Evaluation) Act of 1947 c.c.

h as retrospective . so t h at a mortgage o f }an d m
. operation -I96S
.
t he year I945 mvo 1vmg
. . Japanese
a sum of Rs. I ,400 m MA TIN AYlf.
AND oNE
currency could be equated with a mortgage for K 70 as u SA~- Kvu

calculated in accordance with the Schedule under section 3 (a) u NvA
. . . NINDAAND
of the Act. The question occurs m the followmg oNE.
manner:-
In the year 1945 the suit land was mortgaged by the
first respondent and his late wife Ma Khin to Maung Htwe
(deceased), father of the appellants, for a sum of K I .400
by way of usufructuary mortgage. Sometime afterwards
the mortgagors off~red to redeem the land but to no avail.
They then filed a suit for recovery of possession on the
basis of their title it was decreed. On appeal to the Dic;trict
Court of Myingyan the District Judge in his Civil Appeal
No. 5 of I959 confirmed the judgment and the decree of
the trial Court holding that the suit land was mortgaged
by the first respondent and his late wife Ma Khin to
Maung Htwe and that the respondents offered to redeem
the suit land from the appellants who refused to accept
the mortgage debt and to allow redemption of the suit
land. A second appeal was then preferred to the late
High Court, sitting at Mandalay, and was taken up by
U Ba Nyunt (J) in Civil Second Appeal No. 56 of I959
In that appeal it was contended that in-as-much as the
payment of K 1,400 in the year I945 was equivalent to
K 70 according to the Japanese Currency (Evaluation) Act
the mortgage created by U San Kyu and Ma Khin at
that time was a valid mortgage and that therefore the
respondents should have filed a suit for redemption rather
than a suit for possession based on title. It was also argued
that as ~e offer for redemption was made to the de-facto
guardian who could not accept a mortgage sum on behalf
of the minors it was not valid in law. We may here
pause to mention that the same grounds were t::\ken in
83-8 BURMA LAW REPORTS
the present appeal before us as also in th<; Cidt Special

' '~~:' .MA T.'IN AYE
Appeal No. 3 of r96o of this Court \vhere a Bench of
4}.)<;,..f.}~IJ tlw; Courl upheld the dedsion ot rbe Second AppeU ate
""
U .611.:-< Klf') Court. As v;e are entirely in agreement wlth the findings
(a) UNYA arrived at by the ]earned Judge~ 1n the aforesaid prrl-
NZNDA AND
ceedings we nc;-ed only to add a fcvv observations by way
of fortifying t i;d r decisions.
The Japanese Currency (Evaluation) Act of 1947 fotmd
its way to the St~tute Book dosely in ~he wake of the
following observations made by Goodman Roberts, C.J.
in the case of Ko M aung Tin v. U Gon Man ( r) :
. ".But the ma~ter brooks no delay and it is most earnestly
to be hoped that within a very few weeks of this judgment
some legislation, even if of an emergency or te1i1porary
t:haracter; will b:: enacted. l have rarely ventured to press
the necessi<.y for legislation upon the legislative authorities.
lt is the business Of the judges to interpret and to administer
the law. But this becomes dif1ktt1t indeed when they are
faced with th~ alternative of deliberatdy inflicting hardship
up.:m one of the parties jn every suit. or of directing in each
suit a further inquiry into tht! ccor:o111ic sim?.tion at a
pc:rricular place . at a particular time- such inquiry bting
useful only in respe.:-t of a par~icular dt-dsion and having no
application tt> the generality of eases that come bc.for(' tbe
Courts."
In. that case th,.:! (~ aestio::-. v:as as to what principles the

Courts should fo llmv in del.eunining' tlre . ar110Unt of com-
pensation to be awarded to . a person under section 70
of the .Contract Act. T'nus 'it is cle~ir that the Japanese
Currency (Evaluation) Act was enacted solely with a view
to obviate the nece.ssity for the Courts to enter into pro-
longe :: ....-=lui:ries :reg2::~ii:.g the amount to be a\varded in
respect of any debt or contractual obligation entered into
during the period of the Japanese occupation and which
remains unsatisfied or undischarged. We are th c:refcr;~ c.~':
unable to subscr.ibe to the view as presented by the learne~1 ~::.::::
;..._...ounse1
,_ -: f or f-l ,.,p,l, ..... f-1-: r .._l -,r -. ~!-~ f r1"r L :"l;C :\{\ I'N AYB
.. :1e .. pp~ .,~ , , t S La-l~ 1 1e n .. e,.~; -n o , o: .... , ~.'' ~~-0 o:-.:1>
l
lature in cnacti:w. the sai.: Act was with a view m c~:.... : r u.

:5"-N KY!.1
.all t ransaction:; i!"!voivi:Ig the so-called Japanese curren<:'y ,.1 ,_,,)!'1!1:~
t:.r N vA
~ND
throut;hout the pe,.ll'U 0f the Japanese occupation of the -:.:-;R,
country. Vle would even venture to pl)ir:t ('Ht that .such.
a proposition would surely lead to confus!on; for rnany
.a contract which were otherwise valid would on account
of the retrospective operation of the Act becom.e Yaiid :
manv , a documenr: which ,verc adm!ssible would hecorne .
jnadmissible; and all the adj udications given by the Courts
o n the basis of such contracts or documents would be
:rendered illega).
Moreover from the very wordings of the Act it~cif it

JS apparent that no retrospective ~peration was ever in-
tended by the legislature. Se2tion 3 deariy relates to the
4ucst.ion of paym.e nt for thl:' discharge of any debt or
contractual obligation that remains wholly or partially
unsatisfied or undischarged at the time of the military
occupation of .the area in which the same was incurred,
while sect!on 4. covers or- iv Su('b kind of debt or obligation
as had been 'Nholly paid or discharged and for which
payment had aiready been accepted. vVe do hot therefore
see how any of the Section:; cf this Act coui::f be mzdt:: to
validate the transaction r.:elai:ing to the present c;,se hefore
:us.
As pointed out by the learned Judges of the Bench

which decided the Civil Special Appeal No. 3 of 1960 of
this Court it is settled law that no retrospective operation
could be given Lc; :; statute unle-;s it i::; expressly stated
to he so or unless it clearly arises by necessary implication.
As authorities for this proposition we need only to re-
iterate the various rulings cited by the learned Judges.
;9~5 Please see John William Cree v. Violet Elizabeth Cree (2) ;-
- Messrs. Burma Corporation limited v. The Union of Burma
M AT!'< AYE
AND ONE (3) ; and U Hoke Sein v. The Controller of Rents (4).
u SA~ KYU Therefore as neither expressed nor implied provision for
J~~ ~~~ the retrospective operation of the Act can be found in it-
0NE. we have no alternative but to reject the first ground
of appeal put forward by the learned Counsel for the
appellants.
Regarding the second ground of appeal we are of
opinion that the ruling in the case of Babu Ram Das v.
U Mg Gyi and four others (5) is a complete answer to this
issue for in that case the following observations were
made-
"While we accept the principle enunciated in Ko U Mar's
case that ~ection 53A may be invoked where possession had
been given on a document purporting to be one of mortgage.
but which is invalid for want. of registration we are unable
to subscribe to the further observation appearing in the
judgment that a suit for recovery of possession based upon
title must be preceded by an offer to pay back what had1
been received."
For all these reasons this appeal is hereby dismissed:

'\-Vith costs.
Advocate's fee fixed as (three) gold mohurs.
(z). B.L.R. (1958) (H.C.), p . 53 (4) (19~~}) B.L: R. (S,C.), p. i6o~

(3) {1953) B:L.R. (H.C.), p. 403. (s) (1959) D.L.R. (S.c.), p . 1 79
CRIMINAL REVISION
Before U Kynw Zan U, J.
MAUNG SET HTAVv' (a) MAUNG NYEIN MAUNG c.c.

1965
(APPLICANT)
Oct. 6.
v.
THE UNION OF BUR~A (RESPONDENT).*
Fore~f(ners R eglst1ation Act s. 5 (I)-Constitution s. I 1 (ii)-a citizen ~r the

Union under-no necessity to renew the Foreignf!Ts Registration Certificate.
Held: It cannot be disputed that the applicant was already a citizen of
t he Union under the Constitution and not merely a person deemed to be a
citizen of the Union when he applied for Union Citizenship. A person being
a citizen of the U nion there is no necessity to renew his Foreigners Registration
Certificate if he has taken one.
~ "( T) roo:>:>J~Oip<X>C
OO>:nO)J<l G:>
~ o <~ ~ c: ~ o~ .
t<: tJ~GCO?C~c:JfU?~CCI r. c:r c: ~" ~
oeoot crrw')C:j~'IC~U
o?!i ( co'P:~o5~oo~) 11
Indu Bhai , .. The Union of Burma, (1963) D.L.R. 384 (C.C.), refcrred to
Kali Mutu v. The U11ion of Burma, (r96z) B.L.R. I (C.C.) ; ].>. K. Dutta v
The Superi11tendeut, Central Jail, Rangoon, (1953) D.L.R. 83 (S.C.).
distinguished .
8ishna Lal v. The Unicm of Burma, (1959) B.L.R. 3 (H.C.), reft:rrcd to
and followed.
U Hla Nyun fqr the applicant.

U Ba Pe (Government Advocate) for the respondent.
U KYAW ZAN U, ].- This is the recommendation of the

learned Sessions Judge of Katha in his Criminal Revision.
No. 2 of 1965, to set aside the conviction of the applicant
un~er section s(r) of the Foreigners Registration Act for
his failure to renew the certificate under the rules framed
thereunder and the sentence to pay a fine of K 30 or in
default .to suffer I 5 days rigorous "imprisonment ~nd to
.., . Criminal Revision No. zs (B) of 1')65. Review of the order of the s ub-
divisional Magistrate of Knwlin, dated the 9th day of February 1965, passed
in Criminal Regular Trial No. z68 of ; 964.
c.c. direct an acquittal. The learned Government ..c:._dvocate

1065
supports the recommendation.
J\..j.;r ::Nr; ~3l!T
H r .>.\V(a)
:tv:f.~UNG The trial Court found that the ~pplicanfs mother
!~1..!Z!~
is ~ pure Burmese \von1a!1 \\'hile hi.s f~ti1er 1::: a Ch irldt~an .
Ji.1;,u:-;G
v. <:l foreigner. The learned District Magistrate of !{:tttia as
TH!l 'l::';)I!ON
1)1" _Br:tM.A~ per Exhibit No. I directed him ro file h is <.<.n ~r nded
application for citizenship ot the Union :1t:d his ~.ffidavit.
Finding that the applicant's rnaternal g1and parents were
also Burmese he recommended to rhe Ministry of immigra-
tion and -National Registration as per Exhlbit No. 2. for the
issue of the Union Citizenship Certificate. There is no
evidence that the applicant is recognised. as a cjtizen of
the Peop~es' Republic of Ch ina.
There is evidence on record to show that the applicant
(i) was bprn in Burrna and (ii) his maternal grand parents
were pure Burmese. Accordingly. he is a citizen of t.~e
Union of Burma under section I I (ii) of the Con.s!:'itution.
But section r2 of the Constitution gives power to the-
Parliament "to make such laws as it think<> fit in respect
of citizenship ", and accordingly the P'a rliament made a
law known as the Union Citizenship Act, being Act No. 66.
of I948'. sub-section (2.) of Section 4 of which says if a
p erson has resi~lecl perm4lncn1ly in Btmna s;nce t ht: rime of
his grand pa!ents and. he as well as both his parents were
born in Burma he is to be deemed a citizen of the Union
. fB urma. coro0)'
D
C'G/'1') C'<) (' ('C {',-,(' OC
romQ~yumaoc .;,.c ' ;Go::>?c011.}~ ~:>~cc
.11.l 1 GO)r
IJ \tl L l ., l D
- .-- l 1
(I). Under this sub-section it must be shown that both 11is
paren~s were also born in Burma. In_du Bhai v. The
Ui:ian of Burma (2). In the instant case the applicant has
complied. with all
the requirements of section II(ii) of the
Constit1,1tion .and of sub-section (2) of section 4 of the
Vnion Citizenship Act, I948, except one, that is, both his
parents were not born in Burma. The trial Court was quite
correct in pointing out this missing link in its judgment.
(1) (1961) B. L.F~ 136 (H.C.).
J'he applicam's father U Set Mi (OW 3) a Chinaman

admits he V\.-as born in China and a foreigner. and
~\I~. NC ~.;.~r
therefore, the applicant cannot he clcemcd to he a citize-:;, I 1
L~ JO..t~(a)
~'!At.:NG
of the Union of Burma under this <;uh-section (2) of ;-\.j'ff.JN
'ection 4 of the Union Citizenship Act. 19'f8 though. of i'i'r.ttt!!-!G
r.l.
course. he is a citizen under section r .t(ii) of the Constitl! l'Hl't !J~:!ON
(Yf1 Bv~?.-r.A.
rivn. rcr this rt.a.son. perhaps, the applic:~nt applied for
tfnion Citizenship.
Suh-section. (2) of section 6 of the Unio11 Citizenship

.Act, 1948, as amended by Act No. r6 of 1957 however
e;npowers the Min~ster to issue a Union Citizenship
certificate not only to a person qualified under section -}(2)
of the Union Citizenship Act. but al<;o to a person who is
a ci i izen under section r ,r (ii} of the Constitution. In the
present case t.l-te District Magistrate, has already reccm-
mended the app~icant to the Ministry that he is a fit person
to be a citizen of the Union. The applicant has. of course.
not yet received the certificate, but this should not deprive
him of the Union Citizenship when (i) he is a citizen
under the Constitution, (ii) the learned District Magistrate
has recommended him to the Ministry for the iS$Ue of the
Union Citizenship certificate as required by l(1v1 and '(iii)
the Minister has .authority to is~ue the certificate to him.
The facts in Kali Mutu v. The Union of Burma (3) referred
1o by the trial Court are distinguishable from the facts ln
t:-:.e present case. In that case the ~~nlicant Ka!i Mutu
2Pf~.ied for Union Citizenship under sub-section (2) of
section 4 of the Union Cirizenship Act whereas the appli-
cant in the present case is a citizen of the Union under
section u(ii} of the Constitution. I think in the judgment
of that case second figure ' 6' in the fourth line at page 54
of the Burma Law Reports is a misprint. !t shol!!d be
' 4 ', In that case there was no evider. ... that the appii-
-cant Kali Ivfutu could even be deemed i e a citizen of
(J) (1962) B.L.R. 51 (C.C.).
c.c. the Vnion of Burma under section 4(2) of the Union
1965
Citizenship Act. The case of P. K. Dutta v. The Superin-
MAUNG SET
HTAW(a) tendent, Central ]ail, Rangoon and two others (4) is a case
~~~~~ under the Union Citizenship (Election) Act, 1948 and is
MAUNe
v.
not applicab!e to the present case. The question of
THE UNroN changing the mind does not arise hexe as the applicant
OF BURMA.
being a citizen of the Union cannot renounce his Burmese
citizenship under section 15 of the Union Citizenship Act,.
1948 so long as he resides iri the Union of Burma. The
learned Sessions Judge should have discussed the law
applicable more fully and come to a clear view of the c~se
when he made the recommendation.. It cannot.be disputed
that ~he applicant was already a citizen of the Union
under the Constitution and not merely a person deemed
to be a citizen of the Union when he applied for Union
Citizenship. A person being a citizen of the Union there
is rio necessity to renew his Foreigners Registration Certi-
ficate if he has taken one. In the present case there is-
evidence to show that the applicant's father through fear
of prosecution took out a Foreigners Registration Certifi-
cate for him (applicant) in the year r951 very much
against his (applicant's) will. The mere fact that _a sitizen
of the Union holds a Foreigners Registration Certificate
would not make him an alien. Bishna Lal v. The Union-
of Burma (5). See also Indu Bhai v. Th e Union of Burma
(supra).
This is :undoubtedly a case fit for withdrawal under
section 494 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In these
circumstanc~ the conviction and sentence passed against
the applicant are . set aside and he is directed to be
acquitted. The fine paid shall be refunded.
(f) (195:3) D.L.R. 83 (S.C.) . (s) (1959) B.L.R. 3 (H.C.) ..

CRIMINAL REVISION
B~fore U Sein Thinn, :f.
MAUNG TIN NGVVE AND TWO (APPLICANTS) C.t:.

H)6S
. v. Oct. 1
THE UNION OF BURMA' (RESPONDENT)*

Public Propnty Protection Act s. 6(x) read with s. 9 - !IO order, dir!!cti011 or
mtification paddy to be sold o11ly tfl CO".Jtrnment.
Held : It is necessary to determine whether the 77 baskets of paddy were
'brought to the Government paddy purchasing point with' a view to have. them
S(l!d either under a contract or any law for the time being in force. It haS
been conceded that at all material times relating to the alleged offence the
Government has not yet issued any order, direction or notification by which
paddy were required to be eold: only to the Government. Therefore it was
clearlr no offence for a person to mill his paddy at a private mill at the time
when the ca.~c undt:! C:lnsideration took place.
U Maung Mauna Khin for the applicants.

U Kyaw Gaung (Government Advocate; for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-ln this application for revision the

three applicants: Maung Tin Ngwe, Maung Shein and
Maung Soon Leong seek. to .quash the charges under section
9
6 (r) read with section of the Public Property Protection
Act framed against them by the 5th Additional Magistrate,
Myaungmya, in his Criminal Regular Trial No. 58 of. 1964.
The facts giving .rise to this application were as follows:
In Crimina~ Regula~ Trial No. 12 of r964 of the rst Addi-
tional Magistrate, Ein-me, five persons including the present
three applicants before me were prosecuted under section
8 (r) of the Essential Supplies and Services Act. The
offence alleged against them wa~ jn respect of 77 baskets
of paddy which were brought by one, Maung Thaung
Criminal Revision No. IS (B) of I96s. Review of th'~ order of the sth
Additional Magistrate of Myauogmya, dated the xoth day of January 1965
passed in Criminal Regular Trial No. s8 of 1964 pra~ing that .the cruirge~
framed agai'nst 'the applicants be qu;lshed.
~9~: Shwe. a cultivator of Yengan Kwin village with a view

-~ to have them sold at the Government Paddy Purchasing
MAi%~Im Point.in Kankyidaung Village. This was on the 6th lasan
ANPv:'vo of Tabodwe, 1236 B.E. (r9th January 1964). On presen-
T-Hll UNioN tati.on tile paddy were found to be wet and were accord-
oP BURMA. .
mgly reJected. . It was, however, suggested that the paddy-
should be dried up and be offered for sale when they
conform to the standard required by the Government.
.tv1aung Thaung Shwe did not take the suggestion and
instead he mill.ed them into rice and sold the same to five
persons including the three applicants. The learned trial
Magistrate came to the finding that as no order has yet
been issued under section 3 (r) of the Essential Supplies.
anc) Services Act no offence was made out again..st the
accused. He accordingly discharged them under section:
253 (r) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This case
was taken up on revi<>ion by the Sessions Judge, Myaung~
mya, in his Criminal Revision Case No. 36 of 1964. By
his order dated the 28th April I 964, the learned Sessions.
judge directed a further enquiry under section 436 of the
said Code. II}. his order it was pointed out that the trial
Magistrate should have applied his Inind as to whether
the acts alleged against the applicants . fa II whhin the
purview of section 6 (r) of the Public Property Protection
Act. It was also remarked that any paddy brought by
a cultivator for the purpose .of selling the same to the
Government falls within the definition of ' public pro-
perty ' as cle1i.ned in section 2 (r) of the said Act. In
accordance vvith the said orde.r a new case was opened
against the . applicants, this time under section 6 (r) .of
the Public Property Protection Act. . The new case was
t.~ken up by the sth Additional Magistrate, Myaungmya,
in his Criminal Regular Trial No. sB of T964. The
learned Magistrate after examining 8 witnesses for the
prosecution discharged the :two accused. As regards the
three applicants before me charges were framed against
them under section 6 (r) of the Public Property Protection c.c.

1965
Act. Hence the present application.
M-\t:NG TI~
Now, the main point to be considered before me is 1:\cwg
whether the said 77 baskets of paddy whic.h were brought AND v:rwo
by Maung Thaung Shwe to the Paddy Purchasing Point 'l~~eB~~~~~~
to have them sold to the Government could be termed
' public property' within the meaning of section 2 (z) of
the said Act. ' Public property' as defined in the said
~ection means any store or equipment or any other pro-
perty whatsoever belonging to} or consigned to} or in-
tended for the use of the army. naval or air forces serving
in Burma or belonging .to, or consigned to} or intended
for the use of the Government of Burma or a~y local
authority, or any Board or Body constituted under any
law. Ute definition thus given is no doubt very wide. If
interpreted to the very letter of the law it may mean that
any private "property Will become public property once
it is intended for the use of the Government. In the
present case there is no doubt about the fact that the
paddy were originally brought from the village by Maung
Thaung Shwe with the intention of selling them to the
Government. Therefore} if the intention of the owner
be the main criterion for deciding whether a property is
either private or public property it is likely to lead to
absurd results. For we can imagine a person who at
first intended his property' to be sold to the Government
for the latter's use but, before he cou~d actually sell the
property he may change his mind in which case the pro-
perty which had already become public property would
again revert to private property. In .this connection an
instance pointed out by U Ba UJ CJ ~ in the case of Kin
Ma Ma Y. The Chairman~ Public Property Protection
Board, and another (r) is worthy of note:
" Take} for instance} the case of a man having several
bundles of piece-goods in his own possession as his own
(x) (r948) B.L.R. 574 (S.C.).
c .c . property, and an army officer coming round and telling him
1965
that these bundles of goods are required for use by the
NL\Ur<G T1N army and that they must not be sold to others. These
N GWE.
A;'ID TWO bundles of piece-goods would, according to the definition
v. given above, become public prope::-ty. Nobody in th~t case
THE UNION
OF BURMA. would have any sense of security with his own property-.
That would even in a way be in conflict with article 23 of
the Constitution."
It was accordingly held that having regard to tbe

whole context of section 2(i) what public property means
is, and includes one's own property if it is intended either
under contract Qr any law for the time being force for
the use by the army, navy, etc. It is; therefore, necessary
for me to deterwine whether the -said 77 baskets of paddy
were brought to the Government. paddy purchasing point
\vith a view to have them sold either under a contract-or
any law for th~ time being in force. The learned
Government Advocate has conceded that at all material
times relating to the alleged offence the Govern-
ment has not yet iss.u ed any order, direction or notifica-
tion by whi~h paddy were required to be sold only to
the Government. No doubt, at present_a notification has
been issued prohibiting all kinds of private transactions
in respect of paddy and other essential commodities.
Therefore, while it would be an offence subsequent to
the issue of the said notification for a person to deal with
paddy in contravention of rules and directions issued by
the Government it vias clearly no offence for a person to
mill his paddy at a private mill at the ti-me when the case
under consideration took place. In the circumstances it
is quite dea:r that the learned Magistrate. in. framjng-
charges against the three applicants before me . under
section 6 ( r) of the Public Property . Pro!ection Act has
acted illegally. The charges framed against them should
not therefore be allowed :to stand. I .would accordingly
quash them as prayed for by the applicants.
CIVIL REFERENCE
Before Dr. Maung Mmmg, C.J., U Chit and U Thet Pe, JJ.
MESSRS. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD., (APPLICANT) c.c.

1965
v. Sept. 21.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BURMA

(RESPONDENT).*
Burma l11come-tax Act, s. 66 (z)-reference-whether interest 011 borrowed
capital allO'Wable deduction wrder s. 10(2) (iii) of the Burma Income-tax
Act read with Rule 33 of the lne<m~-tax Rules-whether Route Developme~~t
E":pendituu mr all()f))able deduction under s. 10(2) (ix) of the Bunna Iucome-
tax Act read with Rule 33 of the Burma Income-ta~ Rules.
Under s. 66(z) ot' the Burma Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Appellate
Tribunal has referred the following questions : -
(z) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the sum of
K: xs,o1,232 being interest on borrowed capital, was an allowable
deduction under s. 10(2) (iii) of the Burma Income-tax Act read
with Rule 33 of the Burma Income-tax R'Uies.
(2) ''Vhether on the facts and circumstances of the case the sum of
K 1,22,285 being Route Development expenditure was an
allowable deduction under s. 10(2) (ix) of the Burma Income-tax
Act read with Rule 33 of the Burma Income-tax Rules.
Noting that the assesee has withdrawn the claim for the difference out
of HK$ z,sor,232 the Court would say that on the facts and circumstances of
the case the sum of HK$ 1,457,441 being interest on borrowed capital/was an
allowable deduction under s. 10 (2)(iii) of the Burma Income-tax Act ~ead
with Rule 33 of the Burma Income-tax Rules. Therefore, the answer to
the first question is in the affirmative.
On the facts i.e. it is the general practice among airway companies to enter-
tain guests invited for inaugural flights and to pay their hotel expenses, etc.,
in accordance '"ith the resolutions of the International Air Transport
Association-as stated by .the Appellate Tribunal the answer to the second
question is also in the affirmative.
Messrs. Bharat Line Ltd. v. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ra11goon,
(1963) B.L.R. p. 31(C.C.), referred to.
U Paing for the applicant.

U Ba Kyaw {Assistant Attorney-General) for the respondent.
Civil Reference No. rz of 1963 against the order of the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal of Rangoon in its appeal No. 12 oft96z, dated z8th Decem-
l>er 1962.
59
c.c. DR. MAUNG MAUNG, C.J .-Two questions were referred
1965
to this Cour.t by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under
MESSRS.
CATHAY section 66 (r) of the Burma Income-tax Act as follows:
PACIFIC
AIRW:\YS I. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
CLro.
v. case the sum of HK$ r.sor,232, being interest
THBCOM
llf!SSIONER OF on borrowed capital, was an allowable
INCOMB-TA..'\:1
BURMA.
deduction under section ro (2) (iii) of the
Burma Income-tax Act read with Rule 33 of
the Burma Income-tax Rules ;
2. Whether on the facts and circumstan~s of the
case the sum of HK$ r 22,285, being Route
Development Expenditure, was an allowable
deduction under section ro (2) (ix) of the
Burma Income-tax Act read with Rule 33 of
the Burma Income-tax Rules.
A Bench of this Court, in its order dated 28th December

1963, elucidated. the principles that should guide the
search for the answers, but pointed ou t that further
particulars are needed for a .complet e and final decision ..
Under section 66 (4) of the Burma Income-tax Act, there-
fore, the case was referred back to the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal so that the necessary facts and material
might be gathered and a further statement of case made.
The Appellate Tribunal has now made the further
statement.
On the matter of interest which the assessee has:
claimed to have .paid on borrowed capital, the Appellate
Tribunal states that certificates of payment up to
HK$ I.457.44I have been issued by 'the Hongkong and
Shanghai Banking Corporation to the assessee and solemn
assurance has been received from the Bank's Chief
Accountant that relationship between the Bank and the
4ssessee is purely one of banker and client and the Bank
has no interest in the success or failure of the assessee's;
busines,s. U Paing, 'learned Counsel. for the applicant, c;c.

r96s
submits that the principles laid down in Messrs. Bharat
Line Limited v. The Income-tax Appe1late Tn"b unaJ, CATHAY MESSRS.
Rangoon and one (r) should apply to the facts as stated PAciFic
AIRWAYS
by the Appellate Tribunal and an'affirmative answer should LiP.
therefore be given to the first question. U Ba Kyaw. the Tm ~(:0~1-
learned

Assistant Attorney-General, states that he has M IssxoNna r
1NCO.MET_AX,
nothmg to add. BuRMA.
Noting that the assessee has withdrawn the claim for

the difference out of HK$ r,sor,232, we would say t):lat on
the facts and circumstances of the case the sum of
HK$ 1.457.44I , being interest on borrowed capital, was
an allowable deduction under section ro (2) (iii) of the
Burma Income-tax Act read with Rule 33 of the Burma
Income-tax Rules.
In regard to the second question the Appellate Tribunal
has submitted that it is the general practice among airway
companies to entertain guests invited for inaugural flights
and to pay their hotel expenses, etc. This practice, it is
pointed out, is accepted by the International Air Transport
Association which has. however, imposed strict control on
the expenditure in orde.r to prevent any individual airway
company from taking undue advantage. Copies of resolu-
tions of the International Air Transport Association
relevant to .the matter were placed before the Appellate
Tribunal together with details of the new services
inaugur~ted by the applicant company. The Appellate
Tribunal submits that the expenditure claimed by the
applicant appears to be reasonable.
In the light of this information, U Paing submits, the
answer that we should give to the second question should
also be in the affirmative. On this also U Ba Kyaw, the
learned Assistant Attorney-General, has nothing to add.
(t) (1963) B.L.R. p. Jl (C.C.).

c.c. The learned Bench of this Court, in its order of 28th'
rs
December 1963, having propounded the principles which
MEssRS.
CATHAY would govern a decision on this question we need not
PACIFIC
AIRWAYS further elaborate them. We would only say that on the
LTD. facts as stated by the Appellate Tribunal the answer to
"
'lim CoM the second question should also be in the affirmative.
114ISSIONBR
OF INCOME
TA.X, BuRMA
Each party will bear its own costs.
BURMA .LAW REPORTS 853
CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION
Before Dr. Maun.tt Maung, C.J., U Chit atld U Sein Thinn, J J.
MRS. 1. FOXWELL (APPLICANT) c.c.

1965
v. Oct. 8.
THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANGOON
A!'{O ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Burma Income-ta.1: Act-assessment to Income-tax on capital gaim wheth~t

travelling e:cpenses be construed as pemmal e":penditttre or e.."'p~nditure
deductible under the lt1come-tax Act.
The applicant has been assessed to income-tax on " capital gains " earned
by her for sale of a certain property. She was resident in London and came
to Rangoon on a ''isit during which the sale was made.. Her appeal
was dismissed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.
Held ; Whether the travelling expenses incurred by the assessee to be
present before the Chief Court at Rangoon to take measures to make the pro~rty
under sale transferable must be construed as personal expenditure or expen4
diture deductible under the Income-tax Act is purely a question of fact and
no question of law is involved.
U Tun Aung (2) for the applicant.
U Ba Kyaw (Assistant Attorney-General) for the respon.dent.
DR. MAUNG MAUNG, C.J.-The applicant Mrs. Foxwell

has been assessed to income-tax on "capi~al gains" earned
by her for sale of a certain property. She was resident
in London and came to Rangoon on a visit during which
the sale was made. She appealed to the Income-tax:
Appellate . Tribunal on several grounds and when the
appeal was dismissed, she applied for the reference of
several questions. which she submitted were questions of
law, to the Chief Court. The Appellate Tribunal con-
sidered her application fully '<lnd decided .to refuse it.
. Hence her coming here.
* Civil Misc. Application No. s of 196s,against the order of the Income-tax
Appellate Tribunal of Rangoon in Reference J{o. 4 of 1964 arising out of its
order dated the 23rd March 1964 passed in Appeal No: S of 1964.
c.c. Only two of the several questions that she framed are
1965
now taken before us by her learned counsel, U Tun
Mas. J.
FoxWEl-L Aung (2). And he does not seriously press the one which
v. questioned the determination o f " fair market value " of
Tlill.
INCOME-TAX
APPELLATE
the property. Two different assessors had surveyed the
TRIBUNAL, property and the Appellate Tribunal had accepted the
R-rncooN
AND Ot."E. valuation made by the National Housing Board.
The second question which U Tun Aung submits to us
is " whether the travelling expenses incurred by the
assessee to be present before the Chief Court at Rangoon
to take measures to make the property under sale
transferable must be construed as personal expenditure or
expenditur~ deductible under the Income-tax Act ?"
The Appellate Tribunal had considered this question
and found that no law was involved. Mrs. Foxwell had
travelled from London ,t o Rangoon and back.. and had
claimed that the journeys were made by her with the
direct object of effecting the sale of the property. The
Appellate Tribunal had not accepted the claim, pointing
out that she stayed in Rangoon for nine months, which
was ;1 rather long spell if she had only one single purpose
of selling her property. U Tun Aung concedes that
Mrs. Foxwell could .have appointed an agent in Rangoon
to act on her behalf in the Chief Court where she says
she had to initiate proceedings to have a gift of the pro-
perty previously made by her in favour of a missionary
institution revoked in order to restore title to herself as
a prelude to selling the property. He submits, however,
that the lawyer engaged by Mrs. Foxwell had advised her
to come to Rangoon and she had taken his advice.
U Tun Aung also concedes that there is nothing on
the records placed before the Appellate Tribunal to show
exactly. how long the proceedings in the Chief Court had
taken. In any case, as U Ba Kyaw, the learned Assistant
Attorney-General, points . out, the evidence adduced by
Mrs. Foxwell did not support her claim that she had visited c.c.
1965
Rangoon solely for the purpose of selling the property.
To bring her claim within the ambit of section I 2A {2) (i) MRs. J.
FoxwELL
Of the Income-tax Act, Mrs. Foxwell must prove that the (1.
THE
travelling expenses were incurred solely in connection INcOME-TAX
APPELLATE
with the sale 0f the property. She was unable to dis- TRJOUNAL,
.charge her burden of proof. RANGOON
M'D ONB.
That was purely a question of fact. The Appellate
Tribunal came to its conclusion after examining the
evidence before it. We do not see that any question of
1aw is involved, and we would therefore dismiss the
application.
CIVIL REGULAR SUIT

Bqore U Thtt Pe, J.
c.c. THE MINERAL RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
15
CORPORATION (PLAINTIFF)
Oct. 21.
v.
U BA YONE (DEFENDANT).*
Suit for recovery of pre-sale advances-cardinal principle construction of a written
agr6ement-burden of proof of the tu;n-observance of the directirm or 1zegligence
to discharge the duties--contract Act-ss. 21 r mzd zrz.
H~ld : It is the cardinal principle of construction of a written agreement
that whe.n the intention ofthe parties are clear and Wlequivocal, effect must
be given to it in the sense the parties have really intended.
Although the defendant was described as the trustee of the plaintiff in
respect of the ores extracted in one of the clauses of the contract, the rea}
intention of the parties was that they should adopt one another as principal and
agent in respect of the ores sold through the plaintiff.
Wilson v. Beva11, 7 C.B. 673 ; Volkart Brothers v. Rutnavelu Chetti, .I.L.R.
Vol. XVIII Mad. p. 63, referred to.
Held further : Since the relationship of principal and agent e!i:ists between
the parties, the defendant, in order to succeed his counter-claim, must ~how
that the loss was attributable to the non-observance of the direction given
by him or to the negligence of the plaintiff in the discharge of his duty within
the meaning of ss. 211 ~nd 212 of the Contract Act.
Narayan Deo v. Hanumat1tha Rao, A.I.R. (Il)So) Orissa p. 241, referred to.
Mr. S. K. Gosh (Government Advocate) for the plaintiff.
U Kyaw Myint for the defendant.
U THET PE, J.-The Mineral Resources Development

Corporation (herejnafter referred to as the plaintiff) sued
U Ba Yone of Tavoy (hereinafter referred to as the defen
dant) for recovery of K 37,603-73 paid on advance.
It was the case of the plaintiff that the defendant agreed
to work the Phaungdaw (Crest), Phaungdaw and .Wi<Ines
Mines and to export the mineral ores obtained therefrom
* Civil Regular Suit No. 78 of 1961.
through the Marketing Department of the plaintiff by an c.c.

tS
agreement dated the 21st March 1956, under the terms
Tll
of which the defendant had to pay to the plaintiff a com- MrNmw.
mission of 10 per cent on the gross sale proceeds of the ~~~~
mineral ores extracted and a further 2 Y2 per cent com- co~~~--
mission on all sales done through the plaintiff, apart from TioN
the royalties collected by the Government and the plaintiff u BA\"oNB.

in return agreed to advance 70 per cent of the value of the
market price of the mineral ores consigned by the defen-
dant. That the defendant on various occasions consigned
to the plaintiff for sale 23 tons 9 cwt. 2 qrs. and 25 lbs.
of wolfram for which the plaintiff paid and the defendant
received K 1,05,950 being 70 per cent of the value of the
ores consigned. That the aforesaid quantity of wolfram
was sold for a sum of K 97,3II87. That after all
deductions, including a sum of K 14,81686 being
interest charged on the advance of K 1,05,950 the net
sale proceeds totalled only K 68,34663 which was
found to be short from the pre-sale advance by K 37,603.73
and that the defendant had failed to refund the amount in
spite of repeated demands.
"The defendant resisted the plaintiff's suit on various
grounds and made a counter-claim from the plaintiff. He
contended that the sum of K 1,05,950 received from the
plaintiff formed only 55 per cent of the provisional value
of the mineral ores consigned to the plaintiff. That he
was under no liability to pay interest on the amount so
advanced. That tlie plaintiff as the agent of the defendant
was under a duty to sell the ores delivered by the defen-
dant immediately on a falling market with a view to mini-
mize the .loss. That the sale proceeds of the ores would
have fetched K 1,69,79422 had the plaintiff been
diligent enough to sell the ores immediately after delivery.
That. he had thereby suffered loss amounting to
K 63,844-22 over and above ~he amount of advances
c.c. received from the plaintiff and that he is counter-claiming

1965
the sum from the plaintiff.
THll
MINHRAL
RasdoRCES On the pleadings my learned predecessor framed the
DEVELOP
MENT
following issues :
CoRPORA-
TION I. Did the defendant suffer loss and damage as de-
v.
u BA YON!!. scribed in paragraph 6 of the written statement
and, if so, was the loss and damage due to
failure on the part of the plaintiff to discharge
its duty, if any, to sell the ores without up.dti.e
delay after delivery ?
i. Is the plaintiff entitled to interest as claimed in
paragraph 4 of the plaint ?
3. Did the sums of money advanced from time to
time by the plaintiff to the defendant represent
70 per cent of the provisional value of the
ores consigned, as alleged in paragraph 3 of
the plaint, or did they represent 55 per cent
of the provisional value of the ores as asserted
in paragraph 2 of the written statement ?
4 To what relief, if any, is the plaintiff entitled ?
5 To what relief, if any, is the defendant entitled ?
Issue No.1
This is the vital issue on which the counter-claim of
the defendant must either succeed or fail. Before .going
into the merits of this issue, it is necessary to pause over
a novel po!nt raised by the learned Advocate for the defen-
dant, whq has :referred me to clause 5 of the Ex. 2 agree-
ment executed by the parties, by which defendant was
described as the trustee of the plaintiff in respect of the
mineral ores extracted. The plaintiff's case, the learned
Counsel for the defendant broadly insinuates, is not in
accordance with the contract of the agreement. But it
must be borne in mind that in construing a contract it is c. c.

1965
not an isolated word or clause but the contract as a whole
must be looked to. A perusal of clauses 6 and 7 of the Mr~~L.
agreement Ex. 2 will show that the plaintiff agreed to act ~~~~~~s
as the commission agent of the defendant in respect of the MENT
CORPORA
mineral ores extracted and sold through the plaintiff and TroN
the defendant was to receive the balance of the sale pro- v DA"Y.oNE.
ceeds obtained therefrom. The conduct of the parties did
not leave any room for doubt that the relationship of
principal and agent did really exist. This is clearly
evidenced by the averments made in the pleadings. In
paragraph 4 of the written statement the defendant has
described the plaintiff as his agent. Besides it is the car-
dinal principle of construction of a written agreement that
when the intention of the parties are clear and unequivo-
-cal, effect must be given to it in the sense the parties have
:really intended. In this connection I can do no better
than quote the following remarks of Cresswell, J. in
Wilson v. Bevan (1):
" When the intention of the parties to a contract is
sufficiently apparent, effect must be given to it in that sense,
though some violence be thereby done to the words. Where
the intention is doubtful the safest course is to take the
words in their ordinary sense."
'See also Volkart Brothers v. Rutnavelu Chetti (2). In the

instant case al'though the defendant was described as the
trustee of the plaintiff in respect of the ores extracted in
-one of the clauses of the contract, the real intention of
the parties was that they should adopt one another as
principal and agent in respect of the ores sold through the
plaintiff.
Since the relationship of principal and agent exist be-
tween the parties the d~fendant, in order t<? succeed his
( x) 7 C. B., 673- (z) I.L.R. Vo!. XVIII Mad. p. 63.
c.c. counter-claim, must show that the loss was attributable
1965
to the non-observance of the directions given by him or to
THE
MINERAL the negligence of the plaintiff in the discharge of his duty
RSOURCJiS
DEVEt.OP- within the meaning of sections 2II and 212 of the Con-
MllNT
CoRPORA
tract Act. In Narayan Deo v. Hanumantha Rao (3) the
TLON liability of an agent for negligence has been stated thus :
"
U BA YoN. "Where it can be shown that a loss sustained by the
principal is directly traceable to disregard on the part of
the agent of directions issued to him regarding the conduct
of business, even though such disregard may have been due
to no'thing worse than negligence or ove:v-confidence in the
honesty of others, such misconduct on -the part of an agent
is clearly actionable."
The defendant contended that the loss would have been

obviated if the plaintiff was diligent enough to dispose
of the mineral ores immediately after receipt from him
and that the plaintiff was guHty of gross negligence in
withholding the sale of the or~s until the market price
had reached rockbottom level. But it must not be !or-
gotten that the agreement between the parties does not
contain any provision for the sale of the mineral ores
immediately on receipt by the plaintiff. Besides, the
defendant was unable to consign a reasonable amount of
ore at one time. The schedule -attached to his written
statement shows that small quantities of ores are con-
signed on various dates. The evidence of U Mya Sein
(PVV 4), U Ba Tun (PW 3) and U Thein Tin (DW r) agree
that the optimum weight of mineral ores suitable for ex-
port is round about five tons and that it is neither desir-
able nor profitable to export mineral ores at a quantity
less than the said weight.
There is a dispute as to the nature of direction alleged
to have been given by the defendant regarding the sale
of the ores. Defendant contended that he had verbally
(3) A.J.R. (1950) Oris~a, p. 2P
instructed U Thein Tin the Sales Manager of the plaintiff c.c.

to sell out the ores immediately so as to minimize the loss -1965
.
TRil
as the market was declining but this allegation was denied MINBRAL
RliSOURCES
by U Thein Tin who stated that the defendant had ver- DEVELop.
bally instructed him to withhold the sale and wait for MENT
CoRPoRA
the market to improve. In this, he was supported by Ex. TION
13 letter written by him to the head office in Rangoon "

U BA YoNB.
informing that he had !"eceived about eight tons of ore
from the defendant and the sale had been withheld at the
request of the defendant. The letter was written on the
16th March 1957 long before the parties started thinking
of the present litigation. U Ba Tun (PW 3) had even
made a noting on this Jetter that the wolfram market was
reviving. All this go ta shqw that the parties were at
that time under the impression that the wolfram market
would revive one day and that the sale should wait until
the price became more favourable. On top of that, the
defendant had admitted on page 8 of his evidence that he
had given instructions to :U Thein Tin not to sell the ores
and to wait for a favourable market. The defendant
would have it that he had never made such a statement
but the fact that he had taken steps to correct :this state
ment-only on 18th May 1965 although the disputed state-
ment was actually made on 26th April 1963, coupled with
the reasons marshalled above, clearly shows that his sub-
sequent denial was a belated attempt to improve his case.
. Although the contract does not provide for obtaining
of any instruction from the defendant, the plaintiff cannot
be said to be negligent in the discharge of his duty for the
loss occasioned by continued falling market when there
is a specific instruction from his principal thal the sale of
the mineral ores should be withheld for a better market.
For the aforesaid reason, the anS-wer to the issue will be
that the loss suffered by the defendant is not due to the
negligence of the plaintiff.
c.c. Issue No.2

1965
Since the contract between the parties does not provide
THE
lVIINSRAL for payment. of interest on the amount advanced by the
RESOURCES
DEVELOP~ plaintiff, the claim for interest prior to the suit cannot be
MEN 'I'
CoRPORA-
allowed. In this connection a decision of the Privy Coun-
TION cil in Bengal Nagpur Railway Co., Ltd. v. Ruttanji Ramji
o.
U BA YoN. and others .(4) is relevant. It was held there that,
" Interest for the period prior to the date of the sUit may
be awarded, if there is an agreement for the payment of
interest at a fixed rate, or it is payable by the usage of
trade having the force of law, or under the provision of
any substantive law, en'titling the plaintiff to recover interest
as for instance the Court may award interest at the rate of
6 per cent per annum, when no rate of interest is specified
in a promissory note or bill of exchange under s. Bo, Nego-
. tiable Instruments Act."
See also Ramlal v: H. Prasad (5). In the present case the
plaintiff has not shown that there is a usage Qf trade having
the force of law to justify the award of interest. Besides,
it must not be forgotten that plaintiff had obtained more
than K 30,000 (Kyats thirty thousand only)as coriunission
on the sale of mineral ores made by the defendant to other
people and that the defendant had incurred heavy expen-
diture in improving the mines and severe losses due to the
falling market for which due consideration should be given
in his favour. The answer to the issue will therefore be
in the negative.
Issue No.3
Mr. S. K. Ghosh for the plaintiff and U Kyaw Myint
for the defendant submit that the decision of this issue is
1,1nnecessary for the correct decision of the present suit.
I concur with their submission and will not therefore bur~
d~n my judgment with the deliberations of this issue.
(4) A.J.R. (1938) P.C, p. 67. (s) A. T.R. (t9SS) Pat. p. 25-1-.
In t.~e result I direct that there shall be a decree for c.c.
1965
K 22,;86- 51 only in favour of the plaintiff against
THe
the defendant with costs thereon. The plaintiff is further Mll"ER..<\L
entitled to interest on the decretal amount at Court rate RESOURCES
DEVELOP-
from the date of the decree to the date of realisation. The MENT
CORpORA-
counter-claim of the defendant is dismissed. TION
f}.
u BA YONB.
CRIMINAL APPEAL
Bfjore U Sein Thinn, J.
c.c. THE UNION OF BURMA (ArPELUu"lT)
1965
Oct. x6. v.
MAUNG TIN MYINT (RESPONDENT).*
Appeal against the order of acquittal-conviction unde~ s. 3Sojro9 P.C.
Held: It is settled law that in order to convict a person of abetting the
commission of the crime it is not only necessary to prove that he has taken
part in those steps of the transaction which are innocent but in some way or
othe'rit is absolutely necessary to connect him with those steps of the trans-
action which are criminal. There is not a shred of evidence to show that the
respondent was aware of the absolute ownership of the properties by the
wmplainant. .
U Myo Htun Lynn (Government Advocate) for the

appellant.
U Than Tin for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, ].-This is an appeal by the Govern-
ment against the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions
Judge, Toungoo1 in his Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1964,
which arises out of Criminal Regular Trial No. r87 of
1963 of the 5th Additional Magistrate, Toungoo, in which
the respondent Maung Tin Myint along with tw9 others,
viz., Ma Kitty and Ma Thein Kyi were prosecuted under
section 380 of the Penal Code on a complaint filed by
U Tin. The facts of the case in a nutshell were as
follows : The accused Ma Kitty was the wife of the
complainant U Tin having been married to him for nearly
13 years. They lived together in Toungoo occupying a
rented house in Pabedan Quarter. The second accused
Ma Thein Kyi was a maid-servant employed by the
.cou~le. D~g the month of _April 1963, U Tin, who
* Criminal Appeal No. z.97 of 1964. Appeal from the order of the Sessions
Judge of Toungoo, dated the z.4th day of June 1964, passed in his Criminal
Appeal No. t8 of 1964.
BURMA LAW. REPORTS 865
was away from home for sometime came back to Toun- ;;~;
.goo o:nlyto find his house empty. It was common ground THE -UNION
that during U Tin's absence Ma Kitty left the house taking oF BuRMA
away with her all her personel effects as well as furniture MAu:;; TIN
and other household articles. It was alleged that in MviNT.
removing these properties she was assisted by the third
accused Maung Tin Myint who was a co-worker in the
same department where Ma Kitty worked as a Telephone
. ()perator. The learned Magistrate of the trial Court held
that the accused Ma Kitty in taking away the properties
belonging to her husband U Tin committed an offence
under section 380 of the Penal Code. He also found
Maung Tin Myint guilty of abetment of the o~ence com-
mitted by Ma Kitty. As regards the third accused Ma
Thein Kyi the lower Court held that she was only a maid-
servant who carried out the directions given her by her
mistress and as such she could not be held liable as an
.abettor. Ma Kitty and Maung Tin Myint were according-
'Jy convicted vyhile Ma Thein Kyi was acquitted. Ma
Kitty and Maung Tin Myint went up on appeal to the
Sessions Court, Toungoo, which, as pointed out above, was
-dealt with by the Sessions judge in his Criminal Appeal
No. 18 of 1964. The first appellate Court concurred with
the finding of the lower Court as regards the conviction
:and sentence passed on Ma Kitty. Regarding Maung Tin
Myint it was pointed out that he could not be convicted
:as an abettor inasmuch as there was no evidence on
record to prove that he h~d knowingly assisted Ma Kitty
Jn dishonestly removing the properties out of the posses-
:sion of the complainant V Tin. An order was therefore
passed acquitting Maung 'Tin Myint of an offence under
section 380/109 of the Penal Code. It was against this
order that the preseht.apneal is field.
The main ground of appeal before me now is that the
iirst appellate Cour:t erred in no~ convicting Maung Tin
Myitit of an offence of abetment although there was clear
6o
c.c. evidence on record to prove that he had assisted Ma Kitt y

1 65
9 when the latter shifted her residence. It was also con-
THEBUN10N
OF URMA
tended that the respondent
Maung Tin Myint in engaging
v. a car for the purpose of removing the pr9perties must be
MAUNG TIN
MYI!'tr. deemed to have acted vv1th
the know1edge that she (Ma
Kitty) had taken away the properties from her husband's
possession with a dishonest intention and also without his
consent.
It is settled law .t hat in order to convict a person of
abetting the commission of the crime it is not only neces-
sary to prove that he has taken part in those steps of the
transaction which arc innocent but in some way or other
it is absolutely necessary to connect him with those steps
of the transaction which .are criminal. In the present
case before me there is no shred of evidenc~ fo show that
the respondent was aware of the .absolute ownership of
.the properties by the complainant U Tin. It is even
doubtful whether Ma Kitty could he said to have com-
mitted an offence under section 380 of the Penal -Code
for it was held in many cases that if a person takes another
man's property believing under a mistake of fact and jn
ignorance of law that he has a right to take it he is not
guilty of theft because there is no dishones:t intention
even though he may caus~ wrongful loss. h was also
pointed out that if there be any fair pretence of right in
the property a persqn who t*es away such property can-
not be convicted of theft. In the present case before me
there is every reason to believe that Ma Kitty as the wife
of the complainant U Ti~ had acted in a genuine belief
that she was also a co-owner of the properties under con-
sideration. I do not also see how it could be said ~hat
she had removed the proper.ties out of the possession of
:the complainant U Tin for in law a wife's possession is
alw~ys equated with her husband's possession. The pro-
perties were at all material times relevan.t .t o ~his case
stin in t~e possession of Ma Kit_ty and as such They cannot
BURi\1A LAW REPORTS 867
be said to have been taken away out of U Tin's possession c.c.

1965
so long as they still remain in the former's possession.
. THE UNION
It is an accepted practice that where the decision of oF Bua!'.tA
the trial Court is an honest and not an unreasonable one MA.uN"G TIN
of which the facts are susceptibl~ the High Court will nol: MYINT.
interfere. Applying this test to the present case I find
that the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Toungoo, in
acquitting the respondent Maung Tin Myint is no.t un-
warranted by the facts and circumstances obtaining on
the record of the lower Court. The learned Government
Advocate who appears for the Government frankly sub-
mits that he could not support. this appeal. In the
circumstances I have no alternative but to dismiss this
appeal which is hereby dismissed.
868 BURMA LAW HEPORTS
CRIMINAL RE:VISION
Brifore U Trm Tin and U Kyaw Zan U,JJ.
c.c. THE UNION OF BURMA (APPLICAN:r)

x96s
Sept. 15. v.
W. T. MciNTYRE AND ONE (RESPONDENT).*
Re'!Jision against the order of discharge-cffences under s . 6 (1) and Il (I) of

the Foreign Exchange Regulalion Act, 1947 read ztith s. 120 B.P.C.-the
interpretation of laws.
Held : The modem trend of construction is where an eq~ivocal or
:ampiguous word leaves a reasonable dou~)t of its meaning which the canons
'(){ interpretation fail to solve, the benefit of the doubt shott!d be given to the
:subject and against the legislature which has failed to explain itself. It must
be remembered that the spirit of our free institutions require t."lat the
interpretation of all laws should be favourable to personal liberty.
'IVhere an enactment may entail penal consequences, no violence must
ibe done to its language to bring people wi.thin i't, bnt rather can: must he
.taken that no one is brought within it w:1o is not within its express language.
lf the lc,gislature has not used words s:.tffi.ciently comprehensive to include
.aU cases within its prohibition it is not competent to a Court to extend them
There is nothing clear to show on records that there was i~tent on the
:part of the respondents to secure dday in the receipt or to stop or cease the
receipt of the foreign exchange. If tJ1is b~ so these two cas~s do not fat! within
the ambit of the provisions of s. 6 (1) and II (1) of th.e Foreign Exchange
.Regulation Act, 1947.
P.C. Ra:y and one v. The U11io11 qf Burma,(x96x) B.L.R. I (S.C.), referred to .
.U Ba Gyaw (Assistant AttorneyGeneral) and U Tun Nyo

(Government Advocate) for the applicant.
C. C. Khoo for the respondent.
U KYAW ZAN u, J.-These two applications by the

Government to revise the orders of discharge of the two
respondents arose out of Criminal Regular Trials Nos . .s
and IO of 1957 of the Court of the Special (S.I.A.B. and
Criminal Revision No. 139B and I4'-'B of 1965. Review of the order of
the Sp::cial Judge II (S.I.A.B. and B.S. L.A.) of Rangoon, dated the 6th day
.()f August 1965, p:ns!d in Criminal Reg ... lar Trials Nos. 5 and 10 of 1957.
B.S.I.A.) Judge No. 2 of Rangoon where they were indicted c.c.

for the a!leged offences under sections 6 (I) and I I (I) of 96s
THE UNION
the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, I947 read with OF BURMA
~eu:ion r 2oB of the Penal Code for conspiring to do illegal "
\T.,'.T. MciN-
acts punishable with imprisonment for a term which may TYRE AND
ONE.
extend to three years and liable to fine. Under section
()(I) no person, or resident in, the Union of Burma, unless
exempted by the Controller of Foreign Exchange, shall
inter alia make payment, or draw, issue or negotiate any
bill of exchange to any pers.on or place any sum to the
credit of any person outside the Union of Burma, and
under section I I (r) of the said Act, except with the
permission of the Controller, no person-
" who has a right .(whether present or future and whether
vested or contingent) to receive any foreign exchange,........ .
shall do, or refrain from doing, any act with intent to secure
(a) that the receipt by him of the whole or part of 'that
foreign exchange, ......... is delayed, or
(b) that the foreign exchange or payment ceases, in
whole or in part, to be receivable by him."
In Criminal Regular Trial No. s.of 1957 the respon-

dents were accused of debiting to the rst respondent's
account and making sundry payments and transfer in the
year 1951 through the Bank in the United Kingdom of
foreign exchange issu.ed in Burma, and in the second case
they were accused of remitting foreign exchange in 1951
to their account with the Bank in the United Kingdom
inclusive of the commissio~ payable to them hereand for
making various payments and transfers to the bank abroad
in 1952 more specifically mentioned in 'the complaints
presented against them :Oy the Deputy Director of the
Bureau of Special Investigation (PW r), who is an ex
police officer.
The respondents are two of the partners of the well-
knowii firm known as A. Scott & Co. of Rangoon which
had been carrying on business since 1ong before the last

war as recognised bankers and as merchants until it was
THE U NroN
OF BURMA
nationalized by the Government a few years ago. They
t~. were authorised dealers in foreign exchang~ under the
W.TYREAND
T . Mc!N- Exch ange Regu1atlon
F.ore1gn Act, 1947 and has branches
oN~. in many places abroad.
We think it will be useful to give the background of
the two cases briefly before we tackle the main point
raised by the learned Government Advocate in his argu-
ment. Jt will be seen that :the prosecutions of the two
respondents, who are foreigners, arose out of the transac-
tions entered by them in the year I9SI/I9S2. U Aung
Nyunt Pe, t~e Exchange Control Officer .(PVv 9) referring
to Exhibit L Circular deposed that " Foreigners in Burma
can operate on .their accounts expressed in any fo;reign
.currency other than U.S. dollars" until it "was later
cancelled by :the Exchange Control Dep.artment Notifica~
tion No. 36, dat~d 24th September 1955:" According to
him the Exhlibit No. 2B is the rst respondent's permit
issued by the Controller to effect remittances to the
United Kingdom for self and family from October I95I
to March 1952. He further deposed that if a firm has a
banking account in England which is not connected with
any business or profession here it can operate on that
account without permission. He stated tha.t nothing
could prevent the respondents to direct .their banker in
England to pay a sum covered by .the permit plus an
excess amount not so covered from the firm's account not
connected with business or profession. In this connection
P. Solomon, a witness for the prosecution with a long
experience in banking business depose! that a holder of
the General Permit like the respondents for a period of
six months could send any amount in any particular
month so long as they did not exceed the permitted
amount during the allowed period. He said if the respon-
dents had a General Permit to send 200 a month for a
BURMA LAW REPORTS
period of six months they might send 400 in the first c.c.
1965
month and nothing in the following month. It may be
of interest to note that sub-section (2) of section 6 declar~..s T;: B~~
that it is not unlawful to make any payment already w .T~MciN
authorised with the for~ign exchange retained by a person TYBB AND
in pursua.nce of an authorization granted by the Control- oNB.
ler, and sub-section (3) says nothing in section 6 shall
restrict the doing by any person of anything within the
scope of any authorization or exemption granted under
the Act. U Aung Nyunt Pe agreed that out of the three
items of the alleged offences mentioned in the complaint
in Criminal Regular Trial No. 5 of !'957 the first two
could be no offences if the above conditions wete
:satisfied. The complainant in the case deposed-
" For the purposes of this prosecution I am maintaining
an allegation under sections 6 (I,) and II .(1) of the Foreign
Exchange Regulation Act against the two accused. My
allegation is that the accused had delayed 'the repatriation of
the Foreign Exchange earned or owned by them. I have no
authority to direct the two accused to repatriate the foreign
exchange but in the course of my investigation I enquired
'them whether they had done so or not. To my enquiry the
(they ?) replied that the foreign exchange earned later by
'them was bee1;1 {being ?) arranged to be repatriated into the
country. Because I found that they had not repatriated the
'foreign exchange covered by the period of my investigation
I filed this q>mplaint."
nxcluding the inadmissible evidence of the statement made

:by the accused in the course of the investigation if is thus
~lear the cardinal point in the prosecution was the alleged
delay in the repatriation of the foreign exchange by the
:accused (respondents). A good deal of documents not
:actually relevant were filed l?Y the prosecution. They
only created confusion by touching upon points not
.actually in ~ssue. The prosecution could have so'rted out
'Only those that were relevant and filed in the proceedi~gs .
872 BURMA LA:.W. REPORTS
c.c. In the second case the learned trial Judge in his order had
1965
found one item of the alleged unauthorised dealing was
~EB~:~~N subsequently approved by the authorities, and on reading
v. the records it appears to us that the charges were by no
W'.'!;~~~r:- means definite.. If there was approval it is spineless no\v
oNii. to agitate by the prosecution over the use of the word
" condon<ition " by the learned trial judge in his order.
It serves no purpose. With regard to the first charge the
draft for 46o-6sh-Id. was issued by the 2nd'
respondent in favour of the bank in the United Kingdom ..
The origi:r:;al drafr was not . obtainable. When the com-
plainant w;1s asked whether the amount was actually
drawn out:. ;a t the foreign exchange of this country ~e
merely answered-
"Since 27th December r95r certain sums in pound sterling
were acquired by A. Scott & Co. and since 't~is sum of
460-6-r.d was not repatriated into the country but givetl'
out in Scotland the foreign exchange reserve of this coun:try
had suffered .to that extent. This payment .relating to-
{ 46M;i rd is a book adjustm~nt and a~tually not a physical
payment made from Burma. The word 'remittance' record--
ed from time to time in my deposition may not necessaril)r
mean actt~al physical payment made from here to abroad."
The second charge in this case relates to -five drafts but

the prosecution through its complainant submitted that
only transaction in regard to one dra.f t being No. 4342
would be preferred for the charge. Whatever it may be
the learned Government Advocate -submitted that he
would not press the charges under section 6 (r) of the
Act:-:
The learned Government Advocat~ agreed that the
late Supreme Court had ruled in P. C. Ray and one v ~
The Union of Burma (I) that mere failure to repatriate
foreign exchan~e is not an offence under section I I of the
(r) (r96r) D.L.R I (S.C.).

Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, I947 and that the c.c.

1965
intent to secure delay of despatch or to cease. payment is
THE UNION
a necessary ingredient. In that case the sums involved oF BuRMA
were in fact repatriated later in the course of the trial and w .T~McJ:r.o:
it was conceded by the learned Government Advocate TYRE AND
. ONE.
who appeared for the Union that the offence even if
proved would only be a technical one. If the respondents
were found to have failed to comply with the requirementc;
of sub-section (I) of section I I of the Foreign Exchange
Regulation f..ct, I 947 quoted above the Controller had his
discretion to give them such direc.tions for the purpose of
securing or expediting the receipts of the foreign exchange
under sub-section (2) of the said section, but it appears
neither directions were given nor actions taken against
iliem. . '
The main point raised .in the argument of the learned
Government Advocate. is the interpretation of the words
" who has a right (whether present or future and whether
vested or contingent)to receive any foreign exchange " in
sub-section (r) of section I I by the learned trial Judge in
his orders is wrong. He held that these words do no~
cover :t:he foreign exchange already received. To use his
words: .
. "What is apparently made au offence by this sub-section
is the doing of an overt act with the express intention of
securing the delay or the cessation of the foreign exchange,
etc .. to whi-::h a person becomes entitled to receive."
we think his interpretation is in line with the ruling given

by the late Supreme Court quoted above. .The "right."
referred to is the present .or future right " to receive" any
foreign exchange. The words " to be receiveable by
him" in clause {b) of sub-section (I) of the section are
.very si,gnificant. Since the respondents had received and
spent the foreign exchange the right to receive the .same
had been extinguished and did not exist . . Sub-section (I)
'.874 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c.
I9fls
of section I I of our Act is almost identical with sub-
. section (r) of section ro of the Indian Act. Only the
THE UNI ON d . k . f h I d'
oF BuRMA : wor s m orac ets m ours are not ouna m t e n 1an Act .
l 1
.w. .T. Mel;~ Some help is derived from the Statements of Objects and
TvnE AND
ONE.
Reasons given under the sub-section of the Indian Act in
interpreting the law and we quote the words below from
A. I. R. Manual, Vol. VII, 2nd Edition, page 690 : -
" S~b-section (x) makes it obligatory on a person to whom
a payment is due from a person outside India not ~o del<ry
the receipt of payment. This is to ensure that the country
receives the full ' payment due to it, .and that individuals do
not hoard foreign exchange."
The modern trend of eonstruction is where an equivocal

or ambiguous word leaves a reasonable doubt of its
meaning which the canons of interpretation fail to. solve,
the ben'erit of the doubt should be given to the.subject and
. against the legislature which has failed to explain itself.
It must be remembered that the spirjt of our free institu-
tions require that the interpretation of all laws should be
favourable to personal liberty. We have also consulted
Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, . 10th Edition.
Where an enactment may entail penal consequences, no
violence must be done to its language to bring people
within it, but rather care must be taken that no one is
brought within it who is not within its express language.
If the legislature has not used words sufficiently com-
prehensive to include all cases within its prohibition it is
not competent to a Court to extend them.
There is nothing clear to show on records that there
was intent on the part of the respondents to secure delay
in the receipt or to stop or cease the receipt of the foreign
exchange. If this be so these two .cases do not fall within
the ambit of the provisions of sections 6 (r) and I r (r) of
the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. It is not
disputed that'between 6th August 1947 and 2oth July 1955
no notification or order restricting or prohibiting the use C..
1965
or dealings in foreign exchange was .ever issued. Tne
THl! UNION
fact that the respondents had no bad intent or any ulterior op BURMA
motive concerning the matters in question is apparent w.T .vMciN-
from their honest declaration and surrender in 1955 of the TYREAND
ONE.
foreign exchange amounting to 4.855-16-r rd. their
. uneXJ)ended balance of their commission :r:eceived ~y them
to the Controller as required by law. The principle is
where the order of discharge is one which cannot be said
to be perverse or prima facie incorrect it should not be
-lightly brushed aside.
In the result both the applications are dismissed.
876 BURMA LAY../ REPORTS
CIVIL FffiST APPEAL

Before U Sein Thinn, :f.
c.c.
I96s U KHIN MAUNG (APPELLANT)
Oct. 7 v.
pAIK KYAIN (RESPONDENT).*
Suit far compensation for ttse and occupation of premises........,elatirrnship of landlara

and tenant.-failure of suit for want of Standard R<.-nt Ct1rtijicate.
Series of litigation had been going on between the parties since the year
1956 in respect of the subject matter of this suit. In Civil Regular Suit No ;.
272 of 1962 of the City Civil Court, Rangoon, pl~intiff-appellant U Khin Maung.
filed a suit against the defendant-respondent Paik Kyain for recovery of a sum:
of K 8,294 being the amount of compensation for use and occupation of the:
Eastern half of the premises known ~s No. 78}, l\llaha Bandoola Street, Rangoon
The plaintiff's case was that he was the owner of the premises, but the status
of the defendant was not specifically indentified.
Held : There is no shred of evidence to indicate that the defendant was
not a tenant at the relevant period in respect of which the daim for com-
pensati<'?n was made. On the "other hand there has been successive
adjudications by which the defendant was held to be the tenant.
Held ju"rther : Once the relationship of landlord and tenant had been
held to be e$tahlished between the parties the suit was bound to fail for lack
of Standard Re::~t Certificate as required t::~der the provisions of the Urban
Rent Control Act, even if the suit had been other,vise maintainable.
A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar v . .4. Chohalingam Chettyar , (1949}
B.L.R. p. 4.6 (S.C.), referred to.
CJ Aw _for the appellant.

Mr. ]affar for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 272 of

1962 of the City Civil Court, Rangoon, plaintiff-appellant
U K.hin Maung filed a suit against the defendant-respondent
Paik Kyain for recovery of a sum of K 8,294 bejng the
amount of compensation for use and occupation of the.
Civil First Appeal No. 93 of 1964 against the decree of the Additional
Chief Judge of the City Civil Court of Rangoon in Civil Regular Suit No. 272
~I~~ .
Eastern half of the premises known as No. 781 Maha c.c.
1 65
Bandoola Street, Rangoon. It was the case of the plaintiff 9
that he was the owner of the premises and that the defen- Mu KHm
AUNC
dant had been in occupation of the same, at first by himself v.
.and ' }ater t hrough his partners, f rom 1st $eptember 195.5 PAIK KYAIN
to 24th December 1960. The status of the defendant was

.n ot specifically identified in the plaint although from the
nature of the claim made by the p~aintiff it would appear
that he was not a tenant. The compensation was claimed
at the monthly rate of K 130 which, according to the
plaintiff, used to be the rent of the premises. The period
of limitation for filing of this suit was also sought to be
extended on the ground of the defendant's alleged acknow-
ledgment of liability in writing. This however seems
hardly necessary in view of the plaintiff's assertion in
paragraph 5 of the plaint that his claim was governed by
Article I 20 of the Limitation Act, being the claim for
damages for use and occupation and not for rent..
The defendant by his written statement admitted
ownership of the. premises but denied the rest of the allega-
tion made out in the plaint. The trial Court framed
.several issues of which the following only are relevant for
.the purpose of disposing the claim of the plaintiff :-
(r) Did the defendant use and occupy the. suit pre-
mises from rst September 1955 to 24th
December 1960 ?
(2) Is the plaintiff entitled to the amount claimed ?
The learned Judge of the lower Court took great pains in

tracing the series of litigation that had been going on be-
tween the parties since the year 1956 in respect of the
subject matter of this suit. It started with the institution
. 'on 2nd January 1956 of Civil Regular Suit No. 6 of 1956
of the City Civil Court in which the plaintiff sought to
eject the defendant and two others from the suit premises
878 BURMA LAW REPORTS .
c.c. on the ground specified in section I I (r) (e) of the Urban

1965
Rent Control Act. Neither in the suit nor in the appeal,.
UKHIN
MA.vNG which was dealt with in Civil First Appeal No. 25 of 1957,
PArK KYAJN. was the plaintiff successful. The High .Court held that
the defendant was a tenant and that he had been in occu-
pation of the suit premises in partnership with one Khin
Maung and Sein Win. The next suit was Civil Regular
Suit No. 89 of 1959 of the City Civil Court, Rangoon. It
was a suit for ejectment against the defendant and three
others and was based on the alleged relinquishment of 'the
~enancy by the defendant. This suit also met with the
same fate as the first' one and on appeal it was held that
the defendant still remained the tenant. There<;tfter on
rst April 1960 th~ plaintiff taki.ng advantage of the expir)r
of the Urban Rent Control Act filed' another suit for eject-
ment against t}le defendant and three others but on the new
Urban Rent Control Act coming into force, the plaintiff's
suit was dismissed. His appeal to the High Court also
resulted .i,n the appeal being dismissed as withdrawn. The
next litigation took the .form of an application before the
Rent Controller under Sections 2 r and 22 of the Urban
Rent Control Act. In this case the plaintiff was successful
in as much as one Hone Kyi a sub-lessee of the defendant
W;.tS forcibly evicted and the premises allotted back to the
plainptf. The order of the COntroller of Rents was also
upheld by the Supreme Court in jts Civil Miscellaneous
Case No. 224 of 1961 where it yvas observed that the
plaintiff had been in occupation of fue premises as a tenant
till 1956 when he ceased to occupy it after ~ub-letting jt to
one Hone Kyi. Then came the present suit under
consideration.
In the face of these adjudications the learned trial
Judge held that the defendant did use and occupy the suit
"premises from 1st September 1955 to 24th December r96o
but that as his occupat1ion was that of a tenant and not a
BURMA LAVI REPORTS
trespasser he was not entitled to recover compensation

. from the defendant. It was also pointed out that the
UKHIN
plaintiff. ought to have filed a suit for recovery of rent as it MAUNa
was clearly m~de out that the defendant had not bee11 pay- PAIK KYAIN.
ing any rent of the premises for the period under considera-
tion. The lower Court even went so far as to consider
whether the .plaintiff should have been allo~ed to amend
the plaint although no application to this effect was ever
made by the plaintiff. It was however realised that even
if the plaintiff had chosen to take such a course it would
have been infructuous as his claim for rent was time-
barred under Article I 10 of the Limi.tation Act. For these
reasons the lower Court dismissed the suit with costs.
Hence the present appeaL
I may say at once that this appeal has no legs to stand.
~ pointed out by the learned trial Judge there is no shred
of evidence to indicate that the defendant was not a tenant
at the relevant periods in respect of which the claim for
compensation was made. On the other hand there has
been successive adjl,ldications by which the defendant was
held to be the tenant. As a matter of fact it was the
plaintiff himself who had at the very outset treated the
defendant as a tenant. For section II (r) (e) of the Urban
Rent Control Act under which the plaintiff first sued the
defendant contemplated a su.i.t between the landlord and.
his tenant. The status of the defendant never changed
until the sub~teriant Hone Kyi was forcibly evicted and the
premises allotted back to the plaintiff on 6th November
1961. It was only then that the tenancy between the
parties may be sa~d to have been terminated. Til.l then
the defendant was the person who was liable to pay rent
and as such he was a tenant within the meaning of se~tion
2 of the Urban Rent Control Act. Moreover the action
taken by the Controller of Rents and which WaS confirmed
by the Supreme Court proceeded on the assu~ption that
:880 BlJRMA LAVv REPORTS
c.c. the defendant was a tenant who had sub-let the premises
1965
to another person without the permission of the Rent
UKHIN
M/.UNC Controller.
PAIKKYAIN.
The plaintiff has Irom the very outset of the presel).t
case taken a dubious stand .. He has not got the courage
of conviction to state in clear and unequivocar terms
whether the ~efendant was a tenant or a trespasser at all
material times relevant to his claim. In paragraph 6 of
the plaint exemption from the Law of Limitation was
claimed which was clearly tantamount to saying that the
amount claimed by him was rent due by the defendant and
again in paragraph 2 of the plaint, it was averred that the
premises were sub-let by the defe~dant to one Hone Kyi: .
I do not therefore understand how the plaintiff could. have
done so if he was not a lessee or in other words a tenant.
But in the rest of his pleadings the amount claimed by him
was described as damages for use and occupation . . There-
fore even on his own showing the suit should have been
thrown out of Court for it is settled law as pointed out in
the oft quoted ruling of A. S. P. S. K . R. Karuppan Chet-
tyar v. A. Chokalf.ngam Chettyar (1) " that a party should
be allowed to win or lose on a case set out in his pleadings
and it is not the function of a trial or an appellate Court
to make out a case different from the one set out in th,e
p~eadings ". I would accordingly hold that the lower
Court was perfectly justified in disallowfng the claim of
the plaint1ff. The next ground 6f appeal is as regards.J:}:l.e
Law of Limitation. It is contended that the trial Judge
failed to ta!<.e into considetation the exclusion of the period
of limitation. But this was hardly materia~ in view of the
fact that once the relationship of landlord and tenant has
been held to be established between the parties the suit
was bound to fail for lack of Standard Rent Certificate ~
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---
(r) <194-9) B.L.R. p. ~6. (S.C.).
1965) BURMA LAW REPORTS 881
required under the provisions of the Urban Rent Control c. c.

1965
Act, even if the suit had been otherwise maintainable.
u KHIN
In the course of his arguments before me the learned MAuNe
v.
Counsel for the appellant has drawn my attention to the PAIK KYAIN.
commentary at page 509 of Woodfall's Law of Landlord

and Tenant, 24th Edition, by L. A. Blundell, where it was
mentioned that in accordance with the principle of con-
structive occupation the lessee who has sub-let the pre-
mises may be sued for use and occupation for he holds
the premises as tenant and occupies them by his sub-tenant.
On the strength of this statement the learned Counsel
would have the Court hold that even though his client
was a tenant he was entitled to sue for use and occupation.
I am however unable to subscribe to this view. It is not
known in what context the above remarks were made but
even reading it as it stands, it is quite clear that the words
" use " and " occupation " do not at all mean damages for
use and occupation. It only means that as a tenarit who
was out of possession he was still liable to pay rent on
account of his use and occupation of the premises through
some one else. Thus it is quite clear that the defendant
who was a tenant was only liable to pay rent and not
damages for use and occupation as claimed by the plain-
tiff. In the result this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed
with costs. Pleader's fee fixed as 2 (two) gold mohurs.
882 BU.RMA .LAW .REPORTS
CIVlli REVISION
Before U Sein Thinn, j .
c.c.
196s u KYAw THEIN AND ONE (APPLICANTS)
Oct. zo. v.
DAW ZAINABI (a) MA HLA KYI AND ONE
(RESPONDENTS).*
Civit Pt'OCM'IWtl Crxlt~, s. us-demanding Court fees afresh-wh4ther revmiJ'If'

lies.
H~d: The Additional District Judge in demanding Court fees afresh
had acted in the exercise of his jurisdiction and he could not have avoided:
an issue that had come up before him. So, even if his order was wrong or
contrary to law, it cannot be said that he had acted without jurisdiction or in.
excess of his jurisdiction, and therefot:e it is not open to revision.
Ma Than Yin v. Tan Keat Khang (a) Tan Keit Sein, B.L.R. (1951) (H. C.)
161; Ramkluklwan. Sahu. v. Bir Sut'~dra Sahi, (1937) x6 Pat. p. 766, referred to
U Ba Nyunt for the applicants.

U Tin (Syriam) for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, ].-In Civil Suit No. I2I2 of 1963 of
the City Civil Court, Rangoon, the applicants U Kyaw
Thein and Daw Kyin Y one filed a suit for specific per-
formance of conrract againsJ; the respondents Daw Zainabi
and Ma Kya Nyo. It was the case of the plaintiffs that
on 21st April 1956 the defendants and the plaintiffs
entered into a contract by which the former agreed to
sell the suit proper.t y to the latter for a sum of K 7,000
only. In pursuance of the said contract the defendants
accepted an advance of K 3,500 and put the plaint:iffs in
possession of the suit property. Subsequently, the defen~
dants received payments for the baiance in three instal-
ments of K 500, K r,ooo and K 2,ooo on 14th June 1956,
25th June 1956 and 9th September i-957 respectively.
However, as no order under the Land Nationalization Act
had yet been received die defendants undertook to
* Civil Revision No. 14 of 1965 against the decree of the Additional District
Court of Hanthawaddy in Civil Regular Suit No. I of 1964-
execute a registered conveyance as soon as the said order
was available. During the month of December 1961 a
U KYAw
monk who was in occupation of a portion of the suit land, THEIN
made preparations for erecting certain structures on it. AND 0 NB

v.
The plaintiffs accordingly protested by inserting notices in DAw
ZAINABI (a)
some vernacular newspapers whereupon the defendants MA HLA Kn
on roth December 1960 replied that they would not sell AND oNs.
the land to the plaintiffs anymore. Hence the suit in
which the date of the cause of action being mentioned as
roth December 1960.
The learned Judge of the City Civil Court returned the
plaint to the plaintiffs under Order VII, Rule ro of the
Code of Civil Procedure on the ground that as the suit
land was situate within the Township of Syriam, the City
Civil Court had no jurisdiction ~o try the same. The
plaintiffs accordingly presented the plaint to the Sub-
divisional Cour:t of Syriam which in turn returned the
plaint to the plaintiffs under the same provisions of law.
pointing out that the suit was beyond the pecuniary limit
of its jurisdiction. Finally on rsth june 1964 the plaintiffs
filed the suit under revision in the Additional District
Court of Hanthawaddy being Civil Regular Suit No. I of
1964. The plaint in that suit was not .the same plaint
which was presented to the former Courts, the date of
the cause of action in the present suit being changed .from
roth December 1960 to 28th October 1961. The reasons
given by the plaintiffs for the alteration in the date of the
cause of action was that although the cause of action
arose since roth December 1960 when the defendants
intimated their desire not to sen the land. it continued till
28th October 1961 when subsequent to an order passed
by the Subdivisional Magistrate under section 144 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure their possession was disturbed.
The defendants fi~ed preliminary objections on poio.:ts
of law by which it -was contended inter alia that the
c.c. ,plaintiffs. were not entitled to file the plaint in which the
1965
date of .the <;:ause of action was altered. Citing various
UKYAW
TRBINo rulings pertaining to Order VII, Rule ro of the Code of
AND ONB
v. Civil Procedure, the learned Additional District Judge held
DAW
ZAINABI (a)
that as the date of the cause of action being changed from
AHLAKYI roth December 1960 to 28th October 1961, the present
AND ONB.
suit could not be said to be one filed in continuation of
the previous suits. It was accordingly ordered that the
plaintiffs do pay Court-fees afresh for the present suit.
Hence tllis application in revision before me.
The first point taken up by the learned Counsel for
the respondents is that no revision lies against the order
complained of. In answer to this contention, V Ba
Ny-unt, the learned Counsel for the applicants, cites.several
Indian mlings in which it is made out by implication that
Indian High Courts have dealt with such question<; in
'revision. Please see A.I.R. 1959 Punjab, page 629;
A.I.R. 1949 Madras page 448 ; and A.l.R. r943 Patna
page 355 However, it is necessary to bear in mind .the
existence of a Full Bench ruling of this Court, namely
Ma Than Yin v. Tan Keat Khang (a) Tan Keit Sein (r) in
which the question relating to revisional jurisdiction of
the High Court is fully thrashed out. In the present case
before me the lower Cour.t has ordered the plaintiffs to
pay Court-fees afresh on account of the new plaint
presented before it. Assuming that the order of
the lower Court in demanding fresh Court-
fees was wrong, it was tantamount to demanding
Court-fees erroneously. Therefore, the question that is
posed before me now is whether an order demanding
Court-fees erroneously from the defendants on .t he ground
that in the plaint which was presented after the previous
ones had been returned under Order VII, Rule 10 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, the date of the cause of action
was changed is. open to revision by the Chief Court under
(1) ~j .R. (1051) ~H.C.) 161.
..
BURMA LAW REPORTS 8S5
. . .
section r 15 of .the Code of C!vil Proq~dure, This. question
is to my m.ind hardly different from the .q.uestion which
u KYAW
had been referred to the Full Bench iri .the' .ru.liJ;J.g dted -THEIN
above. In that case the. Court-f\eS . den:):anded were . in AN.D /NB
respect qf a claim for set-off while in the present cas~ z~~~~~ (~)
before me the Court-fees related to t,he plaint which was ~HLA KYl
presented after tw"o preyj,ous ones , ha<;l beeii returned AND ONE.
under Order VII, Rule ro of the Cod_e of Civ-il ~rocedure.
No doubt, the circumstances under which the demands
for the Court-fees were made in two .cases vaned, but t}1~
principle involved i? the same. In both cases revisioiJs
were . sought for . in respect of the alleged erroneous
demands which .vv:ere made by the Courts competent tq
deal with the question. It was entirely within the
jurisdiction of the Additional District Court to have come
to a finding whether or not Court-fees ought to be levied
in respect of the new plaint which according to the lower
Court was not substantially the same a~ the previous
ones. It may be that the decision was wrong or contrary
to law but there is no suggestion whatsoever that it was
either whimsical or perverse .
. The learned Judge, who made the reference in the
ruling cited. above, has also pointed out t}:le ruling in the
case of Ramkhelawan Sahu v. Bir Surendra Sahi (2) in
which it was held that in deciding the question of Court-
fee the Court decides an issue not as between-the plaintiff
and the defendant but decides an issue as between the
plaintiff and the Crown and that if the decision be adverse
to the plaintiff it amounts to a decision to refuse to exercise
its jurisdiction to try the issue and as such subject to the
revisional j'.lr~sdiction of the High Court. In spite of this
ruling th~ learned Judges, who constituted the Bench, have
come to an unanimous decision that an order demanding
improper Court-fees from a defendant on the ground that
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. the claim for adjustment made in the written statement is

sg6s
....... tantamount to a clailp. for set-off is not open to revision
u~~w by the High Court under section r r 5 of the Code of
AND ONB
(1.
Civil Procedure. It is also laid down in clear and un-
DA:w equivocal terms that section II5 of the Code of Civil
ZAINABI (a) .
MAHLA Kv~ Procedure does not apply to any wrong conclusiOn
AND ONJJ. whether in law or in fact where the question of jurisdic-
tion is not also involved. In other words, where a Court
had jurisdiction to decide a question which came before it
and did decide it, it could not be said that the <;:ourt was
acting ~ithout jurisdiction or that it was acting illegally
or with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdic-
tion merely because its decision was wrong on a point of
law or on fact. As I have occasion to point out above,
in the present case before me the learned Addltiqnal
District Judge in .demanding Court-fees afresh had acted
in the exercise bf his jurisdiction. I do not see how he
could have avoided deciding an issue that had come up
for decision before him. Therefore, even if his order was
wrorig or contrary to Ia~, it cannot be said that he had
acted without jurisdiction or in excess of his juris~ction.
Therefore, in the light of the ruling of the Full Bench
case alluded to above, I have no alternative but to hold
that the order passed by the Additional District Court is
not open to revision.
In the result,. this application fails and is hereby dis-
missed with costs. Advocate fees fixed at two Gold
Mohurs.
II
u:~cc<l':2u
.:>O e
v
ucocow
.) .e:c1coe&w:
.
uxc=>~xo:2u
.:> .:> e nco&wb:c1coe&m
.> o
* (:cPBe:cbcoelbes) d10
o o t.,
G:2
e o
r
:)~
,)
I ~
L88 si)!Odffit M.vi v:r.rnna

s~~Odffil M v1 vw~na 888
s.uro&nr M.V1 vv.rnng
C' C'Q. C' "lC' C' C' C' C' C' 0 c "l c
<:l.:OQIJO):'n ;::>:C~C GOic:::oc;G't"'lOSdO)C:: G~?OOS~GSd?C;()O),g,C Gtslm oelij
COOQG6 ?C:
J U C ~ J " L.o 6 ~T L h. J o
'\
"l CC'
oCOGGim S ~ C''\ C G o ~
~:~en
C 0
OO:r.>;Q;;JI())QSdOI C
3d?:::DroG:nOO;::.:
C Q
J T I..L,. ll t.U J - ~oTcvu~
C"..GW?:JYJI
C OC'C 0 0 c 0 C 0\ "l
1...t
C
::D~C C:<:IQG@III mco:.:O~C mco~QO) ~i[O:;oOOIO)~{))GO::?
'c
:.c
)J L Jl u -- T LJ 0 -- L "'L " L- c..:, IL J
c c c c "" 'l' c ~ 'I
C1lfc c 0
'l?Q)J[O<:IJ-:>:~fm O):Y.>GO)Q~(J) 0 GOI C\~CGf::D~ SdQ)Jn:Yi-:.1 2~0 01 ?II
Q C C 0 C C CQ C
:~f~ <:l=9QJ~O'J::D2:1 O@jO ~I G<:l:O fl.'JffiGtro ;ce:O)GO)~~ "OC<:IO)'):
cc ~ C\\ c c o c o\r::;:: c cr;:c c
m~~1 ti::D4)~::D~~?Q)Jloa:>~~ ..,Jlo~~e:lo:>j??~G:n? ~;;:>Jmt,~:nt:: n
o c c or;:_ c o- " c c ~<:. o r::;:: c o c
<:q>?~J[O QJ[O~tjc:~ e:>:D:I.Ij??: Of;;lOO?:;vn CQ_Gt:j?~ <Xl_l?Q)JlOffi'J
<:l.:OQ)iJ~C
C C
o:JO) Q
Sd:;()OIG~m
o 0 0 "l C C
0)0)000)~"><:1') CO~CI') JGCO::D~ II
~ C\6
C C 0
J U J v.._ L
[., a. L.. L C J J1 .C
0 0c c c c c c c c
e:>m (~1>:0Q)J[O::D2 (J):I.XD:J)f: ~')~C :::D~ C?<;J[OO~ GQJOOO?
c c c ~<:. c c c c A; c c o cr:
Go:>).:oe:l CjC:e~ G;;JJO;;:>Jm;S Oro::D:DSJ O)O)GO)QQJffi ~:COO~ wCtl
occc o c r;:c c "l A; c c or,::c o
~ct9c: <:~~ GQJ II roc<:~o:>?:s;;tl~ <:l~?~c:G::D:Oio;(9J l?QJ[o QJ[O~tjc:m,_
c [sc o c o c c "lo c c c c.<:.
<:1:\f<;J>:D c:~ro?:o:.e II ~1>?QJ[(J~COI5)G::D? COCD'f(J)XI2: (:lC)>O.J>~
c c c
ro:r.>~~CO)G
~ J o ll.
c c 6
?::: COmGCl:OI'JOCD
]
"l
IL
cc c c
<XlC CQiroGO:ro?:O)~ffi): Q.Sc:JIII
U C JT
c.<:.
o c c ., .<:: cr:i c 'T' c cr;~ o c o
~'f> ~ ro:DGCj:OICj~ell ro:;cr-QJCDX~SdGOI ~X-? '0)2:t:J: <X:{~?;;JJ[ orq
c c c co c c o c cor:::i c
G~J>~fOXOO) QJ[O~~e::~ "-'<l;?;c>~G;;)JII ~>?~J[U QJ[<-~'Jr:f-:~s
C C<:: Q ~J:. r,::;:: C J7: C C 0 C C C 0
Om:nmgl e::~~ SdGc_:pc:C:JQJffi'f?.:Oj??: J())GffiJfO~OXfl <:l-~GQJ II
c ~ C'\ ., c coc c 0 c c c c
<OC<:lt.D?~ tjJJOOI'f <:IO)')l~2 oxp:Sd?:CX?:x>~C~~ 5j::Dj??Of <:12:o:l~CDJ<:~a
c c c c c c C' 'l'J7: r- C' 0
~e::n~ 200:31 <:lC.:l)~~:Cr.kl:OOO?>eCO?<:lJ?:O'~~ G<91 C:JCC?~(.9C: <:l~G~J II
c c ( ) c .-.c
o
e:roc ~S '-lc.IGa:>: 9:1~ :; i11 ~<:1~~~')0.."'?0'-"?:eoos~c ~O)?:lS'tO
rc
:0)0)
"l
O:XJI:O)~C
c c c~
rotil:ro.s~">..LI
o
(:1(7)
c
rocrooc.:om~CG
c coc ?C:c II o
:::l:X:f{))O)
c
ll ILJ T ~G J\. " IJ
flO ,Ll l b l l
c c ~c: r:co r::;:: c co c r,~ c CQ G r;:c
C\"'.Co:l2: <:~m:m:a3'.,ti4::~Ge3?c: ot~~Jm~t:l:Gt?m ;ce:::DGO)?OJr~t!S
. C
rocm ~cut:oo1>::t">:mm
C'" C 0
:1 roc:;>(,): ~m?:oo: ro>&cG
~ .
m?c: 11 ro.J.l::D C C . C C\OC C 0 \ 0
J \. f.>l::t L 1L L .,. " :..
c.-.c o "l c c c c c c
~
"l C\~
rooul<>tc:<:~.;~utml <:~oo?::n~ :uo:xm~c m'll:C\~5.0)~(}) cue : O.."'C::DO)
L l Jl C.::, tl .! tJ 6'!' ~ l c. 4 C
C' 0 oc 0 c C' 0 ~ C' c c C'C' 0
O)(;l:omcx:>?:Qlc<JQG,~ x : n 0:.\..'C:D~
oo~:ro
1lC L l A - Jl - L..:J C.
oxp:o:G~?~
1 Cl ro:xud
:, lJt.
'\f,~ c reo r;;::: c c cr: c.-.c ,- c r;;:c 'l'J7:
'5C:J: '=i0)');3 Sdjg~wo~~:pc: ro:;~p:G~')C ti'J~j??~Gt.'3?C;<:~p:tl~ G<91 tl
C' cc 0 . c 0 0 . ~ c C'
<CO?lG :D:1:i~ C.:.
11 m,;,L roJ:.tOG<~Q
OJ L '!IIJt :UQ2 oxn l .U!r.l?:m:
J!u -- L L ~
m?:ro?: L.:uoro?:x:~
t L,!,
0 C'
mo:rom~t(D(;l?l
tJ -- T
J
O
mco:Qlo.>::D:uC
...~. c:,
o;cp: 0
C C ()
:nmGo:>;;):T.,(;lro
J
C CO
Ql >?~'lu:-o
:o~c
LJ . tJ L
C'Q . c c
...f::C' 0\ "l
C' c 0 C' 0
C'
~ce:::;O)')~ ;;)Jl u~~~ .:;n2: ~...:ne 9;\~ liJI:j>::Dj??ll<:l =9QJ>x Cll>?~Jl u~
C" ore O\ ~r;;::: c r,:c [,.... c c c o c o c o c
~Jlo~!g::::~~eec:~.:; t;c:op>ro?::n~n ~~ ot>?O'Jlo~ <:~=)>:;JJ>
) c- ~ . ~ <-o c- <'
( 0) ( oe9o . 1~01 'jf~fX}C<XfU 0-:>QJCD~? 0911
892 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965-
(' (' C" 0\ 0 c c 00 C'
oeti:J m:-oc.ooc QJl<.x>q~:o2~ Ll;?~~m:r~t ~A>?;:)JlO~ ~;::u'D:n ~~X'2'
" C" J C'
"l C'C' C"A " C' o C" C' "
c :if"1~145 0:0~C
t., J
O:X.:t:c;:::O?:::O~C ffij 1''l::D.SI~:m O.S;:)C:O');O):'D
c;o.c:::OC:G.S02!r.O')C:
r .e.tLJ o l o To- ~ T l::b
c c ~0 C' "'' ~ 0 c-
. . ;.<:
f;M>
'\
01 ?II
U -- L --T
r-' C' "
0
6 Jll U
o ' C'
!. t.
C' '
u
C' o C' co
C' ') 0
~O>Jm~ ~o:lC'OG~lll O)l)');:)]lOOOo:>c; ()100):::0
C'
C' ' '
Jl C,.!,
coo:x;;<Sl
l
~~
~
C' n o "l
CJ<.~C
C'
l

C:::O?~Iffi?C:o:><;l
L.:..J L
;;::;)0):::0~? ~l)~ltO:DU,'lC.SOO)::D:TJG
L CJ J tJ l TJI u ?C:n;.l ;;QUio:>:::O:))
;. c l
Q C'O C' C' 0 C'O C'o C" ( C'
~:0:n cx;1:n~qa:>J:G:::O? ::u2 :I o:p;~:;>J :T.>:':f Ga:J?:DQO.:>?!:::O~ :x>roG X:;>:;>J :T.>
C'C' 0 C'C'9 _<:.
~~I,..,:UC 000"-"JO~.,)II! CJ::U;:)il'0~': O:Q)C:I <.IU)?l ro,:m
soC'
~::l)C~O')C
"o3G.S:::O:!) C'
--uc 6 J I tJ J L
J ..t o o T U
c- c o c C' c o "l c-oc c o :1 o
~ ?c:m o:::o?J.s:c:o?::::oo:>c;qurm
T l ,_. ..
X>:::o:
c
-n:.:.~
~lilCG
L
::u::.o:n
c.:. n coc;.?:>o.:
LJ
COl>?
a.
cc c c oc cr,: C' o c 'l"C': c o C''
;:)JLO~ ~C)l:;\J0 GtJ T.:~G::.x.:l?CDl:::O~~ ')~: G'SI tjOO?:X'2ll <:q~Q)JO:>
0 C'A; Q C' C' 0 C' C' 0 c ( \ C'
CJfGC:O?:DSJI e:0;~ <.l=)l:;lj0=Q:::02 ~;;)O)GO)~:D~(J) 0) 8;;Cj :)@jO ~i\01
C' C' Q C' r,~ ') '.) C' 0 . C' 0
G~:O j~ 'JO:>G~X ;~e:o:>GO??:J?. ~?~C:tj:Go:>?-:r.><;:l'11 <Xt'D?Q)Jl0~ <;:Jl o;;q
r;:::c r,;:c- c ~ c o c "A\ o 9c c
tjC:[j'D:020f '-\(GC'D'J?~G~?c: 1IGCD:02 11 !:P:D..D~ 01J".I?~f')) 'X>COOYJt
r,: c\r:;:c O\ "l C' C' oc cr,: c "''C': r '
tj<D~tjc:~5J~G::mol ~i <.I:\];:)J~;Gf?.'))3d<JGC:O?Cbt.20f G<5>1 tjO)');~~:JJ~'.)~
C' C' C' 0 C' C' ,.. C' C' "''C': ~ C'
COCC(.l)Gfl)21 qrro2:<.1<J:?()') Gl<:p:DbOO?:o:>e~o:>? G<.91 tj~!'rcG~?C~
o c cocr.:c o co co cc c c
~ G~1o:>~n ~2:?~oc 1~n~~:u?~ cq~?~Jlo~ <;)Jtooq~m?~~ ~~~ .;~"1:;lj0::)')e
1
~cr. .d:Go:>?.x-~
oLJ .,
G<5>l~fU?:G~?3:
tJ ~ o~OCo?:x:riw
T C.:,
~:;l0 u,x;cf:::~:cl
l t:j . J t
0 C'
'-'<:qm::;>JU
C' o C'() C'O C' C' Co c C'

o:>mG :::o:;l~())
,
:;l 4> ?:;lei...Ioml. C\JC"-lOO?:ro?oc
6 Jl
::::o:::o
~~~
0')11)'330')('1)0.":.
c 0
') :QlC
jJ
c~~C': c c c C" r,:oc cr.;:C' c o C'
~CC':l:TJ;.s..-,~o:>~ xmGX:;l;:)Jmadi~> ~~I!Yt~~~21S'Do:>211 ~")QJlU
c: (' tr (" C' cc r: ~ C" c c ('" C"
::o2 <:Jc::fXl())COO?~:::o2l 0?:;\J1 o~J~:osc:G~?~ mJoc;~oxp~;;mpo:::;;~
- ~ C' OC' C' J;;:. C' C' C' <"A\ C' r--
"'G~tp: :~CGX? ~oc:tf"'1!2:"Jj?:ft~ IJO)XO)~ :UmGO);'::Jd~ rn~
C" C' C' C' 0 C' C' C' A\ C' (' (' "!'~
~OCG:;lJ 11 C\JC~u:>?;~'.)~C;:D~~'~ O<Do:>:U9J :02:1 !'{'!('Q.":)"lf G~ l tj
' 0 C'Q C'
OO?:o:>.'))~ ~1)~:o:>G:D?m ('I)')~C:G
C'
Y:: :O."'? .~,::IC
C' "'' C'
GC..:I OX:'t:C\YUj)) II H:0:;\14)
C' C''
o c, J L -i l! J iJ '-' ......J J IJ
c: Q c "l c c c c "l c c ~ c "'' c-,~c
::02 2:~. Gt.>lc::::oc:Gy~2oo~.;: <Dtli:~C?, roJilDlfG~?C: GOI ~Cfje:
o c c c c ( ) \ o
~)lGQ)J II ~~f:G~js G~')C~'5?~f j a;;:.c C\JC"'ID?;o:p51C:'Jf
c c C' c
~oqo:>2l
C' C' "l C'
~(,)~ ~o;uY;: 'Do:>~'.): roo1:0.1~-:; m' ll:::v.sG
C' C' C' OC'
?c; c:ocQ1?:0? ~ o:>lilcro.1c
c
JLtl fi.. ll J uI ~ T J 6 l JJ
C' \ rc C'Gl oC' ~ c- . o oc- c o s.
4>UQ)OJ'J~tluuc ~<De:uc<>!'::x>:c.>t?~(:) c.~m?:<::~~ooro :Q~?~Qc c.~m:o:&cm ooro
JJ 1.:1 J
W
C'
~roc:
0
~ C'
CJ(')')(JjCX)');O,):::OC'7)
l
C,
""C.:.
C' 0
L
ll
OOC'
J
C'
GCJ.I'-'~CG~:::O:'D II
~ Jl l C '.. -.J o J L.. t
0 6 b"
C'
t';)G <T.\~C .'l\.1XWJC'..>:):::O:mc
c>C.:. A
-1. Jll
C'Q O C'
L \.
C C''
Si; C' C' C'C' 00 ~<:. C' "\ (''

CJOJ?:ell 8?~CS'~9:
4 o
O:O:CI:CI.s<J?
1. jil ~! T J
(\)C (!l'DOX)) ~~c:li~CO?:o:>:'l."> ())O !:G::O?X'~C
IL C :t J
C' \ I":":' C' C' C' (." . C' 0 C' C' 0 C' C' r,:
mJ il:c\~f>~G~ ?C:!J'd ~f'00~5j?::').)~ o:>:UGo:>:;lQJ rT.XJJ ?:tl;))9f ~!J'dOG00,;2' 1~
c ('
( J) ( oero) ~t>l 'lf~f>')Cot:t .
('9 ('
<')QJmp JJ@ 11
('
68
~ C' C' ~C' OC' o ( C' C')

tf~GOO')C~ t::Jf'~')~CC G~')CG::D')Cg
(8~8'}~GojpoScxy~go;?)
c
~c
J 0
C' C'
G~')CCD~C
J 0
:~~~I()(.()(X)eGtn
J :=:1 1,; .) 0
t:QC.
J ~
~OCOXh,l~:::>bl:C.OOCOC.CO~
.) ~ J:::l
to<hro:::J@es
0 .).....J
WP0es
.)
0
.)
....Qro&s
:f'._j .)~f:x~"""co@cc4;:x~
.)~ ..) J.)
c~bc.@~rcoro
0 J
~~)(::erox.~e>-
'S:> .)
tbes:cPc=x:oPeeooro
J J
~:crt'l<:C~ccce&-
:>- J
w~rox.OO.
.) .)
t:x~e>-cococccc
J :=:1 .)
:&e~
'1.0
~ecoo~co
~,; .:>Ci':l
wcGRes
.) .:>:..:!
rote~:~~
1,;
t:x~ococuccccGI=J&co~:>
.) ~ .) .)~ .) .)
c..bOc:erox.e-,e
.:> ;;;
e:cbco

c~:4lcoblh*fles
3'::1"3 .)0
&illto
0 \ 0
ua?ccewbPe*fles
J 'I.J .:>0
4b::>l:o4e>-
J .)0
c..M~:xwe>-
.:> J
:::>tcesrococ.IJ~
.) .) :::1 .) .) 5~@~ w ~feoces
.). tcc:oo.~h!ro
'- .)....J .)
wnxa:;e>-
.)
1:t:Jb~~
a~ 0
to.xcc:ci;::>eo~hl
.) .) .:>:..:!
tbesc:r 6 t'lnb:~cocc4>Cb
.) 1tj,:>
,-.Llo~ro:x:eb:>::>c.~e>-
.) .)
1w:~ec:dxo
e:l edcc@~es:\koc.ese>-
.:> J .:>
uJC2cccet'o~ccb .:>
'Gfl:to
'S'o o
M:4Ttro
_, .:>
~e:co rcbCbruscoRw~:c~
.:>o e .:> .:> :..:!.:>
ccc4b o
:Xo:xcc~::>et'l~
J .> .:>
nd:oro
.:>O
Rcc
:>
oel'n l!:)~odx::e
:l.J
X.EO!e>-& I~ChleJf)
:> ......JO .:>o:..:l
reGOOCD
.:>
IG&X2ccGR:te
'$' .J .>~L :>
@cc:C2~o :>
x.hl~::>c.Re>to ::,~~~boo :C2&0xhlexhle>-
.) :_j .) :_j 0 .) O :> .> :_j .:> :_j
:Xo5cero::>c~e>
.> .:> .:>
:a?ro~bw
.:> :>
wreco&xce>-ax:c
.> .:> J
~Xt'l~to
Y .. :> o
r::>khle>-fl
.>O :_j
PeGCOCD
:>
CoC2cctmte
.:> L L
e=.,cetoocfle>
:> :> :>
t:Xocoreoo
.l ..> .)
a:!l:::>C.CCOOC.f)e>-
s .) .) u@cc~es
-.) 00 t.o@cclQe>-
.)
eco:@~o::>c.9e>-:x.f)le>-
.) .) ~ .;, -.J
ICCf)CI)CCC
0 \
ecowro
.) '- .)
l!:)Oceroocf)eJ
:>. .) .)
totccoPeeG(beG
.) .) .)
~- c~-hJro)
;)" ::J ....o
~::>c.0eto
.) 0
1::>hles:::>b
.):_j
u.)C2cc:flco::>to
.) .) .)0 "
too3~coro:to
.) .) 0 0
::,~emla5ocbes tccce>bcoto:r
.) .)
e
(.,
W~<::ero::>C<'le>
.) .) 0
oc
to " .)ECb:f)CD::>to
.) .)0
Xo:4eGb
.) .) '-
co:::>CCC~::>Cfle>
J .)
1i C2cc"
.) 0
eero
o
toc2cc::>~:ceccohl:c~
.> .Jo .J :_j
&ro:::>eo
c ' .>
dto<'l;ro
.:> o o
::,~=~~es::>&:e:ro
.J .> .>o e
tecbw&
.> :> o
~~ro ::>tccoreGG ~4oCbce t!GcocccooM:x~e>-esto u@cc:c.eccohl c.~
:>- e .> .J .> ::> .:> ':5' :> :> .> .> ~ o .J :> :_j
w~:d
J
C~:::>c.cc~::>ct'le>-r~c.~e>&
y .) .) " .) ~ 0
u@ccfu4C()f)cor,
.) .)
tocol;:c.~
0.) 0 0 J
~:::>ccc
.) .)
~oc.t'l~
.)
~=~~es::>&e:co
.J
~t:>Oc:eroocf)e>-
JO e ::> :> .>
tecb~co~to
.:> ~b oo o
uC2ccEOlco~
.:>
::,ti):cPt'l:co
:=:1.:> o .J,_j e
:2m
e
to:Clco tbcbWl:df):ccoG
oe ~
tC2cc&:xcce>-xfle>
:> o:> .:>
MOc:eroxee>-
.:>.:> .:>
lcf,@ccbb&>e>-
:> o
:Xofiro
.:>
11 @cc@I=J,:::>IJcobPeS.fles td:.oesRccef)J 1oocoroes 1
.) .:>~ .:>:::J.> .JO .JO .) ,__,.;_, .J
:Fi1JcetnmC2cc
6 .:>
c.oc~~ohl
.) :_j .) :_j
ben cr6 t'lsb:qcocc..,cb
lcwre& too:!cc:coccohlwl;:c~
.) e:J.:>
.) .) ;_j_,
~:xcce>::>e~:;, ,::,t:Jcct'l:Co ::,f:~@ro::>&e:co t::>fucbwM~:co :ces:::>c.cc:=>
::> .:> .> .:>~ o o .:> .> .Jo e .:> .:> o.> e .J
::>ct'le>- 1co:~:cbco e2cc:ce~GG~es ,ct.>::cerox~~
.) 0 .) 0 .)
&be:crococ Ito~ .j ,;) 0 .)
$68 SDIOdtni M V1 VW~{lg:

rm C
~p:G~')~I GiJ':lCOj'~SSJ':l:
C C C C f:":C '
GCX>'JC8m !Dtli!)~GO:::::DI !DCX>CDO.!DOf.C: !DClt
C ~ OC DC
C'(;::C r,;:c C
QN\)):.:t:lc:l~~::.:>~ u
o oc c c c~ o c c ~ ~ c
Q:{!D~~~oroo.:>roSfl 0~')1) CCroSJCroq>:Oir~:m Go.GroJ?o.:>~~
c o o '1 c ~c c c c o
0?.~0)2:; II CJ:?~ GO!GC\)J?::D2~ <J:?~lgC:(.p Gti'JCGo.:>?c:qc 'J~!Go.:>?
c
8mq>o.:>~l
c o c c '1-)l '
o r,:c c ~ c r,;:c
~().)i>.lc: fuLO?~':l:o.:>~mro tlc:oo.pGo.:>?G~')S . l:JG):D~II
c
c o cr,;: c c c c "' r,;: cr,: c::!\1 o c

<,>~~UC[jG)GCCI G~JCGo.:>?c:9Go.:>? nrnq>'pi Gr:t:lSDl"lOSJ 9]C.:x-'JSCU:'f>
c c " c e co c~ c G oc c c c co
<,>~J.)I o:>G().)'J())O~ro~().)')()) roet~'i)IDIS'f>O$CI CX>::il'i)Cc:Ji n;~;;:~S co<,>
rc c o c Sl or,:c r,;:c c c c c c
o.:>Cl~J illc:~o.:>? 8Cll:l"?lduL:9~t:Jc:t;cco.:>~<-r qcooo.:>e:; 11 m:.Jc :x:mo.:>m
o , o c c r Sl r,;:c r,: c c
CXlrJ?~G::D':l 8CiXp')G!D?C !DI:!j(,)Jl:l:JS 6{Cy.>CJ:><f<,>9t II
!DCXlroGOI l:)OI
C'l"C"' rmc ~C
!DGCj?C:gp:G~':lS:I Gs;J?m~:S~G)(:G~!O)~J
C C' c
0?9?:
O)~:;;:.J~CJSG::D')!D~~(:)') ~~())~~~ cQ!D~~gut GO')~C\)?~k~(J) 0)00:J);,3 II
tL.t.:.:.J t.J~ 14J JT T:ll .. ,bJ 0 0 t II. ..........
C !i,'O C C
B. Titus and others (1) m~qc ~DO?~G:x>? SJ':l(:)2~S G<fG1!;9t
oc Sl c (' c~ 0 c c c r,;: c c: 0 . 0
!Jd;,J'f.~ul:~c;oro::DroSJI CCQ)OC<i)'):~ !D~~Sd[jo:>GO:CX>')::De:;rq G<].?~
9o.:>211
c c
'P'f' c"'
oc r,;:c c
Gm':lrool3d~:19<Do.:>e;u
"Section 562 is intended to be used to prevent young

persons from being committed to jail, where they may
associate with hardened criminals, who may lead them further
along the path of crime and to help even men of more mature
years, who for .the first time m;~y have committed crimes
through ignoranc-'! or inadvertence or the bad influen~:e of
others arid who, but for such lapses, might be expected t:>
make good citizens. In such cases a term of imprisonment
m~y have the very opposite effe'ct to that of which it was
intended. Such persons would be sufficiently punished by
rhe shame of having committed a crime and by the m':!ntal
agony and disgrace that a trial in a criminal Court would
involve. It was not intended that section 562 should be
applied to experienced men of the world who deliberately
flout the law and commit offences which they know are
strongly condemned by their superior officers, but which they
have peristed in doing in order that it might not be said of
them that they have not been able to detect a petty crime."
c r,:c c c c c ( ) . c c r,:c ,
<pmtlCI 'f>C'OO)())J~CXl: ~8<,> ~~j ::> o:l')l GCX>?C8('8) ~tllll~GO::::OI
c c c' 0 C' c C' c~ cc 'l"f:":
!Jd?(,)Q!~ <OtGCC');> <;:IJ'rO?::Go.:>?!D~~gJ?:!c; ()o:J::DrD9J1 G!D')('))~ GOI tjCX>':l:
(x) A.l.R. (1941) Mad. 720.
::x>~ ~9~~:gp: The Union of Burma v. Saw Thein (2) SJ~ 1

Chhotan !lasmat Ali v. Emperor (3) SJ~I Vaijappa Shivlingappa
Humherwadi v. Emperor (4) SJ~r Emperor v. Faiz Talib (5)
SJx1'S Public Prosecutor, Andhra v. Shaik Dastagiri (6) SJ~
0 1m ('I)
~p:Of ~~UIU
(' 'T'I,; I) 1m (' r::: (' (' 0 (' ('
3JOOffiG<.91 tJUISJG~')C:~c:'PI::lJJ:~~ 2UG8SJCJf:SdO)?Wp:SJ91 ~'tO
C' o C' c r:::;G ~<: C' C' o C' ooc or,;:c ~
::x>~ <>~')51 0m~coxp:~t23:e~~ Goo:::roQQJmOf rorogQ'tcGoll ~e~~>9Jr
c c r:e <: oc o cr,; c oc c
GSJ')ffi'i):Sd~0:0G;;;Q:G::x>') oxp:~a:~ll (U(JtC"Jf SJO)~()t')y SJ(JtQJ'TOO
0 (' ('
~m::x>~u
(z) {1958) B.L.R. p. 47 (4) A.I.R. (1935) Born. p. 402.

(~)(1935) I.L.R...vol. Lix. p. 514. (s) A.l:R.. (~gz6) .Lab. p., 317
. . (~) A.I.~. (1957) Andhr~ Prad.esh, p. 532.
62
r
0\'
J
Sltl0d3.~ M.V1 VW'tlflg 868

BURMA::LAW REPORTS 899
Sg6r] S.UIOdiDI M V1 VW)Jfl{l
, .., ,. cbxe::.
(C) -~ ASOSOO~Wffi , IMWI:l:X.<:ee>
n ir 1<7 r n '"":13> r
~~:c;:.JAiCCiliOSCo C.X~:
~ b
: ~W
11 ., B,' ds
.:> .:> .:>o .:> .:> .:> .:> .:> e
n 1 -:~
~~e u 0 vo uo~en:~woccoe cc:c.cowc.Jro~u
L 1.:_ ,, n:..
JJGJe:c: cc: co
.:> o ;.t, .:> .:> .:> .:> & e 0
<llf:2 :h'J~e>~e>b:~wn
n.:>ee::l o
.. ,, rr J6 ~
u.:>O
4-mcl-b:>:C!u
.:> e
ua:c.cescc:cccc.<.
.) .:>
era:~~ oo:::
~ .:> ~
106
90~ ~UKiv,T!t-; J.;AWJ ~fGRts 'I~96s
r,: c- c- c- o o -r,;.c c IR ( ) c c
:>eti:J ~ r:~>1mwcwo:>~ G~'Jo:>t:j<;t~~&r.. o 'f?OXT.> 'J:'Comoxp:
c: c: ::l:>J~:
r:o ( ) c- c- c c-
mco: 0)1 o:>c:<.X.T.:~ro~.s:oo:>: 3CB?GC6 OCXJ
c-
ffiiOGO:GOOXG4>Uc
W)~~f : :t.-...... It 'l T . -u
c- c- , cr;:;:: c c- C' -c c- r,:, c-
GCOXDOO ? .00o:>J~G4> II qc:ootj'-
('
~c
J
OJ~IO) $~eiy:~c: O)O)GO)q)
~~<X>~~ c- r,;:c-
~~:yp:fjooo:>~~J-:>:~~:1 ~:9~~o:>:>ootl~ O)'=l::;o~:G> n
o c- o c r.::.c oc- c- c-
toc:
C:!
c- gj c- c- ~ -CIOGO:>:>Gerol
OC'
Clf:.~?;cc11 oc ' o _, o .o . --.- o .c--o .. . c
O)'=l::;o::n:
G
G(\)(\)O')CGCOC::;ll
. T~ CJ IJJ ~ L
mt4>:-CilGC:Wrb:D
l .;1 6 L ..\.
~;:o: ::nc:<;;4)())
6 l
OC' C\ (' 0 OC' 0 C' C' C' c-..,.,(;".,
3J<,J~:;lJ~~::l:l~ll ~~'=>~~ G9j~:l:O{ l:l())~y:ro '=>GffiJfO"""'J:j~
c- r.o c- c ~. c- (;"S'" 'fc- c- c- c- c- o
., 00<;;0')~ ~~:o:>t:tCjl:mc .;1'::~009JXJ)CD:>mc:DC::D~II 0~~
c- ~. l J Q: . t-~ -~ v.~o/:. .. ~ ;'. Jl ?-c. ~ . ~ ~ ~-:- C' ~ - .. ('., -:: o~
4>mclcaxn:""'~:ct>r
- j --T ~ :oo~~ro ._, .. L lj ':G~-:>ma::;lJYOOG:D:>3J<,J.s
. &. ill l. 'Gc6'M.:>'::n:::xxl8:r .. . ,_~ UJ ... ..
(' c c 0 oc 0 c-r,:~ (' -- .<:. ('
'P 'W~ro:>~ O(oo:n?r CX(.~t.O? s:ro~D(SJ GC'jj~:>:~ ~C9J?m
ro?~ oco&:80S&b~u .. .. : . ;":! ,~--- - >:. :. . . . :, . :
.. A l ";1,, L , ~ ' . , . .~ :- ~- ~ . ~ - :. " .. '.\
c- c ..c c- -~ o c cr;:c-' c-
u:>~ro~;;r GC9J:>o:>co:>:~ gm~ro~;;:ror :~~=~ ~proooor:~cooc~
~ropoS~:>~t~t;~o;,~u ~~poSco?:~ oe?~G~Gf@-3.: - e:~:S~

'c- ..
~ -~a>;Q~O:>O)
0- c 0 c "l
OO(T.)OIGOO-,CQCDG.::n') O:l"l')c:l
c . C' 0 0
OO<D:~gG.S ~:
e3 0
2~4)m0)
(' 0 0
J z.:-, ll .. 1. AJ c . Jf L.-7'1-c.~,T J -::tl
Q?:.s:>:U~
e.:J -r .. cc u . ~
~::t.~Ymt
-'' ~ .~m:>tlS~:~&i:>ro:ro
.. 1J J -u 1.
~''=~o3G::n:>ro~~'=~':>ig?t
tJ J To u J
. -r,:::: c !:>:>: C' (;'~
(' c c . . - (' (' . '(' . C'
mGe~:>e:cr-:~p:~c: oro::nro~G::n-:>qc:r t,oG:,.OO:;lJo:>~roo:>Yp~c: ooo
~~Gro5q6: ro:DGO??oo~:~Gt::n~ g}~:~G-fe~' cip->~6:>-=>ro~~

C' OC' 0 C' C' C C C' ,..-. C' o 0 0\gj OC'
~1~0)-:>~.SO) OCGID~O)Q.S ~G1m:>C:QQGOII COOO:;l tG:D:>~.s
UJ Tt l ~L ..a ,T ~ -11 -t ~ r.
(' ('~ (' c - \ r,~ . . c;:c- . ('
GJ:>~:> ~:~o:>G~J:>~ C:OCCOC ~p:~e: cyp:l:j: . ooxp:[j4>Gf')>:DJ91CI
,_$. (;"~ (' C' C' C'OC' C' C C OC' C' ~ (' C r,:c-
CJ~:~[j'; OC~O)tC:D~ II GCol-:>=~f~E>f 1t': tlC:GOO-:>C~ l:Jf(,J')
oc- ( ) vr,:::: c- "l
'icc o ~e~e?-''"
~ c ('" . (". (" (" 0("
<ll~c G!:Q-:>O:>'i):~~:~:rot ro:DGO?:>rot:?::;lJ'jroG:D:> :ng~-:>1
c- c-Ai c- c- " fR r,::c- c- o o
mo;z:~o:>G:;lp~ coccoc ~p=~e: ~:>:~:tl: g~:l:joo;;::n~ ~~
___,c;:c- ('(' C::, (' C' C' (' C' ~ (' 0 ~ (' ('
"""'J:j':l ~~0~~ OC~O:XSOO'Jr GSJ')O) OOGeJ:>C:~G:D:>Gei'JSI
OC' 0 C'~~ C .C C' 0 C' C' 0 C
Q:~.S<:Ir:>:o:>~ro::p
u T U l G
or
:'1
~CDI:lmco?::Dc:ll GO:>I'JO)(D..,.,.-v\rl-vlCI.S:D'XlO)::OII
JJ .L JJ A-:_'' 'r--.. . _. . . !T - Jl C.~
. c- (' -- ~
G~:>ro'J:~~:4>~:~
r~ c
ootlc:<:l'i
1:~OJI
' ' ~
u:>~~..II~:O':>J~
- G9:>rooo:>:"'r'
" ~.,.s;
0
<?~~~~~= -e:~:co;;ro
~ q C' 0(' 1. rsc
. c 0 cr,:~ (' \
~ c:~- :QJmro~~ o:>cr:~~ Gcqproro~-;:
~ 0 r;.. '(' "l (' 0 0 ~ ~- (' (' ('
::b~ ll O(!;OI::JC:O;I_:~Jffiffil 0~:>~ G~Gf~:ro r:;,COOC(;,)GOO_JO<'l?C2:>0')C
o . 'l' ~ t:"' . c- ,J - ~r,::q;-;:c- c- .c-~ o f;..~c-."'1
m~OOffiJ I '(:ICJCX)O!Q:D-:>0:>~!1 oxp:::nt:j<; tj<DG~f ~~oro~r:f:~ :
: ('- <; c ,.$.~ . (' \ C' 0~ - c- -0 . . (' (' .0 (' 'l
qj~~ gooro, ~ G~j:>. O::O:;lJffi :>:f J:D :T.!r..::1 .::?.''- m~:'j8J~.J.jot0)0 IG~ )C
... .; .. . . . . .. . .
~ (. ) ( ::'1 - c: --~c: ,... c: 0 (' - c: c:
:> :>e:J<IJ ~CI.i '~f~-:>~e : ~'{Cotll ?''f'~OOGCT.>? I ~-:> Jer11
ucccc:cecroc.uclbJ::"> eoccccro(l)~ ~b:o::"><}hl tu:crflg::') ccc::">:canccre~flcc rt;
.) " .) ~ l., .)::J.) .):.J 0 .) .)0 '5"
coK>cc::">:dxo:crott:croc.uc
.) ~
lEo::"> r~c h-l::">CCC::">:c&:
.) ~ cnhlc.uPocMe.cccc::">:cro
~ :.J.)
. ee&:dxoto:b::">eGX~::'>OO
0 \. .) ~ 0
II rn:::>~Cofl:be~e.cbe.cse>o~c.ue.c(ln~t)lcc~fl:::>@:cro
l.. JO ~ 0 .)~ 0 .)...J
co~cocc
.) .) eo:C2.gn~tu
.) . .) . ccce~:h-l:be~e.c
;tj rbe.cs::>o2c.ue.c(ln
j 0
C2ccge~
.)
rc~:dxde
.) 0 0
r; .)a?ccro~e~::>Pc.u~ce.
l.. ~ ~ . .)
~f s::">o2c.ue.c
.)
c~ r~
'
cof,e.cc(l)c5Jc
.)
~e~~ee.c
.)~ ~0
ecce~-
. :cro:~c5hlc.ub:~e.c
~ :.J 0
rc.oofe
.)
0b~c 'fbeocccoo~~:cPfl:CC~oro
:5'~ .) ~ . .) 0
r~hlcccoCc:fl.
~~ .)
:cPfl:CC<to~tu
~ .)
ccce~:W:b::">e.c
;tj
c~:crflge> ccc::">:cro:ce:flcc
e .)
11 ro::>ofl:cbco
l.. ~
c~~~~q-> be$~e>oG.~ro~ r~cc~ .besse~r.2soro cb~~:cPfl~~t;~cce~

~~:cPfl:~<tott.o -ccce~:g:b~~c~:cP~g::J ce~:croi~re:~g:: .~:oe~~eB .
ff~bcoo~c.lbJ~~cn c~~re:Lt>:i))en :ijfe~~~~ccco ~:c~droe~ .-
11 C2cce:oe~ :C2row:b~e.c~e.c ~b:oe~c.uPero
. ' ,..) " ' ~. 0. ~ ~ ~ "
soclEoe>ilD
- v .v:.J ~c.ucccoo
ihl ';5'.) ~fc.uPe:rh::::,5Je.dx;>
.), .) ~ l., ~
r:EC'roh.::h-l~::">l5~ccct:c.u~
. ~ 0 ~ ~
06 SL-aOdffii M.V1. VW~OH

904 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965'
. .
1m
-
~ =>efi:J . <) <: . 0 0 ~ cr,: C' 0 C' r,~ C' . _c:.
CQGt.j::><? o~~ oo~:9G~Gft.j: ooctl~Jm~ rom~tl:t G<XlJ?mc:xn:O(lc::ll'
0 (;::.!'i G <: OC' cr,: C' 0 C' 0 C" <: .
~ ~
~())'JIKJ:)~~~; 0~?1] G~Gfe1: t:<XlfgQ)f .roctJ~Jm~ OU:>Cl(OX:D~ II
;,8 C' 'l"G":"l 1m<: . C' C C C
~ ~ ~
oocnmw1 tlo1 roGI:.jx:oo'PGJ::>:;~ oo~roooromGJ?0091 GOO')m~:
tl~GOO?C4l <:. <: <: oc. o cr,: c ~ c
~~ . 0~ ;Q)1):Q)ot:m OOOJGO)')O)~:~J'jCDGO)') OOGt~ SdCD~D(C\Jm~l G<XlJ?m
O~~~'J~CCU
.. ~ c o c c oc c o c c
CX)')g~ G<XlJ':l~-;-q OCIJU9f !;GG~QJ'r'o:>Cl(ffiO:>~ If
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS . 905
oom:~oc~mw~Y

-r cJ 1t JL
~" (" ("

oxp="J1c..::~= e=~JC>~~c
~~CD? GOJ'?~m~: (~) (G~T) 2:Groj~~o1 j t :le(ij

C' . r
( SdOi(QCD'P:~~p:) ..
4) (Y)O):p"'X\,"\
J 'lmn.
('
~c
J
G"81 ::Dey: .G~l"'f"')

'Y' OC' (
G81
"'f"' ::D'f:9C
OC C' '1
01 j (
Od<.lfl~CD<f:~'/p:
o o ) *.
c c "\ c c c oo c
t!S::D?:l:l? Ojlol:l:)O) :lOC:S~OOOOUI OO:lliOOC a')OOOO:l:l?l :l:IUIU.I?: ClClOOOOC::l:l?
&.9 4t ~ C.:. 6 ~ - lJil L
COO II
L
OOu:>~
IL -- T l tJ J
0
U. -....-
(" 3:XX>QI
OX'OICI:>':II?Iof.C c)o~
. OOCOIQ! j OO:D I =~
' tl tL
WCOIOI
~ -l-
c)<:
::> <:1 3lQXI) C'
0 r.:c-~
:l:l?::l:l;m~p: tj4>e;j:l:l2" ~., oxp:01
(" (::>) ("
;~ ~.,
0 ~<: (" ("
O?'P:~p:<:~ OelC?'21
cc (' (' (" ~
OOffCO:::G<D?lo:>O C:o1::: l:l:IC I OOOOOOOt4>e ro~:~c ~~ oxp:~J?~
C' C' (' C' . 0 - _C:: ("
()QICO)
(" ~<: (" 0(' 0 (" (' ("
0\ ('
cc:~-114>1>1 C::l:>OO::l:> C OOOIICI 4> 00110> ~~~QQQI:l:>::D H
1 J t. IJ l 6 -llt c.:,
r.:: (' ("

~ltjiOIJOOll
(' C:<'
IIOOOIJC':t:JC>
0(" ('
~OI:l:>e21 1.1~? :JX1
(' (
.f? (') "
I C>l 13~1
" ((")
C> I
( '~')
<:~1
" 0 (' 0(' 0 (" c:c- (' .0 ~ ('. 0 C:<'
[!ltlf~ C<DI OOC:~'jSjC::l:>') 0~2: t1l>:l:>21 ~C:t:j;:>~ II C:~:[j4>C:l:>? 00~~ O>lip~
::lCS
;r:;;:OC" (
c01r
'I') ca;r::Ofi'F ~~~
oc- c- <'. o c- .~ o C" 0 0 C" ' _g
~o~2:
c-
-ji ~~ roill oo~-~:~u <nJt
(" 0 (" 0(' 0(' 0 0 oc C' (' C' ~ oc
00~~~ (7.)()0)~ \' <{C I jO,CI U'~ ro<l[Ol oxp~J?I ~:l:>ell <jC!001>0?Jf. f ~
OC" 0 C" ( ) OC" C' ' '
OXf:<n,~OlOXJ:>IOl~ j OO~:l:>2ll
o1;,1~~'1g"8:6c8c:l ~~~ G~:~OOJ~II (18~~) Text Translat!on not~ ~ a4.

ccc)o
:D:n oe s1XthEd
< OOO?"''jl . ..
ltton, Lah'.
tn, p. 272; (' JCc ~';c- GU"XOI
UUCIOO c (_ 191~ )
Indian Cases Volume 31, p. 875(9 B.L.T.s3); ~ (~) :oo.,~~~ (1892) Text
Translaticon & Notes, pp.:&?J-Z'ls(supra); cu?8Gj~~: f~ ~u8:c1:1 1872(1892)
Selt(;tion Judgments , Lower Bunna, p. no.
~!l:?:l:l?
LO
w~:lOca~uf
U f;;t- -
cng
4
~:Cc&o~:c~n
1 e;,
a')~
X
~:~.JI?t~~
t!j tl J
c;a~<k-r.
01 lJ
C::l:>? OOJ~I4>?11 (1926) Buddhist Law ,May Oung , and Edition p. ~is~
..
'122l~ =:))e"
(" ('

. ::>a~c ~of.~ I oxo:1.1
t; 1 t.J -- r
oc:w
- cJ
n:xx>~
'" A
ro11oS
J
::>:l::>ll
r
_,J: c ~ .(" . (' (' ("
t ::>e...J ~~o1 cmp:~.~e~~~ ?Oe ~ =>eiS9 ~~t>l ~co Je '!<DC~' ~st
0(' C" t: Ct'?
~ . ("~
0
qo:Y.J.> =:"'
--T -r. ~
(" .. - .. 0
M.
("
ooco::l:> :a:c:oo~ QJ~.J~:l:>? am. m s~<,uOJOCW n
"" I " ... ..
( ,. . ~ ..
.. 1:
' :
u:::>c:eiW~ICC
.:; . e.
cco3f>n
.
1111 .;,co&es:cPAe:chcoe&,w

,. o
11 co&ed:o:chcoe&e.s
.> 0
srd"Odmi: MVT VWliOJI 906.

~9Q,S] BURMA LAW .REPORTS 907
o~ r:: <: c- , , 'rm .. . ,
c ::~e~:>
jO Sd'J.'
~.:t~:>=9eP'20{<:0~: ~mq[']~,J211 :nc: roc:veoG8<fS0 . J9'
. c.. c .o c - - c ococ c c c .c . o o o
:081,}
r jl:f mrooro::n:t
q~ c cc L L '> J ~toroto:G:::o:>
oax:o:oc;:;ocQC&,C u~ -,
m4:.-ro:>:ro:mmt
Q L l L
ld'iO)'X:OJ'?
o
coro "croC00)'J:8!C
c c o c: ~,J::D'J:~
::Dmell o
ro:>:co::::o::o c c Be .s~n
" (~\
::~mil: {)1
tl ~l c tl80?'J::DJOC T
("~T)
l J \. L L<;,
;. \
Cl
(\)(:)~: '~
0 :011m:x> O
'tl~O?'J::D'J
t' oc
G0::Do:>8dmc: ~ O)Q(:):D
;:;o: c c II CillQ<.11::D
- c- c " c 'l
l!. o -c:L Li> G: L L -, C 61-- 1i. 2:c>mpcoo,, j
..~st:;:;GoJ? 8d(.l)~mm:c&l?:it 8&<\i O?~f l:"
mGco:'<:lt:>:
; U ' tj ~
. c c 0 . . . 'T' 0 c ( 'T')
:L ~- ~F L tJ J
j mm:Q'J5:::o:"l\
'T' oc . c 0 c
- - l.-
.
,L . C
c c ::: c
:roc
T' ~r
G::llWr:
..
rooc:~c ~8: G8t -::o.s: GQI G81 :::o.s:ocm~c rommm Ql~~tq:,ococ
1 j 0 6 - - T T l ~L J 0 IL 0 tJ u (,;;~T)
G.S~Cu'Jr;::;:::D:?II
J . L ... ~ E,
oom?
4> .
2=Stc8t(J)
Jl.
8d~l~l~lro9:~:::o~
l II,!
Bf<:l:,t~
.
-;roc ,r:
G91Wf~
. ')" . c .. c c( 'T')9ococ c c c C99 .
G~l o:>cCIJ'J::D:DII
: <> G
000)? 8d01~181CDCl:{J GQI ::>:{J.S(I)COXI (:){){) 8d01
~ iiJ C. l J l A o o1 JU
c c 9
$40)(1)1
i:" o
mroo:~;:;o::D~008d0
c ~3
:
co . c
Q)GO)?O"lQ::D:"l1
c- c c c
II ::D::D:D 8dQIC: 10:::0:'1':'1
.
iiJ l ' U.J .. "i ] C 1L C:. U U.,
<C' C~ C C . <" .CO ()(' C OOC C
(;}.sm.s rorooomm OG8:x>'Jro0:mcoG::D-:>cr;J08ll0o:> ja- :x> moc:::o::o 11
IT J..T L . - 11 6 .o J! J c. \ I. l c
~0 ,~~ -o C\ C C C C C 0 0 0 . C
~<DoJtu=:::oa oJo;>Gw:>roO$C:m ro;;~q>m~:::o2311 o:r~rot2G9?C'J:l9?
C OOCO ' C99 C'( 'T')90C'OC C~ 0 C
<DCI o::>cr;J~ro (:){)())? 8d01
{)1Sfmo:o G~l ::>:o.srocm 8dGIJ ;:;oro;;>o QQ::D:D u
~ L L t> ~ C. T Jl . 6 :'1 l J: C
o oc 'T' o c 9 9 c( 'T') 9 oc oc "Y' oc c 9
())8d0GOI :::0 (,)cDO)'J 8d010181mo:o G<;>l e:o.srocl G81 ::D.S:~c OJ:>:::J:X.l:
L oL () Ti.l T Jl. .. T J o
r;: c ~ o<"r;::;: c ,,r. c G r c c
~Gt:JX:9J Gf<Xft:J::D211 ~e"~ ~~01 8~0?'JCIJ
~
c
o) mm~:o
c~ G c c ~~
'T') 9 0(' oc c cc-
e:ot')(C-::D2 ')t<'~fG;:;o:~u:qc 8d'f~Gq>m::D-2? u
c ~
@ 'lffiG~~
c 0
<:I~O)'J
c
c " o o 'f.~ c c 9 ~ cr;::;:,..
<..oc:CJ?~ 8df.~t:J:Gf?ml rorom :::o:>:::DI,}:0p: tl10ef"':::o:> ~:>
9 C
G()I?Sroo:l!) (
GQI'T') 9 <" C
e:G<r.>I?C'~C
C
(:)~~
C C
roro::D<:\:lC: G C'
8roo:o ( 'T')
GQI .
. u, re . u J 4) . m
"Y' C 0 C 0 'T' OC' ( ') 00 0 C
GSI G8d:9co:>::D:D 0GS: G81 ::n.s: 8d(.l)~cnm:~~ <XX:II <:I:JO)O?QC())
.... c; 6 . T . It -- -r . .# r.-L
. . \ . c ~ oc c 00 0 c c c
mG<:lOO:>:QG::D?
A o .
8d~IC:
U
8"'AI~C ~,JbJQ)
Jo L
O?OCOGOO'JC:
L
o::>?:G::D?
.
GO:li 'J:~c
6U J o
c . 0 o' \ (: c~ 'c 0 .i: 'l
B
m.. ?:OO:D:(:)I'J:mro
cC.:. tJ
8dG<:IOOOGO~.S
6~ 'lT
Go:>?C:~(\)'J::D:DII
C
0002 8dQ!ro1
.
11.- : - T
ot L
I)
3;l(.l):;;){JXD;CI.)(:)l?:::D:D
- ~ -u
c ' r OC' c
c.:.. G81 ::DS~C
T J
8dO')(,iGS
n. T
9
o:>::D:o:> :>: B ~
A
\~
L
G.S
T
6 ::D:D11
c
c.:.

8d<.De>OX:O:Q-j{:)q,O)X8d?OOro8rno:o
\ C9 c ( 'T') 9 oc c 'T' oc c
11. -- T .... . o o U'- !n G<;ll e:GO'J(I)
.-L
C::D:D
C
G$1 :::os:~c
T J o
C' oc 'T' c- c c \' 0 \ <' c
mm IL
8dQIC:8di,}GOI
U
O)C GS::D:D II rnc:ro:::o 8dG0 OOQGo:a.s 'Go:>?C:~
. A T C.:. o ot. 6 6 -IT
"l 'T' oc ..,._r,.s
<G::D'J8dQIIG81 ::Df:""t:J"':rot9JI j roo;?OOX[':Q'1?0)'JG~?4'<>CD8~ ~I
'C!~ \ c9 c ( 7')
G
;G
oc-
:::>:GIO'XDCro
JL
o 0 C' ')C' 0
ro(l)QO)Q):C\Y.,u:>:~c {X):G<Jtc:ax::::oJG
-;t - -- T l u J li.. L
'c . 0 .e
?CI 8d(.l)<;>oxn:co
!t -- L l 0
6 $
c 'T' oc o .. . ~ \ ~9 .. c ( "~")
<(:lp::::oa G81 ~~:<Jt : ~ oxp:oo:>?:~ I ~0)? G8d~~:~ G<;>J
9 . oco r,~ oo _o _c c o\ cr,-.J:
:e:G~'Jqf<Jt j oxp:~:>:t:J:I ~O?OC ~G~ ~5j~::D? ro~JC:{j"' .
oc c .
:8d0~C
J _
B
c o
8d ':I:OO:D:<:li'J:ffi
e>C U l olA
\
8i)G(:)QGOGa;~c
- -..1 -Jo
c
oo::o:
c \
4>C.::.
~o:
A l
o c cro
8d0ffil <=!'.CDSIG
JL L ,T Llt!f.L
-G'm~ mm:0mco:"~:Q:1
-- .T - - T ~ 1.'
oa~j
C
~~~~ mm:g~:<:lg;jgdJ
. t.J. -- T ~ JL J
boa
'\ -c
o:xS~~
c. 1. c,)
~:::0~11 ... . . . .
908 . BURMA LAW REPORTS
0
CD8';l'=l(J)
L Jl l l
0
SOX.D mm:::n
- - ~( IL
0
: e:::n.s:())())
T
@3
OOGQO:o:>::n
C.:.
9
II O::D')Q
C
OC'
mm:O,?~~ :0
JJ -- l.-
o . C' , C' 0 6
C' 0 c c 0 C'6
'l' C' C' "'l
::D::D 8';lQ:>I adGJ<;j~C .S '):(\)')()) adGOI OOC Gad')('t)OIOdOOC: 0 C' C' C'
C!QI())
G'!.
[s
~tgO').")~OJ: C. L t.:JJ o T b 'll ll L U ... J
0 .
SC'Of.J:
(~)
~
0
. , ~cq~())~O)~ II
c' C'
o ( .;;~T) :r. Whether Mr. M. C. DeCruize deceased espou~eci

e:~roJ~~ul J ~uddhism as his religion as alleged in the.
. J\c-, written statement? An'd whether the
r;;s(r;;:-f):~ dec~se~ .a~d rst ~-efe-!ldant D~w Thein (a) Daw
If o~. c- Jl\lnYn;r-were ~~gaily marned couple ?
G~ ~;9:
01 J 1 2 . Wij~ther Mi~s :M. ~.;];)eCru_ize created a mortgage
by depbslt of nde deed of the land and th~
house in favour of Dr. U Po Thi forK s,ooo ?
If so, whether the rst defendant is entitled to
be subrogated to the rights of the mortgage
for reasons mentioned in paragraph 5 of (he
written statement ? If so, whether there is-
any property left .for administration and/or
partition ?
. 3. What was the nature of the property in suit ?
Is it ahtetpa property of the deceased or )qint
property of the deceased and rst defendant
Daw TheinYin ?
4 Whether the plaintiffs and 2nd defendant are
entitled to %th share therein ?
5 To what relief, if any, are the pla'intiffs entitled ?
o o[sc c o cr,~ c c o ~ c--
~~ C:QJ(J)<,~p:cq ~ooti:Gf=Jffil GOd')ffi'J: 0~')5) axp:::lfleJ:::D~
o c A; o .C o c o c C' o c oc o
8d'lt~CDOG:n:9JI 0"-"P:"t'=lJ?:<:U ad~q 000~())0)~ II ~OOOOG::D') ::>.l'=ltq
c- r;;: c o !;; c- o c~ c
'=lGroJr<.>::Dtl'? ::>.l<ftQaxp:~J '):())I g)J'J:Go:>')~ ::>.l~QOC~G(\)0)~ II
o .C ~ 9 C' c ( ) C' C
::>.lo;?OOX(>:~p:<:U G~G<f~: 2!0?,-f!G::>.l'X j t'? ::>.l<J?tQOO'f>!OOfJ!~ll
0 ~ ' 9 C' 0 r;;:c- C' ~ C' r,:::c- .
0~~ G~Gf~: ~~') O)JG())I:;QC! ~m . ~rotlcD::>.lOJroadG~'X!r::JC!'{J
o 'l'~f,~ <: o c .o o . r;:A; cr;: , c '1..
~p:<qGOI titl:J eoG8!'? 09c~: ~p:C'J{ roq:adm'):DLSJ ooct!Go:proro
::ne:ill . .
rljC::QJo:>
. . C' c ad~'CD
C' (
~
) C' c C'A;
t<?OOO::Dffi9JI
c Q
'=li?o:>')ad'=llcDIOI())~!q)::D~
g C' C'
::>.l';t'

::>.l~?:o:lOO')ad91
c r;;:c ~ C' c- c c 'T' oc-
tt~O)')::D'JOC tlCDGeJX:t<?J CjC!1<'? G81 ::n;;:
(
G~l
'T')
'l' oc c o c c ~C' c- r;;:c ~ c- r;;: c-
GSI ::n.y:9ccr:2::D~ axp:ocadt.::JCOOC'=l(.))'): t:jCDGeJ')C! ::>.l~:::>.lt:l')')GO:
C' or,.. C' C' C'A; !;; . C' C'
C' C' 0 _c 0
::D~II CX?tJC;QJffi!_'? _OOOOJffiSJI illi'J:GOO')~C ::>.l~Qaxp:~p:<:U 0~~
~
G~G'f~: ~:~.y:G~'X
g C' C'(j ) C'
t'? adu;tQo:>'{J!~'=lJJ!~ 0~')1JG~G<f~: '=l~OO'>
~ 0 ~- ..
z/.z ct 'p!qB'J 'UO!-}!P:il ~S (LS6!) (z}
h d ~ON UO!~lllStrel,L pr.>,L (7:681) (1}
S.DI0d3~ MV1 VW~{)g:

910 .BURMA LAvV REPORT~
. .
" Under Burmese Buddhist Law, partition can be claimed
by a step-child during the step-father's life time,"
r;;: c c
otm~:roeroccu:ro')::::n~ u.
s6:6troJ~:~oocop: g;)rh~lgi00?~9 (9) c:1i

c
'"I ocr c o c
G~Jri)OISd<J?::;:~m~CO'):::D~-
" What properties the step-children may claim to.

. partition . .
When there has not been a previous partition on the re-
marriage of the surviving parent, the step-children are entitled
to partition the following properties, ~amely : -
(a~Ahtetpa. property; i.e., property ta~en ' by their ..own:
parent to the subsequent marriage;. ...
(b) Inherited property, i.~., property inherited by th~if
own par~n~ duri~g coverture with the step-parent!
. and . . . . -
(c) f!iiapazon property, i.e., p:r:,oper:ty jointly acquired' by
their own 'p;u:ent and the step-parent."
or:c c r: ~ cc ga ( ) c Q . c. - c
qrac "'J"':otrocop~:<nrootoJoo:>~9 j .mJ~; mG'mO?Q~:;o')o~ar
c c c c: ,
~ oc: r,; c: o . c- o c: .o co
. 1~ oro:nt:nSJ' G::P~Utif.lqo: t;m~cq')::::n~co~: _G9119:::ne;-
" Of the property inherited by the father during his seconq
m.arriage, the step-children get . one-half and the , ~tep~parel}.r
the oth-er half.".
c
G<,~?CGCl.i: .\C
c: c .
~c,~c:G&: S'd(,)
(c~) OJCOO~:-
c: .c: .
.
AIL Jo
. ;
A
4
..
.C.:, Jl
. -
, .
....
'fProperty inh-er~ted by a father from.; his ancestor' during:
marri~~e is not . ]J.napazon or . j_oint pror.erty~f f1!e h~~pand
and wife. On his death, leaving a daughter by ~a .previous.
marriage and a widow, the daughter ehtitled .to . one-half: is-
and~th~ wi<low:,. tQ. ~-. ~.g~al. s~ar:: ; . :: :- ~ >. .... . : :.. .:... -:.
mro fll;:. .c. G . c ., '
~ ~"' tl9) . o.o::r:>.::Q~, .
-
. :-:- ~"
- .. .~ . ... ,-: :.
..
J . :.
. . ... .
. ... .........
. . ........
,,,. _.._
...
. ~ ..... .. .... . .
.... . .
- - - ..
_.. ,. . ....
(3) (1915) Indian C~ses, Volume, 31, p. 875. (9) B.L.R. (53) : ..
__ (4) (1~2}_ "I:ext ..'J;'~s~~t~OE. .~N.:ote. _ p, .2.73 ...($ttPra), ..... _ .. _, .. .:~ .. .
(s) {1892) Text Translation..&. ~ote:i p;;.Z7$t,.(Supra):' .. _...
(6) (t972-1892) Selection J u<;igm.etitsl;:Q.wer:'o'l3linila; :.P': "1,lO:...
BURMA LAW REPORTS 91 ~
c~'=lg:J.>')~') G'~':ncfj t:OG:J!);)Gc.>fOi~ ~:aS:o:>:G~') Od~s:

(.}J?:'fl G~:~u<.&X)'):G':n') ())J~:d>')(7)~f-
" The Dbammathats include, -among the six kinds of
children entitled to inh-erit, the pubbaka, ' children of the
husband or wife by a former marriage,' and it is the purpose
of the present ~hapter to consider the rights of inheritan'=e
enjoyed by these and their issue."
" It has been seen (a) that, on the death of one of a Burman
Buddhist couple, th-e eldest son or daughter, possessed of
certain qualifications, is entitled to claim partition of the
joint estate of the parents from the survivor, while all other
children born of the marriage are postponed till the latter's
decease or re-marriage. But this do!ii not apply to the atet
or former children of the deceased spous-e, who may call for
a division at once. A contention similar to that raised in the
leading cas-e was put fprward by the defetr.:e in Ma Min Kyin
v. Maung Wa (B) and it was argued that as children cannot
claim partition of their parent's estate during the lifetime
of their parent, a step-child should not be in a better
p:>sirion; and that though the Dhammathats declare the
shares to be allotted on such a partition being made, they
do not expressly say a partition can be claimed'. But it was
ruled that ' that is the usual form in which the case is stated
in the Dhammatbats, and the declaration that a person is
entitled to a ce.rtain share connotes that he may sue for it'.
Needless to say, step-children, once their own parent is no
more, .:annat, as a rule, be excepted to leave their property
for -an indefinite period in the hands of a stranger by blood:'
C' 'l'~ '1 ~ C' ~ C' Q c: c:
SdCQ())G:JII t:JUI s:lGe3X: cr-";'fgp:;c: 20024XJC ~:gp:0091 s:l~JC:
r,::c:
tjG>Sd~~~
OC: C' C: G G
~0:>') S':l(,}JIOISI~:G>
C' ( 'T') 2:G>~~ em
G~l
G OC' OC: 0
SdG''JS)G':n') ~~~
C:
19~~~ 11 ~!?{ &~: &:n:> ~00xf>::5 o ~oT::l3t:~~r G~T)

'T' OC' C' C' 0 C: C: 0 C: OC: C: C: C' 0 C:
(
G91 ::u;>=9c-:n~1 <XM?~:ro~ot: o:>Om~~-:n~ 11 mJto:>~ot:rooo:xp
oc: oc: oc: c: c: c: c: oc: oc:
r lf:l J lf:Sd~ SdU;t~:~p: ~~~II
0 0
<;c:::n~mmJt r <.f=O'X.(C:
0
CJ? ~~~ ~ j
c:
m~""t::: 11
s:
oc: ......... 0 r,:;: c:
~e.P<? ~~~:u~~oxp:::l{
C: 0
@3:m lS~:~JoS~oS( p19) t{ (j) #Sd~:rrJ(9oSoo:oo')::n2W ot&JoS

.0 c: ('
~())':)J~fl
(7) (1926) Buddhist Law, May Oung, 2nd. Edition, p. 278.

II CCcccduc.ollre~ea:> :CCroto~bee>erw:cc:ccro tocoberw~ro
" " o " .)0 ., o ., o e e o " o "
&~~ aX.oro:bJe:&
0 oc .;, r :& cccc:d~cccc~ro I'Gwcccoo
0 .) '5'.) .) .)Mcobe:dxo
.) .) 0
uC2ccw~
.) .) 0
Pe'S-M.c 4bcobre bwc :tewde> 1:)16:h1Jw~8cree> wrowre becce>n2
.)0 " " e e ., " e " " " "
:cbc.o w:r,Jlc:cbco
6:J 0
~"cccon .)M:be>oe>~:C2oo
t;cccn :&eocene> '5':t'.) \.)
o.)
u.)~ccwtv:ne>roRec:tero
.) 0 .) :J
~k)l~~e.G
,;j 0
bwc I"..CC.OO 1w:b~~~~ec :Xcec e2cc:ca:collPe ~cow ~In!&

e to o ' .)0 ., ., " " 'S'!wo
S.DIOdmi M.V1 VMffig Z16

u~bc:oc:l:~
,) .) :J ~cwtco~e:r.co:k
.) .,)
::rooe2coca~IJ-occf!OC'C
.> .>::1 ;, .>
46:c.c:2G
.> .>
fi::c.oo:@c.o:hlec.o
S' , ::J ;,o~;l~a::::i:J].(I;jc.@So
B1 .>:::1~.> o
~:ol:looooaloc.ooooooooro-gco:ol:looccooo:c.I:I:P.oo : ore:oreesc.a4b1 ooc.ccc.cc~h
.)~.) ,) 0 ,) .) 0 .)~.) .) ::1.)0 .) .) .>:.:1,)
woob C coccc
. .) ~ro~)
* (& be:croa;c
~~socec~
16 S.DIOdct~ M.Vl VW1:Ifl9

11 @cc~wc.ccocc Ccf c.~ be
1
~ ' '
~lle.s J:cra&>es
.., '\
!!-w*b
.:> ;,
1(b)c.es Joocnes
.:> ~ .>
1ok
.)O
@c;;'l:w~a
~ ::::::J
b.
:>
::>cw~:~ooocM>
~ .) :J
u@cc:.,\.~@bw
.J .) .:> 0
tJtJ C~ ICC &,e,c
'\
l:cra:1:oobo@hlca4bl
.J O.) ~
d,&,a
_,:_j .:>
of
:>
:ooeWOC.fl!>
.)
11C2ccroec.ooco10e> 1oe> 4b:oe>:cF~Re c.coocc:tc

.J .:> .... ...L ,) ::::J~ .)
rr: ...., .,. ~ ' ....,, ' 1 c.ccem
s-=~@~:oeccG coc.sccc
, , v J~
c.ooeccl oO~ce<~>:c:oco a oo t
,. , b ] o coc.cescvcc
ec,roe v n
..., \ c 0 (' l,; J 00 \ 0 ,) .) .)
S~'BOd3~ .MVl VW~hg:

C' C' I) C'
~;;copmoo?:~::n~m II n2:ora~ II
Gcop~oo?:~'l~:n~~u ll'=l~OJ? roCJS(tf} 8:l<JS(aS) :r.>?:~?:u

(\,'w) ~C ~GbGwCWW
.) J
(b::>(e
JO
:d~G~OC:dxo ::>::>il:ce4bl
o JO J~ .)
CCcd~wrocoro
,) 0
~borowro:~:<'loo
~ .) "' ..... ~ :>0 -~
1w::>e:Cl
.)
:Q&:Cbco
0 e.::J 0
~cC2o ~cce:::o1o
;)
~&>:~~(2~
\..) \... ;) 6 0 0 0
11 .,C2ccooohl .>::I :::>k:le5l:oo

..,~, \
w:~hC2~
o o e
toC2<'lb
.:1
cohl~~
,) ::3 0 W-;es cccfb\Swc.oo!:)
~ ,)
tow~f.l
0 ,)
web~
,)
ro~es
,)
tccc::>~ooowro
,) ,)0,) ,)
:cbl'
:.3
:~co
.:>o
besGoo::! croCe:flco:b:>
,) .:>
Cfl~bl
J:.3
J:C2roccc~~~C2cc::>~"JIJ
.:> .:> .:> .:> .:>o:.:J o o
tocowc.cc~
oo:cbco
J
C2cc:2co
.:> e
:co~:crcoc.ro~ !)
ccc/,wcb~ .:>
ro~eso-.
,) ,)
uc JbesG~o2wes J
2cC25o
.:> o
~coMecoPeco/,
~J J .:>
::>Co:eo::>bo
J J e ~ .J
fb&.CX!cc:c.k:l:& :::1 11C2cch
J
cooo:lr~
o .:, !!>'
2c.C2:So
J 0
~flC.CC
.)
lCO~fl
.:>
:%12::.C2:So
I) .:> 0
e:!-occc
.)
C2ccto:~Qorowro
.) ~,) .:>
:c.bl:flcx:>
:_j JO
u.>C2cce~ \\
d:o::>bo
.> e
mccflbcohl:te
J :J ~.
tofies
o
orcoc.ccbroG~nC c.ro2o:f>CO:b::J
.> :> .:>
Gf.I~Q ueocc:tc:c.o:2o co~ro:co~e.G w:d~:Q&:cbcolXC2o todccchlb::J
.:>:.3 t- .:> .:> J ~ o o :.3o
~~:~e(2~
~\ e
11 C2cc:tcecocb~
.> \:>
:Jfu/;ro
.,
ll:>W
::>- o
(c) ob&,!'l
.l
~-.
:J
:ro~CJJOC.I'l~
:>
&coc./,~i5~
0 .)
t~olre:l~:dxo
;) .) o
ookeJ~blcoc.ro~
o .)O .)~.)
C2ccdccchl
.) ~
c.cc!:)ih
cco~C2~bcohl:re
.) .):lo bros~o2coro .) 2c.C2:So
.) 0
co~~
.) 0
u c.co~C2<'lbcohl:re
.) .)::Jo
be.GGe>o-3 C.CO~:flCO:Cocfl4Q
.:> ,) ,):.3 0
Cu~e.G ::>ftobohl
J .:>;j
Cc:CC~cocb~ro"e.G
,) ,)
CCCC
,)
:3:2co (c"JIJcoco e:deJikoeocorocow ~bnoococo :c.bl:~ro !:>c.Qt)&
e e :,jo J J J o J J J :.:1 JO .:> ;::j o
uC2ccQecohl:~ IG2oo~"JIJ<'l :ok:lo~re<P:ebco c.0::>bloc.ro~
.:> ;::j,J ~ ':> .Jo:.:J .J:::i.:>oo ' .J:.3.:>
~eQt)ro to2c.C2:So c.cce~ooeJ:cbro 1:::oeJ:cbco C2ce2c.C2:Soh>orco~~ooJo.
~. :::1 0 .:> 0 ,) .:> .:> .:> 0 0 .:> .:> t-
:2co &:cct)W~Bro~ ~bo~:o~ tocowoo:ebco broG~o2 2c.C2:So
e J .:> .:> .JO o o .:> J o
11 .,C2ccoGl4bcohl:tebroc~o2
J ::1.:> .;) ~ 0
2c.C2:So
.) 0
cc<.O~~~bcohl:l:e
\. .) . .J .) ~
brost)o2 c.co3e- .)
:f.ICO:fuc<'l4Q
.:> .:>:.3 0
WC. 4ccch1 :.:1 C.CC~COI 0~
.:> t; ..!..
I Ot) ::>Co:c. r<'l~e.G co:c. r<'l:r:;;]tc:cbco.
.:> ~
lPero
~
nC2ccd-h1e&eo
.:> ,):.3\ \ \
:C2rowwre&coc..co~ml8ses
,) ,) J ,) t- 0
euGeo2:Rco:i:o
0 .:>
c<'l4b.1.
.:>:.3
~~
.J ...L
1 ee,ro:&:>~es ~~:c.r<'l:~:Cbco
:>
:::>&:>cbC' . .cc:tc torocb:::>k:l:::x:.Qe>e.G
0 c .)~ .) ~
c.ccer
9 <:; ,, ,
C\JCO ccoo 11 cccceo
'"""} cc:cc~co:::><'l<X>oe.G
0 , 0
l_
.) .)
1'1'
0
~
co:co~w:c. coc.co~ :c.co<'l::>CO
,, 9
\. " 0 0 .:> \..;) .:> ,) ,)
lflero J fb:cc~coeb~<'l<X>~m w:co~w~~ ::>Co:d<'l&81Pees 11CCccQe:c..hlw
!!>'" ~ ,) ,) .:> 0 .:> !!>' ,) ;::j, :,j,
co:c.Pn;e.G .)~.:> ~hlC2cco~e.G c.cc~~& o \ o
to:df>CC<'l o ::>
n~:c.Pwc.rot)
S colli:d~cc<'l
o o ::>
~~:~.
:co~w:~<'ll~e.Gc.ccde~
.)o o \. o
eu:dflcc~ ~~:~:c.Pcocro~ l~e.G C.CC!:)i:e~
o ::, S o \ o
eu;c.Pwcroe-
S
, c..cc~wr.')(.()co w:co~co:~<'l c.cce~:cce>cocbe~<'l<X>~e.G 11 C2ccahl
,):::J ,) :C2ro fbe
~\.
noe:ro
.;>
;ce
.......
.:> 0 ,)0 ,) ,) ,)
r
Olt fu<'l :::>recb::::>k:l:::>c~~ro
.; J:::i,) ;::j
~co~~&o ,)
c.fte2ccbQ&,&;&i:o
.:> ;::j\. \. 0 0
n@ccfO!e"JIJ
.:> ,_l\:.:1
.;>
:~woc.!'le :i:o::>b(J) :lr~:lrflro w:doolrd~:cbco ::>~:d<'l~e.G co::>ero:~-:> ~cc~~
e:Jo .:> 0 b:. &I &' .) 0 .) .) .J 0 "
:oc.Q~b
.) ;::j 0
j~=Q~c..rroe>
;::j ,)
~hlcccowa.iro
.:>~ .:> .:>
C.Ucoco
0 0
orowco:cb.1:fl00
,) ,) ~ ,)0
ll6 S~)!Odffil M.V1 VY-rufUI

8:16.
. .. ..
BUR.MA LAW REPORTS
sJ.~Odffii .M.v1 vmng OZ6
C' 0 C' ') C' C' C'A; OC' r,: C' C' C'
OXJ)('I):O') ('1)0)0)~19JC <>Oma:>CX>~ ro8:l:':fJ:(\)(J)OJO())? o;'f:OC ;,!($~
r-- c c r,;:c o co c r,:: o' "l c c
s:l~CCDC~lO?: ~tl0~ G~fCX>~CG::D? ~GtjOOGf 1j~o01:0211 rom<XY..>
c c c r,~co c "l c c o~ c c c c G~?~~B=
'9 JC ~:OC C\JC~(.l)')g tl0~CO ICDJCX> G~'JCCJt~:CX> C\JCX>CX)O'jf UJCX>~ffi :.8
r;::;::: c c- c c-
c c c J
c o o c r,:oc
G::D:>G~')~ ~::nmro:>:::D2ro2: ro('I)CX)u'lr ~:ocmrootoc DL~c~ G3Tm~~"
c: ~ 0 ' ) C' C' C' (' C' C' C'') (' 0~ '
'Q(J)(J)(J)
l ll
~GUill) Gffi')O)(.l)Q.SI:I') ::OCGO)') ~IO)::D:D~(J)O)OI II GI:I')Cffi m:
r> 1L lT J o. JJ t::. l L
.lJdGO'f 0)0)010)1:1
o c 0<>0l:;;)C:
' or,::c (:) ~oc- c "l c c c o cr.:
~C(J) oo: O)OJC\JIC CD ffiiCOO)ffi 010)10');0)
(J JL 0 I.L:J Ll L .. jJ ll O tl l lJ t..:J IL 0
G c c- c "l oc c G r,:oc
Q)e:ro:n OO~~OOG9:GU:Ifl OOffi?~lO GO:'f G'f?ffiUIC\J~1:12<Jt 2:~0fffi
cr;-: c
m:::tl::D211
o c c oc. c c G c "l c A; cr;-:
02?1) C\JffiGCX)')ffi tCCG())') e:o:>Gmp
G~Gf~JlO ~GOIC:~ O)Ctj
c c c c c r::::::c()Gco r;-:c' . c
:::n2'P Gt~?caz;;:G~:>c ~~ t~G~:ele Gtl:>c:roro:>:x>et J 09c~:ot
h C' C' A; C' o C' C' 0 C'(,~ r;::;::: C' OC' r,:
mGtj~Gf8J?:T~ ore~ OJO~~:::DU'Jf 90001::1<Jt o,{OOG~?C: II 0)1:1:~?:
c C' C' or,:r,::c c C' o c .<il r;::;::: c c '
.rom(X)O']t mro1Jltjc:::n2 :xJ')(:)r o~2?2~dl: ~roG~?c:l CJtfG'Pc:
c ' r,:r;::;::: c C' :l ~- 0 .crl c r.:: r;::;::: (' 0
qfOlO Dl~'P~C ~JtO~::Det ('l)~dl:t<? ~p:~:> ~'Jtj'J:Gt:JX:I . oou:
r,: c c A; oc c c c c c cr,~ C' c c
:~:>: romooo~ ~Gro?c ro~rox9r_l~~lOG'Pmtlut oroo;;:mJc
- 0 C'r,:f,~ OC' G C' C' C OC' C
o,(OO'=~J?:m~oo:o~crroDLtl:G:o? ~:~;;:mGro:roe::o2 romcc: ~Goo:>c
r,: ' c C' oc r,: c c '1 or,: c- c
~D'LG:x>::::nl Gf'JC~C ro~:~:t::J:>: CDffiOJOUI1:12<Jt mroDL9f ~92oo:;uc:
0
/,JQI(J) illOO" C'
C::XJ:n 0 C'
:O:::D')O(.l)())~C
C'
(\).54l')
c C' :>C:
<;X)SffiiCG c II 0
COG ?C
J I. c i.OO J 6 T6 lC u
0 0 :- ' :- '
1:. 0 UL 0
CJ] ~:ml ~cc

0 C' (' (" 0
'01 :m.s:>~:~ ?:~ ::oc:lOw:O? tl('\:n?~ ~m~OG$ 0:XJ:'DO)~Q
T l J A tl o ""~C.:. (, [.. C.:. coL I
r,;:C'r,::C' r;-:' c c r,:c r,:c r,:c o co C'
.;;;q:tlrotjc:~:~DL:::n ~:ro~:~:0ero?ro9 ~f'=~?tl2~~::~2::D?:qr mJ<? rom~
C' C' C' OCG
o:>:
l ::D:n
u lO~Gm1:1:11
G u JL roG.s~:::nou;
:t. TJl J 0 t c::.- mm:"l:x::J.:n :'XJG8<JJ?:oo:::J:x>?
c~ u l
ro:
L
r;: c c c r;::;::: c r,;: c c- c cr;-: c
t:}())'}f ::D~G~:>c:tl<? OOffiJ())())O<? OX:tl:02ll
0 f~r;::;::: C' C' C' r,:c . C' c OC' r,: C' C'
ro'J:9:ot 11l~~::D? t(~:::D?::D?oc ~;;~:~:>~<:>Jc::;;uc: ~=t::~?:romroo
.Cc:1 GOIC:::Dc:
')C C'
G.SOX: OC'C' C' 0 C' C'
c: 0:xJ:'l)())~COro:x>mG::D? C' C'C' 0
0)1~00) GQGI:)'Jffi::D
C' 0
T l C:, tJ o 6J l -oL cSI J o.L
C C r,: ,crl C' ~C' C' C' 0 G
-G'Pmro?:oet tl:mf ')Y~l :~c ~r'=~~ ~:robl:coero'J20G8eJt 2:~? G~ro?
oc
c- c roo:>:nm
'O:>!::DOOI.S
l T
o c
L C:. L
ci: ::>
CX>j~Oro
~ L L
lO<>O::D:D
!L C
c
II ro~:~:
<' c c
?:romroCXl.s --IT
mroo~L
r,:: c o c c c C"r;-: c o o c r;-:r,::c .crl t: r,: c A;
tjc:rq q;;G"[?C: 9fOillDL9r mroo~2:>2 IJltjc:~:~dl =t~ roGtl:ro2: co:r:91
C' C C' C C' C' C' . C' C'OC' o (' 0
2:0'J:9;;
1t>
ocr.: c cr,::c
2 ~~G~J II O)tGffiJ:G::D?
::D~G())'J::l)
oc- C' c cr,::c
2 ::Dt~CC~~~
~:~
c o o c c-
OO<:;:t_p: C\J('f)CX)()tjC:J OOOOro:>c 0)2GCX)')C~C: 0:0~CJt. CJtfGqJC:
('
ro.sow C' ('
romro m:ro: C' C' :G~lll
c:~:~:J:~cooro goo?
oc ~ OOG9: ~:G::D'J
::o~:~G~:~
t.T lJ n. U
o(l)gGQ:m0
:L..ii. l
0
0
U. IL J
C' ~ C C
ro9om~ rom~muc:x>:
Jl. o L
6 :xJ:'l) 11 m C'
c:,:; CJ
~ C'rnll:l'
0 ~::x>:n
4> lJ
C' OC'
ro~:~:
C.:.
-r
?:romroo C' C'
oc c c cr;::;::: c o r,;:c c oc- c c c

SJ(,)GCX)?C ())2GOO'J<'?~ ~J?=t<? S?GffiOO?:tl~ . ::Dffi~::D2 ~-fG::D?
uC2ccbco~
~
to2cck
c ~ 0
ttWIOC.OC.e.G~ .>-:XJJ
0 \. t; ~
Ccc flGh ~
:~e~
~ ~0
:Q:flrCJJ<OCC&9 eo:x..oo:cu::X:e:tc c.ccoo~J.IJ ::x..cu~:2 :h:l::>fl~:::x:o

;;:)~ ~ "~ " '~ .> e ~~ ~ ~
II ..>@ccahl~bcohl:k :X.e.G~::>~eCUCO :@cucu~a:;c.oc.ee~ ro i:>&:::h
:>::I.) ::> ~. .:> .)O.) :> :> :r o- .)
.:x:e.c:xoffl :C2ro::>Co 1o~e.c:::>lb:::>Pee.c C2cc&c ~:c.a:2G Hcu~cu~ be.c
.) .> ~ ..L ~ ~ .> ?;' ~ \.\.~ ~
.c.co2G:flco:oo
.) .) ~:Pcu~ro ..) cfl~Q.)~ .)
uco~~bcobl:k
.) .) :J. ~ 'bc.co~:~~ c.~~b
~ J..;
1n::>e.c
cccbe.ccoo2curo ~
2cC23o
~ 0
eo&o~ro
0 0
Ieee ccc~:lbGhl:::>Pero
l, l, ~~ ~
~curncow
?;' ~ 0
X.~=7J~t:, uC2ccl;cuPco2&1eo :C2roo~&>coooPw c.&cc"ro uC2cc::>ee

~ ~ 0 .,) 0~ .,) \. .> ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~0
wee ccce~cocoGCO
.) .) 0
:C2co~~ecenwc.cee~e.c
.) ~ 0 ~
& ccc~h:I::>OO~~
~.)0
:eo:ce.c&:::>~
0 .)
uC2cc::>Cewcc
~ ~0 ~
:C2coo~::>eA
.> ~ .,) 0
l~:>:coe~w:4:<~
:> ~0
u Pe::>cd:efl
0
~C2cc::>Cecucc
~ ~0 .,)
ccc~~ j
.:C2co:2co:co::>cu:~f> C2cccocu c.ccoo'JIJ :c.e.c:ccocuccfl co:Qb..J::>cf>::>

.> e ~o ~ o "~ ~ et:lo ~
11 C2cccoco?ie~f>CC!r.!h c.wl~:c.co
~ ~ ~o'S'o o
:cbl:cc ohla::Olhl :crfl:flaJ:C20l
~ e ~~ ~~ ~ ~
:b~~ II()~QCOCofJfunco
:::::::b ~
o~df>:flCU:@Ol
~ ~ .>
c.cc~~:tcorw coOCocc :X.o<bdo'JIJ rooec:::>cke.c :C2&n~ C2cc:df>
~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
:flCU:C2GbJ
~ .,) 0
u C2cc:oe>~co~cocc:dfl:flW:C2G
.,) ':)'., .> ~ ~
wb::a:;c.oc.ce~a:;
~
fu to&C2cc~
0 0 ~
C2flbt; eoeo~~ :c.Pfl::x:.r,;t::>ec c.cce>&C2f) ::>lb:>E(i)eodX.&> fS:flCCcur<
;, 0 ~0~0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ..) --.JO ~ ':)' ~0 ~
:x..coooe.c IC2ccax.bl::>:c.cnfl:XU ::>O:cbc.o l,Q:::>ce::::>~n~ :>00~~ ttC2fl
;J ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ jl; ..)0 0 .>
~(2fl6M?hl
~ ~ ~ .>
o.f:c.rfJ:::>PeroC2ben
~ .J
laccC2fJ
.> ~
C2cc&x.occG~
;J o ~ ~
:2G~
e~
1ea::
l..
CCC:::>
oo:x:.uco :c.bl:f>CO x_Q~ uC2ccQeCOO) CoC2ccGhl :C2ro3w ccc~~~::>Ce

.) ~ ~ ~0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~- ~ ..) ..)~ ~ 0 ~0
wee
.)
M~rocuc.ce::>ec &, ..)co~ccfflWCCcucc
.)o..) ~ ~
<h:b~
0
X,Qe>&
~~0
!I C2cc~~cccon :C2coo~h:enwccee~ro & ccc~h:I:>OO~o &:::>b :C2co
..) ~ .) ..) .,)~ 0 ~50- 0 ~ ~
s~"Hodmr MV1 vw~ng ZZ6

I96sJ BU.RMA LAW REPORTS 923
r,: ,. c
S:):(,.)O)(:;lCOO)f GCO?roC.>ICO
t.:J
')
o:>eo:
l-
c 0 c Q -
mucoo:>o:>~C3d:'l) : m:o;n~m~
c
c:.
c .6 0):'1)
c
C!.
oe~:>
os
t Ol J 0 AI " lL
::W.S?GC.>I'1'O')CC' '1'G::D?
0
. 0 c ~ C' (" (" 0 c:o ((

C<XO~(D GCO?ro<;)Cl CC:I ()) I ~()O')GCIG(:;l?())q G<SI
-r !. Jl;;"l -1 OJ I. wL 0]1 J ,h T A c;w-,cro
<:' ro:
c'
s:;v-..3dG;>~]:~t mJ~G::D? Gc..D?a5j?: 3dGoT GCOJ~G6: 9~G?t: ~c
J
' 001:
~ - ~r
(" ' '
mro:0~g,C::D:'l) (J)
A~ " c:. t.
("(" 0
())IS.C.>o:> G '
At1. ...t
6 ? C'
?:COro::D:'l) II
1.
("
c:.
c;sT~c~8r,:
l
("
(;):GC)?8<0: CO:>Groro
(" g6
()):'1)
C' C"
G::D? OJroG<X>:>ro S.CCGO')? GCIG.S;;lliOS.C
OC" . (" (" C"
rom
~,~
~?U) ::D~(:;l.s
0("0-r ll C.:.
(" l
:l:ll:>:3d?:cc:l (:;lS.GCO:C:,J co:>Groro como!

u
G.Jt r .h.. J
-r
(" 0("., G~:>eom
C' C'
6
~
G::D? GCjG.S
OJ, T
g
1.1
C'
-l
:QI?:Gd?:cc: 3do;>: Grol:e:p:>C.>roJCl O')CCIG
tJ ,t, ll L '- - -~ Jf
a.~ .~
C'O6 ?C:mt
C'?
L
61
C'~
())IS.()
6.1 t
0 ('C' ('
C'
qm ~o:>m0:ox:u2: n
uc.~~lh>~ c.cc~::fl:c;oo ~JccS>~rco~ft ~sore~~
c.cc~i'e
.)
co'bw6
.>
0 roc.c.c~c
l 0
IG~~
.:>
b!.'ltlc
:.J
.~
.)
bt\for
;:)
coaw~ohl~
.) .>:.::1
n\3:~'ec:cbco
O':j
coo~o\3e
tl .)0
.~ol!:lcoc.ft~
OJ.:> 01 .>
l~ccwr~
~ .) .>
wwreobe~cc~o~:cbco
0 .> .> 0.) .) .>
a~w cot-ewb
.)
cr
COC.C.CtoWC.O::~
0.)
ICl>~~
.)
bt\tJC
~
1~
,)
bQjMc
:.J:.J
coaec~:~cb
,) ~
1~1~&:scbco~
.0-J .)
WC.C~
.)
rr olQJC\)C.ft~ r6w cCr ftCOCe>OC :'!:oorwcoo~ w::;b w'l.'c:c.cxx:oc.lh>~ +
.) 0 .J .:J .) .) 0 .,) .)
II (e) rc co~lb:eohlcoo~cb
.) .)~.) .)
CJ>te.
I .) C~:~tlc
~
*.
ucob
.J
l:
a:>C.C.CCDC/JO
l .j
S.DIOd:ni M.V1 VW~09:

.rQ Q ~ e r,<?er,<? o e e 1::::!1
O?&p~:ljl_~: e=~J OII II GG"J00rn_Ct~itl~o:x.1Xp:J.>ffi '[)C!'Omaxp:~eJ:~:I :)f!rsj
C ef::::!1 ~ C e e C'~ e 'T' C'
0@~9 ~I 'fC'Oo:leJ:~GJ~O) ~0~ ~CI cpe:om axp:Q GGJCGffiJ?r:J~rf.lG()I r: ere
GI:.-'JC'-ffii':J!I.IC
~ e r,;e e o e
o e o e e r,;e o er,::c- C' II lJ
e~=~sG ?osro
oo91 t:J4>sm~ro~:net t:J~rl? roJ!l=~ttjc: ~:o~rq
r,: ~ 'I? ~
oo ('(' eC"\ ('(' (' (' <:" 0 <:"
I:I~GCO'Jc~
GG9,?~'J'J'1JC)(i.)l ())C:<fSGt~<.>C ~<;)JIDo:lCGOO"JroGOOJC :OroG:OQ S';)GOO?ffi r;:r: or:
o ~ e <: e~e o e <: e c c:Jfi,I~CC II
O'dOO?:CJ~Go:l?GeJ~I axp:Q GGJCGIDJ?r:J~rJ? o:l'[):~C~'Jfl Oel:$9 ~I
e o c- oc- e\ e o ' o oe cr,::c c-
GOOJID~::D?ro Jr
')CDGtCD SdGtQJ'j())~:Ot:; II ~~~ OOCJtQJ'jCDtjC:~~
(" e~ (' mem oe e ~ e <:" <:"
<.>o:l:OCD9J GG?OOI:Yt.CIF.. Q~C'J?C'O())())'J?:O;feJ::ot:;l 'fC'O())IDJ~<X(: e<JG8
oo
e C:)~ 00')1 GG:OG:O?OOGC\:>1?()) (' OOGO)())
' 0 GQI'T' ~ c e
<.>8G <.p :1 ~t:?~C Ql IDC'O())
L 7\:.; . tJ JL 4 l ''- c 1 t -r
e e e o c-~ e o o e eo c-
o e
COOCGOOGCXJ
.Jt
jO J t.
COOC~
l,:) o .
I OOGID
c ())C::O JL l
'"'l
:O:::D<.JCOO())I
1. -r mrn:Q
:0::0<.>:0~ If
T
c ere ~ e C e o c- oo
GG?CGffiJJC:j~OO-:>: OOGt:jJC:CJe3-:>: m~o:x.p~GQJ~<;:rqro~: (,)G():I 00
e C <: Q ( C" \ '1 oe o
~:J.>-:>SdGCVJJCDI :)e~Cf ~,4>1 8C':J.>?(\) 0 'JIDG~~()I 8dGf.00 1 oxp:~
e ere c- c-o q;:;e o c- c-~ c c- o
9
G(,)JCGrop~soo-:>: axp:91c~mo:zrotjc:rq <.>C.OOJID9JI 'J?C'OroroJ~<X(:
c c c- -r e c r,oer,<? c- c-
2<.>G8'-l80 9t~ OO'JI CJC:GJG<.>I etC G(,)-:l006l_CIF.. ()~(,)'f:J.>ID 'J?C'Co:>oxp:.
~ r,:e e e <: e oe e\ c-
~t::j:ro CjfOO~OOOO -G~:9f00(,)~ QJ'jo:l~:O~ II
0 oe 0 (' r;;:c- (" (" ("~(" ( .)
~OO(,l~rJ? GGCDJf<.>:OtJS:I G9J?IDOO"J:~ G(,)?CGIDJ?r:J~ ~cooxp:Q ro
!;; 0 ~(' (' e e (" <:"
2Jt'J=~ t:Jcooc~ Gcqj?roc~pmcotc::o~u
<:" <:: 0 1::::!1 Q 0 ~ e ~ <:"~~
Gcqj-:>CDOO-:>:O;fC!ll <.>t:;~G~GfeJ: e:<f::OJIDI OOGeJ?C:t4>QJIDC:1~
c- c- ~ e o oc c- rG
Gcqproro"J:~:n:o~u <.>s~ooGe~JC:'j-=>1 <.>~?~ Q~'Peomoxp:~c-3:-
0)~1
c- C" <:"
'J?C'O())IDJ~cxz:
C
<:"
2008~8(,) Cfr~
Sd'JI Gcqj-:>CD00-:>:~00?~
(QC C)
,zC:QJID
<:"
er,:r,::e o \ oc- c-r,::c- e c- e~ o

<X(GQJ~DLt::ic:~o:>l ro~~QNmtjc:'J?I oxp:eoos~g ~r.roJc91 S';)?oo?q
c 'G::. r;;:e '1 <:" 0 ~ (" <:" e 0
IDJ il:~f:l(:~tj":tJOOI:O~II q_())())OOGeJ?C::~:oe:: :00>
')
GOIGC\:>1")4)?1
:l e
0)(,)()')()) OOetCJ:G GG?GOJ-:>ro?:ro GG?C:~c
e\
: a:>:C<Jel())l
e <:" 0 ~ C"l o 0
e ).1 o b. ..t l I o L J L ~ ~ J1 L
cr,: e c ~c: c- c- e ., e ~e c- c- c- oc--
GJIDr:~Co::>O".tG:OGJ?:c:e ~QJC?OO'J OX~-:>:<.>mJIDI t:jfOO~OO~:'j~ OOG~
~1(,10)
C"l:G? <:" ., <:" oe
(,l');())C:<.>I:O~II G:O~:o:> (,l.S;roGro::o~ O)(T.)(,l(,)O) CO)ffiClO),
e 0 ' ~ C'"
UJ J J .:. C.:. l IL T C.:. iL i! -~I
e
C\Y~:ro
0 ())G
e ; ~ O)")OOIC
c 000')?0')00
e 00 co
(X)Q())(,l:O<:"
Cl <:"
G(\)I")())OJ"):o:>~ O')q)
<:"
1.. )J L o :.U ilCJ l
r,;c ooc- ~ c 'T' c '1 c- c- ~e c- e oc cr.::~
())'J?Sdt:J~~CGeJ?C: G()l ~()IOOJIDI t:jfC\:>~4>:9'\' Sd(,lf.QJ<p.ltjC:'
~nro~:
1 1
c-
C .:a
~ '1
g?;())C:<.>I:n=n
c- o
c.:. 11 OOG
'-
~ o oc- e
?C <.>~'XlQQCCI)C()())cnm::o
G-II_U_T ______ T tl
~ ~<:: oc- 0 .
:c:~ roG.sro
p l
<:" ('
:1,....<:" e <:" <:" 0 <:" <:" 0
<..X..OOJQ:>G<.>:<.>""j<j> Gcqj?CJ?a;>?::0211 ())C:~ Gcqj')O)OO?:'f>~l 20Gsoorq::
C' <:" 0<:" Q (' 0 <:" <:" <:"
Sdro?:~c
jo
o:>IDOOCGO)')QCOO:GI?:roro~;
l -1 l lJ L C
me :0-:>:Groo:>~ll
4l C
0 <:" 0<:"'1 <:" <:" 0 0 ~ 9
ro~:']:J.>~ O:Zro<.>IG~?C~CDG:O') ()~~ ro~:'JG~ft::j: e:::>JG<J~rol'
0 Oe <:" ~ ~C: <:" <:" <:" C" <' <:"~. OC"
<.>~~ ~9?eomoxp:~e~=~ SdGt:O~I f:<-'G800<;~Jrooororoit::'J?f~ uoSO-)~~GO-).S~8:

~:0-):>:cD:> 0~~0-):>:~ II
~ " T "
" Provided that No Court shall make any direction under

this section for inquiry into the case o'f any person who has
been discharged unless such person )las had an opportunity of
showing cause why such direction should not be made:'
~ 0 c-
~tl;;qoo:>::U211
~ C' 0 oc C' ~ (' ('
illi:D'X~cr o2:>11 ~c<;:p~oro ~:orc1~::fX>2' Gropmcx:n:~
C' ('~(' (' C' 0 0 C'
G<J:>GGffiJ :>r;,~:D:>: ClfGQJ ~~~GO!CO:>!:D21J! G9;?~'):D2 fl
o~.s~oo8~
Ut l \ T &.t !))~:a-J
J I) l
(:::) :D<Jro~-
.JI. A
" The proviso to section 436 is mandatory in \::haracter and

its requirement is imperative. A disregard of the proviso or
a failure to comply wJth its requirement is an obvious
illegality.
The reversal of an order of discharge ordered ex-parte would
be illegal as well as unjust. This illegality could not be cured
by the provisions contained in section 537 Even if the
omission to give notice to the ac.::used is treated as an
irregularity prejudice is necessarily involved when such a
serious irregularity is committed."
<tf? :D~::DoSGo:co:>;:n~ u
o ~ c o oc c ~ _c oc c c
CQGt:e~ 02:>5JQ'i)C~O()) ~:O(ct:j!<:;J~8d<J~:D2 oxp:oCG::D:>
OC' C J;;:C 0 OC' 0 C' 0 C' C OC C C
::D<J~G<Jt()):D[j<; f ~:DI:I~IJ! oworm'Jf :DG~QJI10)::D2 ff
O~C' ~ C' ~C C' C' C'A; C' C~C'
~CP ~:DGt:~:X:!~C:'f>f~ OO)::DffiSJI ro'P:Q G<J:>CGmJ:>t:::J~rr.>:>:
C' C' C OC' C'~C' C' C' C' A; C' C' C'
oxp:~c~oxw :DGtQJ11ro~c::n2r :D~;;ro<;:p11:>:~:91 ~O)GQJ:>Gf:n2
0 0 C' C' A; C C' C OC' 0 C' C A;
9 I:IG9;?5J"JGO ff :D~f~ 'Jl":>!~C:9J ~O)GQJ:>'Jl:D:lcqjC :DG~"! O<.OOJffiSJ
C' r,~ . (' (' ~ C' 0 C' ~ ~ C' C' C' C'A;
COOOtl: 00G~:')f8dGt:j:>C!5J:D2 ff g)I:DGt:~:X:~~ Oro:DmSJI !J~OO:>
9 C' C' Q
~l::w':>')I!Jf:f:C~f: ~~
C' C' C'
CT.>'j!J:9jf Ol
C' 'I
r (
j
)
:D~C-
('
C' ' 0 C' C' C' OC' Sl (' ~ _c: oc

O)<Jf <..01CJ?~ ro'P:5JC~O):D2t :D<J~<Jdl:~I ro<;:p:~t:j:CJ :D'=l~
c
:n2 c~c9
~rop~c:r
0 c Sl ~ " c c~c
~ro1 :Dmdl::DGt:~X: '=l~m0o~c:
(~:
100
lish
r;;:c c c c C' c c A; c C'
or perverse) '=~tj0cqjc 0<..0<.9Jm'lr <J:D<;I COO<J9J 00G~:9;; :Dq(:
C'C' ~co c c c ~coc
GmX!~fG:D:>:DGt:~:>C!I ~\:1~0) :D0(.!02!0:>:9f 8dGt:j:>C:<J5jC\jjCI
~:~~ro8drr
DL L 0
1u::_ m~:rooS~co:>::n~ rr
0~ C' r.: C' C'
~tlCI ti~GOO~C~. I:JfW">tcCGOO:> ;~ e:~:~df
r.: C' 0 C' C' C' 9 0 ~c ( )
r Sd~~-
('
" The principle is where the order of discharge is one which

~annot be said to be either perverse or prima facie incorrect
(o) (195o)Vol. 51 C .L.J. p. xs8o. (J) (1963) B.L.R. p. 796.

(?) (1963) B.L.R. p. 111.
and there is no suggestion that any further evidence is forth-

coming, no further inquiry should be directed under
section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The power to direct further inquiry must be sparingly used'
and with great caution and circumspe.::tion especially where
the question involved are mainly matters of fact."
~ m~:moS&oo?::x>~ u
or,;:c r;::;::: c c c c~c c c c-
~e0Go:J?G~-x; GC\jj?()')CX>?:o;? G~?CGmJ ?t:::~<:m?: a:l'P:SJC<=20XJf
C OC C C C 'T'f.: C C C G
~w1 roG::n?m~t::n~' mrom~oo' tl ~:::no<;>Jm~p:sm~' ~m~?~
c G c r;::;::: c r.;::c c c c- c c c
mC\1?;<:(,):;oGroJ? mG~ x:tlc:'P~rom0o _m"ltox:rt 'i ?:qc: ~a:lG9J ?
c o r;::;::: c o o r;-:c c c c c
Gf::D~ (,)G9,?1J9G::D?Ge:e<:t CX(ffi'l1.l tjf(\)~00Gro: 9 f <;>J'fa:lG:x>-:J>
OC" 0 c C C C OC C 0 C C
m~r.ntro~: OUX9Jm9;s m(,);:~u<rm~J.):x>~ u
t9
llll;elbeato;C?eGIIl):c:73~b<bco (ol;wG) :lbt-ze?5o rWtcoo:cc:o no"a~ewb <'...
o :>o ~- e.::l "' .l oJ.> l..: \ Y
rocc.ccowe
J ,)
10.~
.)
btttlc
;:)
ccc~co'F.re
.J
:X.o
.)
cc collea;:c:73cco~cb
.,) Etj.)
re>f~
.)
CS~tlc
;:)
I.
1
llocr so~~~~~o.-;xb ~~.~ bs~c '*'
11 c.cd:c:2u
o e
11 c.o&>ed:o:cbc.oe&,es:
.) o
1~
':"l
.:>
11 L ':"l
uccccrecococcccoo:
.)
o " 11
rc.c..'e.C ocoe?ccero
j
ccceccc. ~ e>flP.coccro
.)
v 11 r n
cP.a.11e .) .) .)
"11!2) lll)<XJ:wcoecoec
, J ,, J "t. ':"l rr r ...., , !2J ~, ....,
1'1
.:> o
oc eoo
.> o
11 cccc:cl:l ::co c.C? ccccc:ro
.> .)
ca:cx::cccc:c.c:o:oocc-.
.) .> o.> .J
eeoc'"1 10woeoocowcc.oee
" ,
.) .)0.)
"

1 ':") , . 11
ccccro:wcoecoea
.) 0

ocJeco
:>
1
0
.1.
uol>:cc~
1 Cl
::'<l'liF.CCawc
.) 0.>-.1 .) 0.)
] e
n n ,, !2) wrocoe:cescc
.J ~.)
1 1::1 1. 11 r 11 r 1 1
ccceco occ .:>S"rocrroe
.)
cro:rocoecoea c.P.Wiefl ~cccce c.C?:o .J 0 .)
ogc.e:
.)0 .) ~- .)
o 1'111~
o ~
:c.eawc.Je wro:wcoemea
J o 1 11
r.:>ococoecsGccroS"cc:c.eaccro:oscoecr.ec II 1 1<1 1 1 1 11
:J t...J e .> o .> .>o.> oo
e:1e wcccce -'-!2) oS'le>eG::e::omwcccee
~.>o .:>
1 11 " 1 ,. 1< ,.., " 1 0 1 .....,
owoc. ocorocc 11
o
~S'oceccccr.co
::f.> .:>
ecce: ::~ .:>
n g:1re
t,; .l :J .)0.> .,
"!2) ~~::>ro:wcoecoec
~
wrel'l 1 J , r:l 1
croocc:cc, 1 'J
S"ooe:ce:c<J> ~~, 1 1 v 11 na.Jieco
l:i 0w:roecoaea
.:J ~-0 .,) .) .) .) .) ~
noeoo
" 1
.J .JO
mwc.wee-:ob!obe:c.l;oc:oehla bro(l") ;o(-,ro corM (r) 1rodac,f. : h-lcocc.o~<k
.J .>:1.> e .J .):.:1 .>o .> " e::J,
uwb
.J
or co r
c.c.ctococeal> ~~
.)
0 .J
1 .1_ 11 )
(
\Q
rogmcoemeB 0
6Z6 SDIOdtni M.V1 VW~HlH

SJ."'liOdmi M.v1 vw~nf.I 06
lf:6
t6 S.DJ:Odilll M.V1 VW'tlOH
- - - ----- -- ... --- - ----
11 11 co&esk:chcoet!ow
:; 0 0
11 F fl?bff c~~ e.G (~coe.

~dx.o) :~~ ?c.flt ~ ~~~ ob~c 1?;~c.~'f9~Jc.c:os~ _?~ :~rolC.flt)
I!Cilccce&!
.j
~c.oc.r:le>e"l!iGhlbeo
.) ~ .)~
~ll
~
~ch
.)
:h:lcocc~
~L>
cb c.fu,J;;JcdoXI
3'~.> 0 .)
oHsw~cc
~.) .)
.
cowc.c:.oe$
.:J
:X.W~:>t~~~b
.) .JO .>
scw&Mb
;)
Wne
0 0 0
~ccro:cbcoe~ll
.) 0~
uc:.orecot:l:'ce
.> .> :J
u~O~OhCOWC.C.Oe~-:o8obe:c.l;oc:o}\e!i]
.)O.J o .>\.o.J.J G .: _, _
ben foe 1'1Chlr.1cocc~ck
.) ~ .>
, cb 11 , L 111
(oro: coeme.cJ
G
o:'S'oo oc~e>
e..:> ..:>

s.L'HOdffii M.V1 VW'dJlg

S.L110dffil M.V1 VW1Ill9 96
roro~C00X))ffiQ
c c c ~ c o
c~ o c c ')C "
8dQS(.)G -:>;o:;-:;g:))J:l(J) GO)QQI:::DJ:l II QI(J)G(S.IC:..C8d())
oe~:J .
J o -r J r '--' c l 1A J! c.:. o J u.
:1 c c c c c co c c 0 0 c co C' ('" Q"
0.:x> co.lm,;s:x>J:J Q 1:Gm-:>roc comroro~l GQG~-:>m (,)J:JJ:JroG:x>-:> comro
II,.
C
0 I .Il l
C 0
c.:. I.!
:;,rm"'1-:>: comroc:c>-:>:G::D-:>Gim-:>c! Gro-:>m":<.l:x>-:>o mro:::D

OU
!:.
C
W
C
o
.0 l -r c.J
Co
!:
o]l
CJl
!
0
c.:. ~
B :m c;c:s&G<.ll
C
~
'l'
I. (;~')C~fl'j
ic;
('
6 l l :t 1
L. c ('
C C o C C CO 0 C tj~~CXl~
'f~OJffiJSCX(: t,<->GJ~S(,) 9'/.'S nd'JI crdG'):o;rc:n::x>~ G~9::D2:; !I ~C' OC'
l::l~~:>~ccn
CJ: C C CO C CO 0 C
m nd(,X.J cc:c;JJ:x>mG:x>comf.;immro:x>: 0c:n: :x>;nm GmQ Q::DJ:J n
]
CJ .JL J I ~ " .. L- "-' l co J1~, c:,
!;; C 0 C C C 0 C\ o C C C
~~nm:tqc axp: n:m m0ovmyt0? tmt~-:> ~-:JG',p~::x>o'Potc l':f<.D~
o r,:;::; c c c c G occ c c cr,;:c c
bp~G::D') ffiGL_j')C:m~m';?':l G(,nC02<j>:'J8d(,)~ \';~:))~(,)j?:m 9<j>~l!l(,)~
r::: oc 0 c A; r,:;::;m 0 (' c rc
(' c 0 oc
ndGtJSdG<j><~ G9,?';)'J::D~~! 0)8gG~-:>C9JGfe:JtJ:G,?-:Jffii c;c:GQ')C~f:'J~Q
'l' (' c c ' c 1 (' c 0 c c c '")(' 0 co
G<.ll O)C 8dQIC: l!l::D;:DffiQtffil GQ')CCO.S:Q~C G:::D::D G"'')CQI(J)Gt9IC:0) ~0:1:
.,... U !.,....!. 6 T -~ J o ol. U Ol. J C
0 c
::D':lljlG0:::D211
~ <: co oc ( or )
c o c r::;:c r,;:c c
GffiJ:~j-:>~Lj: e:~c c:ll ~ffiQJffiffi9~9JCI rotJc:tJ0::Drt "t~<>
0 c ~(' c c 0 c c 0 c c 0
~n 00 S-:l9G()'),j')ffiQ .SGCD')(J)O)C ::D CO::D GQ')CCO~:QCD') : G(,)-:JCCD.S:CJ(J)
@
C.:. 1 .., T A tt. L 6 , oT -,
c c 'I<" r::::c r,;:cr;:::::: o c o co co c 'IC
~~~ <>JffiGt91C: 8dtJC:tJ0~q:( COGill':lffiCJ? O)GU)')(J)~O)(.)'fl <>JffiG0iiC:
o c c r,; r,; c c c g oc 0 o cr;:;: c c 'I<" o
CX(:mp~:::Gt2j')C: GtPti::D2:; II GQ-:JC~f:'JS'd(,)~ "tm~rt'f <>JffiGt91C:CJ?
J
'I B (' -t J
'I 0
GCDQ I:G "'CIC: GCD:;>IgQG(.)I O)C CDGS::D;:D())GO)Q:)):"l) II COffiQIO)C
t.
'1"
6
c \
T L....
c 0
L oo -, c
c 0
l
')
A
C'
~i('J)GOIC:
u
c :)C
. <: G \ ~ 0 C C 0
C C 0 C C ')C C
c:ll 2:o;m~1 t:Gat-:l~J '):COmG~::DJ:JffiCDJ:J:
Qi0')Gt91C:roc GCJXlCl:::DJ:J II
A .'\~ J \J (i I L:, I.
I; e. c.:. 06 Jl-1 c
o c c c c~
c c o
cr,oc ( or.
c )
91)G::D')8~~<;00)::Dm9)1 ::Dbjffi~l CDffiGCO')ffi~Of e:rocG.~ "t8-00
<: c c o c c c o c o c c c ro
~~~<>J<D~') ~O)OCQ)')g~U)~ ~G0::D211 9:::DffiG::Dffi oe~:S<J ~1~1 ~~~(\)
c c c c 'I<" ~<: c 0 c0 0 c c c
I:S 'JmG.SO)C QI(DG<91C:@8dGCD?C:ro (\):J.)QQIQIGIO:o:;: II mGCD')CgQ').
J ~ t) tJ t JL.:.J j
c r-- c r,;c c r;::c!;; c c o c
<f<.l~GfGtg-:>c:ll mtlcscrxpgp:'f?? ~!:l'~l' <>;j(,)8C10'{>~<; qromscrxp
0
O)Q') c c
r ())QG::D?8;]';QJ(JJ'): e 0G 0)-:>C: II 008(IDQ)
c 0 c [ (,)pgm 0' 6 c
::DO)G:::DQ 'I
Gli(,)&tC c 0
~! J 1! T tj ~ i. IJ L J 0
c s; or. c eeoc ,---. c c c c c ~
~O:>~~~CG::D') 3Coixpt:ji1)~CG[~pc: II 80i')'fSdl10:> 'f':l Gf?CDQJmG<.lt r
c c c c c co C' c 'I<"
O)C: 8dQ;D 13 (\)0)(.)1 nd(J)IU) C CD(})(,)Q Gill-:>C:GCD')CgG(.)Iffi O)Q
a ~ 1..._, U 7 Jl L
('
0G x:
.
c 0 c 0 c ('
II CD8ClDQ)())O):::D: ::DCDG:::DQGig~~C
t l. t L._, .
' 0 'I
J~
C' ~ c c oc c
(\)()O)IC Cl~C :::D;D(})())C:O
!..l lJ -It L-Jt :l
r::::: c c c c c c c r,;:c ~ c
Gf3-:>C: II 800'{>8d(j0) r 0)2
8d~;'f~0J G::D9~rt Sffi'PtJQ)G~')C:<Jt
c o c o c rG rc c r,;c c c ~
com~co?:::DJ:JU 3).,'"00)C OX'O:QGQG~!m: IU"'CD~GQ::~.s::;)JCD())C G ,a::n:
A l C ~t -( 6. -- -[ ~~ I L:J U 1 J I L:JT li 6 l-.-1
C C C C C oC . 'l' OC f,G C
'P5 8d<j0) 0 f<? S'd'f()) j
rr.lUG<.ll m ~CDJ(:3gGf')ffi8C3Xf>Qp:'f')
c c
::DffiG::DQ!Jd~O) :;; GI:Gi~'JC&tC ::D ())')::1)('()0
o~
'1 r. c c oc
Q~CG a:nc:l
c or;-:c rc
co:uc ffil"lC a'!

J l1J .I o Ito o il .......... .:1 l l ~tt..:J LJ o ..J
co '"'~ c '1" c rg
GO)')CQ.G::D') GCDQ!: G COQ)G.OI (,) (\)O)G(.))')ffiCDI G:::DO)<f.)'): rm:~?:G::D':)
J1 J I J il ll ~
r,;:c c c c c c oc 'I c c o
ffi')gt:'J~ ott:<>J9JC . sc:Om'IJ Sdlo]O)
~
Qdl:'!~C<.lt::D2:";or ~CD~CO?: r
c
G00:l211
'938 BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
c _<: -~ _ c c c- _o c c-
oeS~ :::rx:oo,sc:.
~-T
o:m:xo:xxxxr.>:;>lmmo
A 0 .....
8CYXp~l?:cJO(:):> 8:lm~:ro G(:)XOO.s:
- u -, LJ ,t, L L .)1
o c- '"I r;;:c- cs; c o c- c-
(' (' 0 'Jffil o:>mGo:>:;> Gl:l:>t:J~<p.>9! 'JGo:l?SCBXpG(\)') n ~ro~:oorro Go:>O;[
<~Y?C~f"}
"' C C' o OC'~ '1" o
. C' C' 'H' "' C' OC' c
('
z.c OOXQimGOIC:m QI:GK-lXo:>mc : GCOQI:CX>oo SdOOOI o:>o:>mSdCO?I
' lJ t.:l LL J J l
eoco?d4i "' oc-
GC\:]QI:~
c- co ~ rc
G~JC'2f:'Jmei:0:>:Go:>?Sd?!~~
c- o c-..,...r;;:c-
"i(y:~J~..vr::J~
oc
~ffiJ
cl!!flol?'iCCU
.c oe
C' C' C' C' 0 "' " C' C' C'O~ C'
8CIX'O~O:> 0 ~C j ~? QI:GIU?C~C
mo:>:>:o:lC
(' ('c
cc:
t
o t\ --- T J
C'_QC'
m:>:~ccooroumco:> Geo:;>J::;>~c
J
....
"''-.: t:1
('
;
G.s:x~.>;;;om
" ('
Qlooq OGO)?
tJ
Gro-:>e(:)
,
C'Oo:>C' " .
, c
8CIXOI
2::;>m
~ A
'e l
:
g ('~ CIGo:>? 8C'IIXO~I?:
2:G~?ffiVI?:!Y\f"'C\
J tJ ~~'-;'! -~
" ('
J
o o moo:GCO:.Sffi0?
---T :.1 ~0o:>GCO? <!lo:>;::oo:>mi
.__ ,L l :l -T
('
A
J
B('
LJ T
"
C' c c g 'I<' c c 'c:: e c cr,~

02:0?:')GO(:)~II Go:>~o:>~ 2:GQIC:~ Gf?m~~9) e:G~?mvJ:>:c:x,rr.>tl:l
(' C' G OC' ') 'T' \~ ~ C' 0 C' C' 0 C'
G(:)?Cro.s:'JOO!dGCOQI:QGOI '=l? COQ1 Go:>GSGim'?C: GO:>C\Q C:$\CI m.s:o:>C
6 T 0 J l J T L..J 6 11 I J T A
c "' r,: c o c o r:;:c o o c A; c C'
o:>mGo:>Q Q I :G~?C<JtCO~: G9,?'.il9~C:q[O{ Gro?mOO?:SJI moom~G
'1"(;; \ C' OC' C' 'l C' C' (;'; ~ '1" C' "'
G~ l tJ~o:>~SdCJtC: Go:>O;f QJffiG~ IC:o:>~ Gtje~:GO I "i(C ffiJG<fG:D? Ql:
(;'; C' 0 (;'; C'f,'l C' C' Q 0 C' C' OC' '1" 0 ') (' C'
G~?CO{ Gtl:Gm?mtl:l G(:)?C~f:'JO"~ ')f1[9f !D~GOI ~ GC\:]QI:':JlOC OXl?CO?
C'
m.sroo:>:-n
T IL Cj
11
('
m~
me('
~ ~A
G'=l?coo.s:om1
l:l T - ,
(' C' g
~
,l
B Q
: :::ncoo;>co:>
L. .Jl " I.
OC' 0
coo:>GO:Go:>:>
L
(' ....
G l:(:)~c
J
<:'
G ~ C' 0 C' C' C' C' C' ')C' C' OC' C'
00:~ QO)O)G;CO?I o:>QO?O:> 'J.S'-X:I.S o:>mCO?o:> QlmG~IC:m'): 'J.S'=l'=l~CCI.S
L w&. L T Ji -IT IL ll T ;t. L -IT
(' 0
ro~:Q:rom
('c:Sd-:>:
(' ('
c1
~
moomroc
(' (' 0 ' C' 0 (' (' 0
o, u L u 'OOQo:>:TI!Jdmc:
l. ~ L.
3C'IOO"l'=>l?:
--- T u c"o:>Gro?
-n,
OC'
00
L
C' C'
c:~COO)">vncl
J
C'~
- - ..; , 6
8 (.])0)~1');4)?
~C' C'O C'
0~0),.,.., II
U 6 -6--JI C
(' (' (' . (' (' 'lC' C' (' ('
o:>mGo:>'=lJ?:~QJffiSXjl Go:>O? G(:)?:;QJ(')')GCSIC:o:>~ ~':>"i(C ~g:
m:>:o:>Gunm ~-
oo (' - x:1
(' 0 C'
coo:>GU)?OJO)CO:n:
tl.
(' LC.:.
C' \
o:>c:>:;>::n:G; , ?C:(.)')
tt.
6 (' L
~oo
,.,
'-
0 ('
~0)~11
C'
G~:!Crooo:
L
( )
000:
I
('
~C
Jo
::l'>GCO:ICC
C.
C'C'.f>IJ?,t;,CC GOO?
C'
l I
OC'
l
C' ( C'
0 ) m{:)OX:-
Jlll
" Q (' 00 (' (' (' (' r::: (' ('
a;tro2:o:>Gro?mm ~clOd?: 9f~9fCO?cqjC 9~1:JC:<X)O;fo:l~
c ~ c- o c- C'A; oc- c oo o c c ,..,.,c~.A.
~~~~'=>C$1 ')00:>~~ ~Q...~Co:>~ II 000? 9 f<fq(o:>e? ~
C' OC'
O.SW~Co:>
-ITILL
tM6(' L
C'
GOO')C QQ,t;,C:D:TI II
L L
OC'
, C.
C' ))
G C' '
(.]) G)OCro:~oo:>:o:>:TI II U)QSdQO:>C GOXD
C' C' C' C ')C' C' '1 C OC'~
Gg?CQ i ffiG~ IC:o:>:TI QI:G C.;)?CffiCC\

L -1 LA Ct L Jl.t) I~ U C. .J L :l
c- c- G o c c "' c o '1" o c- c c c- 0
Gg?COO.S:Qffi O.S'-X:~.S GCOQI:000~1?:~:> (JJgGOI o:>o:>romCO?O:>C G'=l?Cro.s:9
o T -1 L IT IL IT J tJ J oL o AT
ffil o:>mGo:>QGI:g C
C' "' [9(' QQffi')ffiU)O):TiffiG.S
c (' ('C C' 0
QO:>QI($0)0):-Dm U)Q:) c:
(' (' ('
L A U T o L tJ L C.:. -l tL
C' "' OC' ~ C' o er e- rc- c c ')C' c
COffil GO:>QI:OOO!:lG.SCI1 o:>m?:o:>.s;QIC\)ffil::lC;K-'lCI Go:>o:> GQ')CQiffiGt91C:o:>C
J 6T tJ L
.1 T~ 0 0 o It ll A
0 '1 (' 00(' (' 0 C' "' 00 c
UdOOOI 8C'r..ml:li?:9Cl~C:)')(lXOQO):xlill O{OOOiffi o:>o:>?O(.l)O)Qg:TI(.]) U):;no
L -T U liL -0--TJI C.-I. ' L<Y.>JI C. L IL---1
(' ,.Ji, (' (' '1 (' (' C'A; (' (' c (' 0 ('
GOQ~II g_H"f9?~ o:>mGo:>Q Q I:(:)~~Oo:>o:>roSJ m.y~:C~C"Jfe\(o:l~ll
(' !:':<' 1:': (' ..t. .s_ c:

~Gou
0 ('
( 0) oec;o ~tel ~f~?Cje C'iccxt:l <Y.>'f~~.>IOOO?I 4>':>
tx965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 939
_or c- c- o oc- c c '1 o c c oc ::- oe!S~
CJ:>::D
.01 ll 3: p:Q)cucro:>:
G
...~
o
Q:.>:>coos:9m
AT
J1.
mcOYd:0~8dOllffii QOX>Xl"Xnmc::n.:on
!. 1:, 1: c, - -i.--l- L.:
0 C' c-C' ') 0 C' 0 C' C' 0 ') C'
:nmmc
-~ -r A
::DffiG::DO>Gl:<:lmt OOo:>GO:::D;:l)(J)<:Q::D:Dil
t '--' t l c ::DffiG::DOl ~mi:JC7.>C G:'Xl~
~ 6
C' f o
i;!i':lCCOflQ
Go:>::D:Dm C'
OOOOCI::D:D I! 00 C'
G::D:<:I:> ~;x>:::n C <:I:D::D?tG::D~ ;(J) :;omrom C' C' C' C' ~ (.' C' t 1..
0 6 c.:. -l 0 J l Jl
I '- 0 c.:.
c.:, u, 6 L ~
0 C' C' 0 c ') C'
0 ') ') C' C' ('
OO'd: C:0QGOJI COGI:<:I::DOJ OJ:>:CI:O>o:>G::D:> Gl:9 (I)CQIC G:::O:G(.)fJ,S;0co ~600')8~
Jl <>
t~o~?4doll
L L L..... L )J 0 '"(
r:::' C' 0 C' ') C' C' C'~ C' C' c- 0
ndG~ :>c:~::ne:: II G l~<:I,~Oo:>::Dro9J o:>COOOlJ ::DmG::DO>O>J('J)g5)JI
c- '1 c c ~c c c- C',.. C' o c-~c- o "

mcoroo1 OOGG:>c:l9c:'P~<? Oo:>::nm~l Goo.p~:~xx.>Bc:q Gcn:>m~
bC' t;;:C' C' C' G C' 00 0 C' C' ')C' C' OC' C'
t:Jc:m:>:~:~~' G<:~:>c~t='J::n~ g~or 9r~Oi? ~(DG~Jc:rn:>: 9rl:ll~cGm:>c
c- c C'
Q)Qffi')OXD::D:DOOG.S&C
~ c o c-r c C'!;;G C'
C\)()C\XT.l!:;:.c:~:~:> coe::Do:>!m:os~:~ a~ m~J
c r c-
il\09
a .n.
l

C'
4
\JG ')('J)(J)tXlOO::D:D
L. u.
C'
c.:. II
TJ .
0
OOG
t.
6 ')C
L L
C'

L 0 J
G8d')ffi~:O:D'">Q
C'o
T
u c- Jl
0
c.:..J
mro:::n
-- -r tt
L
B:m1
\,.. ,
~U)Q
'-'
u.
o
'1" ,S.(;Jt C' ~C' ~

oxp:ot0 G(:lJC~:98dGOI
C' C' G
'f>e::Dv-tj:<f31:1 \)0j
(
j
)
~~ tj~r:}'Jffi::D~
C' C'
,..,...)! r,~ c~ c c c c- c c oc o c c~
9G'D'~!9tl:' rn~~~:~:'~ Gooxsm oo ;0mJoo09f m<:~tot Oll:>GJm9!
~ C' C' C' 0 C C' G C' C' OC'
O'Jirn<:~&coo:>::nm::n<:~J
CJ, JlJ 0 JJ rnm:xnco:ro
~ - --~ L
G<:~:>cm.s:Qrn:>: mcn:G::nromo.s
~t.T I --T A,----.T ~<:~.s
~
C' 0 ('. C'
OlJ't~m::ne:: 11
u@cc:~C2@b
;, .) ,
.tltls c.~ 1cc ~ec ~~!!do c~o2soo~Cb 1e octlc ~~soccLocoe ~o~ ~:_r~gbl:c
u dco~f\totn
, o o o- bee c.~ 1:da
atoob~~hlca!l-bl 1O>~e fCtJc. f lOC.OcoOC.I'1e oe:d o.fc.c.oao o;Gf'I~Q~oc.coe.@hl
.:J e~"":.J ~~ .:J "' l...) .) .:J O.l .) .:JO .>!:J .) .) :..:J
uc!;)~J c.~ l :cr.c::ro::.>b<Xab!c.fl~~
.) t)_J
~~-te obtlc 1c.ol:l:oBo6l:c
,~:J .}
.....:1 ,) 5.) " .)~~ c.~tocbcc 0
uedccce&X.o ..)
@cc~
:) 0
o~:coe:]Pcoe;:;:<hcofl
.) ~
~cc&:c.cococ.f6e
~...... .)
ohlec6?ccoh1;,t>;,l:e:cbc.ofl
"~ .) .>:3 .)'oHaes
b:O.ec
0
o~ccGa:oQ:cco:o~c;a
.:>...J 0 .)~ .)
ibcoccc.oo~l?:crf'I:C2&o~ c.cce~~fb,e ul)f'l
s., ,J .) 0
~cc.c.o~bhl
.)
.) .) ~
.)
cc~ .)
toedcc:c.co:ec
0 J
lt:oo:oc.hloohlec:lPcocn
S', :> ~ .>::J l)' J 0 .)

tocotol'l~
0
,@cc~1Q:co:ecroecbe2fl
.J .) ~ \ .J
tcedfl @cc:ob bHaeck:cbc.o u@ccl;4occ.o u:,,~c.oo~~:2&oc.cca~ccohec

o- " ;) -> " o ., o..> ~'""" Ji .) .>
@h.lto .)O~OC
~ :::::r. 0
u@ccohl:l'lCO<bo"&@hl
.,) .,:J.) .J @cdbcoocccftueu
.) ~ ..J ,J
ucoreco~:~P.C:CO
.) .) la.J ,)
u@cc:~~@bto
.) .) .,) 0
ooC co 1~ro
0
db,kec
\..)
1cnec
.)
,oCr;
.)0
1c.ol:l::)(')obl:c
.) ::=1.) .)
"obcsc.c.oc.ce
.) .)
u@ccc.oro~ o:r,.,....c.oo ot:o9,~~.x.ll:.oe cob
S':;-"-.)
.) .) .)~.> .)
J .) ,J
ux~;:t1W:@(jooc.co
~ .) .)
0<-f.Obro
-...J 0
.)
u@ccewoo
~ ~
<.o:dl'lcofehl:x:.oc.'i(Jcco
0 ~ ~.) .)
:oblbr.k4hl00kc
.)..J ~ ,:.J,
li:~code not:l:cec:ka:do~&s o&x:b'\i o~1r.:!&&~J~to~b to~ li::c~::q
S'.l ~ "~ :J '\ .> o .) ~ o-o, :J o ~ o:::J
.a:Xoeccobc.occ:OO>:@o J:o!;lb6G~ro l!c~~b ~:ol:l~~nRc.I'I6:~PcoC'l ~cclk
" " .) " .> ,::Jo .> o .) o .J .:> "::J .:>:3 .> ~....
sc.cocod6a
.) J
o~~cn0
u@cc
.)
o~"!I:Joe <.owb~~:dcoec.occ:~K.U:CC!owc.c.oa:~
..)Q~.) 0 .) .) ,.) .) .) .J .) )
oi6P ~.)
occ
ohlwPetrco:f'Jrco
..) :l.> .) Q .) c~a<\lbco.) ~c.c.oa:~
0 .)
lbcoccc.oo
;r,)
b~:och.l~:tlccbch.I1EiJ!:~a::cb
.) .) .) :::::1 :S""' ~! -.1 .)
oc.h.lacnccec
.:J ~.)
co"&::c.mcoc.l6e~w:c.ec~&c.rco~
..) .) .)
cococobb:>ol.oCb1:c
.) .) 0) 0
uCC!ccahlo!;)
.)
cobec
.>:3 ;:}j
o!Ol:c.ec .>~C'lC.CC c.~cobc.occ:A<.o:@<J>roC.<JJ
,.)._j .> .) .:> .>
o~:c.rfl~oceohlr""~l.u
.) " .)~.:I'S"''"'\Uw
II coPec.ohl:l:e
.) .) :3
11 \1-Awc.cc~
.)0
coccc.ooo~ck:ot:l:
.) .) .)
oc.h.'le.w :@c.oc.cc~ccc.o-l}fl~
.)~.) ~ .:> 0 0
4oc.c.o~6hlccecocc
.) ,.) ~ .)
tu:ol:l
0 .)~
.:coo:k fbco:oc.hleehlec:lrC1Jcn~co4~cob
';) \ .) ~ .) :J Jf .) 0 0 .) .)
c.occ:flco:@Groc.co-1bceohlc.oo.;,cl,
.) .) .) .) .) :..:1.)
(&be:croc.uc!EDe46oceohl)
:> 0 :> :> :>~
r
(&:coo~oclh>efb~ce~~) ~ccc~c~e
::~
~
--
SL~Oclffil _M.V1 VffiiDH Ot6

l965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 94-1
" r.:: " " ". ". ~<= ~ " r ' ( ' (' .s ('
COObl~lljo:>~JOOII 11Gcrd?o:>~: 7~~~~ crd'<>t:e::s~CI'f>~~000~:7J9JOO~G::))?002:
" ('
oeti~
~ c C' C" <" e L~ rC"
OC' c o
-~Ho:><X>?IG~? crd~t~2 COC~?I4l? ~?I~I~OOG~J?Gf[jS lo>OO'Pij9t:>Gt~2~ lo>G<(.?
0
aa11 COlO
0 6 (' (' ?C
('
COOCI,lCllcrdG.!.oftC
C' (" ("
0CGm<n4:>(7.)()(7.)at.~,l 0011
(' (' (' 0 Glo>-,8~"?
Jl , L o .n.ll TJ - l--~ "lT l
;q
G<,1?C~f10f
C' C' oc-
,c;
c (;'! C'
[jeGCO?C~Of<,~?~CCI
c r,:c oc
O(!:J<f
C:C' r;:
~I l::lfbl?Cj~C'jC~IIo>J?:I t:>?
('G c
j(!O
~~?84)
~92~f:~2 11 6t~~;
~(" C" (' C" (' Q (' C' C'
t:JCOOC~fGCOJ?OOOO')~:l[:r.l~m II ne:OOJCGIJ')CQC II
~ (' C' (" (' 0 (' 0 ~ Q 0 C'
tlCOOC9fGCOJ"0000 ?:~9:l[(n~(1) II 118'd~: G~Gfel:
9 e:ct:GIJ?C II
[,I @3: ~C:

L n]
OC' C' C' C"
roro:x- : .J:;;llt:> II
L. tJ
II~O::Go:>
~o I.
UC.IJCOO'XD
cJ ~[
COC'OOOC"~"':o:>
T . -r ~
-.j:':!
u
c
.O@~:S9 ~~ 9? ecroe~:stro'1o-'C' -~ C'
?~ qc;Gcqo:nco:>~~ G~:>c:x>:>t:j
C" C' r,: (
oxp:~1
\
'T'
IDGUI COe'O)O)I!T.i;-.;..:,l,l 90a
C'l-;;~ c ~~ C' ~ c- c-
G!Q)0)0):1:l()';GCT-~J9o:l~CI ~:O"'Ar.>
o o C' c-
-r ~-.. '- c !JdC1 .~ ~ c.:. L ll , o u
o C' C' C' C' o C' OC' C"\ C" 0 OC' 0 C' r
"il::;o~~ Gcox:sm .:; 9romJ~G9;> ID~J~QJ~o:><;::nr:; 11 cqiD0tro G::>:>CO..""l:>~
C' ..h :- c f.<? c- C' r::;;. _C: r C' c-
(OOGO)JyU:l.."'tJ~I OOGqmtl :""f;9iCC">9:~~: ~:c;1 ~~IS<f ~~~! 'f>~OX
(" C'
croc~J
JL
n:lYcr... 1
:)o (})C
.J 6
C'

C' crocYC' ("
Jt.
C' ' C' 0 C' C'
c.;ro.i:>roco?;~:n~ n o~:>QI coro~cmro::n
JJ o G C.:. J Jt -~ -L- IL
~ C" C' ' 0 C" c-r,~ c
.el::oe; Gad~: 8"~~ GX~JJCDJf~:> ~:o:>oGOOft.l:o:>ro:>ro O@~:S9 ~I
C' 0
G8'd")O)J?:J)")(\) C' c- GC\:l.I')O)CO")go;>
() QO)G.So:>C C' C'
Gtl")CO)") _c: C'
~ GC\:l.I')O)CI)")

l .... (. I ~ {) ::u II. :u ..0
0 C' 0 C' C"
~.,uu.."-'(ffi::l~~ :1
C' r,: c- o o C' o cr,: C' r.;: C' ~ C' o c C'
G~J:>c::n:>t:j::l:l21 9ID!Jt~ YGroJyU!jfo:lttS g)I~:Go:>:>~ O@l:Sj ~,~1
'\Q c C' C' C' C' c- r,:c c- C' C' C'
et:>OI'JOO J~ 'JO')Gtq<: Gf:>("I)(X)()~ tlc:;oc~ GelijJ CD<]?o:>c~:
C' ~ C"_(: C' C' 0 C' C' C' r.:~c: <:
:x>~ll g)j~:Gm:>~ ~o:>Qj0)8'd9~CijjCI Gcqpmco:>:~ GY:>Co:>")l:j~GcqjJm
C' C' c- C' C' c ~ ~[,'! ... C' C' C'
~") o:>cGo:>')~~') ro:>:U~~!o:Yd:O)O)'j(J) ~0 t:Je!:tl:o:>~Gf:>ro JJ 9ro
C' C'f.'! r.;: C' c C' 0 C' C' ~ ~ _(: ~
<OmJ-:>~rtl ttGe3:>~: "~9:n~ 11 GCI3J:>mco:>: ~ "~"re1=
Q C' C" C' C' C' C' C' C', C' C"
e:GQ:>CGIJ':>CQCOJ GroJ-:>"lfGO:l':>'JO) JJ '}(00~0)() 1 11 8'd'Jro jO Gro:>ro::x>:>
r.;: C" ') C' C'r,: _(: (" 0 <"t;;: C' C' C" C' c C" C'
t:IWio:>2!.J:? o:>cr:~r::~~u IJ~::l?,_OCt:l~oo ro:>::ooe::Cf.X:I:O)O) 9rocoro9m
'I C" C' C' (" 0 0 C" C' _C: ~
Gt>lc:~Jp:~? GroJ-:>otfGyo:>e;<q G<To~'Jo:l211 Gropmo:>:>:~;u G~Gfel:m
c C' C' C' C' c c- C'fr'! c- C' ~rC' c- C'
o:>:>Qr<D2:et.X:~:0)0)9ro ~c Grop~;>tl::n~GfXrnt ~sc:;oc~GroJJO:>
o C' c- .: cc-r;::;::: r:::C' r;::;::: C' C' c- c-~
C~:>0f o:>C'P;31 Gp~G': ~tel:>Gy'JtjC: IDGt:~:>c:~Jp:'q UOO:UOOSJ
r;::;::: c- r c- c- C' ~c c c- C' C' c: C'"
mGt:j-:>C!~G::OJ:>rD~:>,qroJY:CXlJf~J(OOJ:>:coco:;;:-:o:>211 ~:~JJ:>:e"6CO~
c-r;::;:::
0
~o:>W-?1U~C:IIO")
OC'hC'
r@rl IDqc: OC" CCC"
'1$1$ ~C G8'd:>mt>f8'd~C:~fel"):CO:>:o:>2 II
C'') OC' C'
" 766. Ordinarily no application for revision will be con-

sidered, if filed more than 6o days after, the date of the last
942 BURMA LAV\T REPORTS
order complained of, unless it is accompanied by an explana

tion of the delay and the necessary affidavits."
"Held: that the case Sant Sinah v. Qaim (r) is distinguish-

able from the present -::ase on the facts and espedally
inasmuch as that was a Civil Appeal. This appeal being a
criminal one there is no ' successful litigant' ''\-'ho has .secured
any ' valuable right.' The Crown cannot be said to gain
anything by the appeal being dismissed as time-barred as all
that the Government is, or should be, anxious for is that
justice should be done."
l~tb fctlc (c)
~~~e obt1c (f)
t6 S.D:IOd3:~ h\V'l VJ.'IJlliiH

C' C' r.;:c- c c c r,: (" C' C' r:;:c- ("
:x>OXlX'D9J.).)?!~4)::D~ II G(1J?(')')CC?:O;(:x>~ tle:!~. Of<XX,I! e0o:-~ II
o "
q['f~
C' rm , '".
CJC:CO t>.t8e:?s;.>010:Y):G~J') U~~~t~
'" , Oo:>:x>m9J
'" ,A; co
O.::JOf>1)::D2:; If
'"
0 C C C CO C \ f:": C C 0 C OC
~; :,i:JdG,H'~ '1-::-~.:o~ ld~.:>?,_'=l~'{ ::P.:\{'\~0:J:DI. :\]O::Dcl ~Y<.:qm 9x
.~ cc- r,; ::- "'~ c o c r c c o
roul: 8:ll~0 GtpcD.~9j ~lro:,::n~:~ 0)('))G:::D~9;' o:>?Of><,l5)GOII G:DJ~
c- c c- c- c~ c- r;:::c- o cc- o
GfG::D') Ot~U~C:(-JJ":>l~::_ OOXD:-D~ G~i~c:o:y:>:13c: '=l~::l:li9~l ~.:9fnGf
~l'=lmmJ~n:~~'=~
Jo -[
i(;~:::u.~:Dr;-;8,
L.rl.l.rLO. ~.......$ Lj G:\).P:-J~cxn~O?o:>:-&.,)
.u h. J
Ymm:rum~l:~?:Q[
~[ U O
0 c (" 0 r::::: c (" C' r,: (" (" ("~
~0::2:...1 ~;;o9G0<1~11 9t.Gt.:fJ::_ G:vp:'J'XX)');o:? G.I,>?CX?B~~ UOXXX1J~
~ c c- c rrr o c c- c r.: c- c ., cc ( )
g)JGfbp~C ~~OG<SI ~ 'J:::Dc'f?' ~~c~c:dm 'fS GOOOI~o:>~i~~ Cj
oo~t Gro?:&'1:Jdo5~:
~
~:C:oSro?:x~o3
l Ll c.:;, !.
Gm3 o::nd;n
c..:.
0 06 J -, 1
\ "A peon was charged with misappropriation of money.
The prosecution proved that he had not returned the money
when it was his duty to return it:
Held: that the prose.::ution had proved its case; and it lay
on the accused to prove his defence. The prosecution is not
bound to prove the actual mode of misappropriation of th,e
money."
0 c. .:;) r::::: c ~C' (" (" C' ~ c

02??5JG!n?:U1J: j ~: roG~'Jc:eJC('?f~ UOJ::D('))SJ O)o.JG::mo:>2?:
c oc c c c c c r,~ rc
QJ~CDCO?:G::D? ~~0)2?1 CO~~p:~? ~'):~c:~<X>GQJ?Gft:J: '=IO::qJ: \S0
G.s::n~JS
T c.:. L (:)GO)gClGCII
f.G jJ-1
~Gr;::::::?~
ol. ~
rh~ ::n:};
CJr 1.!1
0 c
~~~gQ:fnG;"'a.8
tJ Jl11 J
O~Gro~
-c 0
(" C' c 0 c 1m c 0 (' C' OC' . (" !;: (' C' Lc oc .

~'l.>t9n:l9y'=~O{CO?:OOOG~?C:t''11 G~':>C9?f:1Df fS tl~GOO':>C~rlf~')iCC
(" (" rrro ') 0 C' 9 (" ' ("
!3d~ ( j ) ~I G!n?.J.>GGI :5:j018~~c: ID9C<X[:~cn:>:~2? II
"Held: The High Court as a Court of revision will not

approach the application as a court of appeal, and will not
as a rule go into the evidence but will a'.::cept the concurrent
findings of facts by the lower courts, except where the
judgment of the facts is manifestly wrong and palpably
unjust."
(9) 0@00 ~t$r -r~oo5 2<JG3 opyc.6 ~~ 001 il)') Seen
(::J) oe::J9 ~;~1 tl,l')e? ~96~:1,lJ'):J 0? j@OII

S9
n~e~k~e
o .)0
es:; ~:~&:cbco:&eccocob
:i e.::~ o
,'lBcobcc
o~b
10~<~
~.. , "'
C.Ob
.,)
cr coccco~ I@H~ bS~elc c.ccoco~reo& elc co~ecks:~coo.:.Jcb
J 0 .) ;; .) ..) ,) ctj,
l@~e
.)
bgtJc + ::J
noCc .)co~ed~e&eccoo.:.Jcb
.)
'@~e
.)
bS~?Jc
::J
,._
-.
ucob oc
.)
coc.cccoco@
'
g:>g cbco~me.s
.)
1 11 )
(
St6 Sl.~Odmi M V1 VW~og

Sl.~Od~ MV1 vmog 9t6
roro:romox:om1
-r
0
l
C"
G~X
C"
'J:ro
0
Ol C:.
G
:::DO'dQ)ffi~I'J:m
C" 0
l tJ
CDO)m
. C"
3d~1c:~1c:
U
C
lJ
C"
~~ro
00 0
o{.
oeGj
(" C"f::' C" (" ("~ (" (" ("
O)GO)')O'dGCDJ:>ffi 9 ;;[911) O)O)~O)t:JO)a') ax:~p:GCDO)~ II
c
G~?Co:>GO)? "
o co ~ c coc ( or,: ) c co
U~J9, GO'd')(D~g oxp:~t:jgO)~I G~'JC0fG~ C\?trr ~I O'dOO~ Go.:>:
~1mm
tJ
r: 0
l
0
3d:>:m:ro'):ro'): ~'
c:~.,
L l J.!O
~:>:o:>c:GroO):::n 11
("
C:.
(" 3d:JXDG (" 6 (" 0 C'
')C OOGO)')
o~ ~~
c
C"OC" C" o C" G C" 0 C" C" C" C" . C" 0 C 1::" "
tJ~GOO?CCil
G~X0,YGCO)i)) GO)Q:JgO)~C :1.13dQ)ffi3dCIC: G())')Q)()O):::DO)~(D cc:ro~l
, ll .........., l 1LJ o C:. L -1 C:. l ot [;':f OC'
I:JY~?~CCtl
c c c c~c ( or,: c) c oc ~c ( or
~m~Jm(:}p:~pro~: G~?ct:Jt C\fe::rl:$ 1 G(:}')CO)r=t:Jr O?El"7) o c
~~~
(". (" (" (" ' ' (" ("~ (" (" (" 0 (" ~ c
8;;JQ)Q)~QJ<'D(,IJ':>gf~ 3d~')' ~~GfGCDO)~ II G(:}'Xt:jf~~ G0'JCO)fgt:jf
cL
0
ro:n;x>l
~
("
rom:ro1
-[ L
0
axn:Q01'):~c
-- -[ U J o
0 c GOO(:}~: G()):>I!)UO)(:)I'):
6
c c
;t tJ L
("
(:}())())O):::n c1 ~
' ("
c o c o 'r'C" c o 'r'C" c r,;:c co c
CJC:~O)~ o:l'f:C\(O'dGUI 3CJC:I o:xp:~O'dGUI ~9c: (:}oxpgO)t:Jl? 3dQ)QJ:;,~Jffi
(" ~ c 0 0 (" o .c Co c 0
GO:')f 3dGt:j:>c: ~CXl'P~~G~J II CJC=~~ 3di!)I!)~~J(D(:}J:>:or GO)~pap
c-r:::c- o c-r::;:::: c " c r,;:c c coc c " c oc
ooc c~:O)U~2iG0):>3d~ ll
0 3d~c:t:li!)ID2m G(:}XCDG~O)~ <:mroromcqc
c ~ c 'r' ') c c 0 ~ c (" Co c c 0
GOO')COJ'):Gi:!3')C~ GUI GOI<'DGCDO)~ II ~Gt:J')': CJC:!Jdi!)I!)~~J<'DO)~ <-q

~ C" 0 C' C Co C C
t_j~Clt<'D0)2t 3dCDI!)~QJffi (,I~())G~J II
0
GO)OO:O)
l ll
G~'JC
C'')g3d'): I! 0 c
omg,m~') 3do:>~
J
c
IL J ll
0
axn:CDO)')CDIC
-- T
I!)G
l :u
'C' 6 ')C~
C'
ooc o c r oo c o o c c
~ c:eo~cGu 11
c o
(,) 1. t
rooo;;,mm:rom
n. -- -L t ooro:>: G(:}')Cro:rom
-r .~.. CD<'DO)
t
c <x:>O::G!o:
1:!. o
O)')gGO)')O'd~l
') GO)Q:JgO)~C
c 3d ')gGO)')O)(:}I')g())O):::Dc 0
GOO:ro:m:> c ''
(pj.SQO)Q
8 l ILJ o il lJ ol C:, 6 L uT J o
'1 c c c o c c r,;: c c cr,: c G c
UIO)~or O'dOOQ(X)')g~l ll w~c 3d<>C:t:JCDI!)2m G0Xte:~l 3df:3dp:~
0 C' _C G C 0 C" r,;:c-r:::c- ~ C 0 C
~Gf~~p:r.p CJC:~ ~3d1DOf(:}p:O)':>C\jJC t:JQ)t:JC:Gt:j~ ~~(:}p:m G~:>C
')g3d'): o c c (:}:::D
Q(D~(D
~~ J
c
C
~())())GQ I II
t
c
U
o6c
OOG
~t
X
o

GO)Q:JgO)QQO):::D
t ,L. -1 Jl
oc
C.!.
c
8C!OQ')~'J
--- T ;
o o c c~ o c c r,;:c ~ c c c c
O'd'ftQro'f:C$ 'i)<'D~<'D9J 95J0)2t8cmrt:!Q)Gt:j 'JC: O'd~fOOC~jJ:GCDO)~ II
c 'r'f:': ') r,::;:: c ~ c o c cr,:
O'd(X)ffi G<JI tlUI O'dGt_jX:~p:Gt:j')<;i ro~:;,o:xp:C\{0)~ G<:}'JCtl')g!Jd'):
0 c c c c c c c C' 0 ' 00 C' C' c c C' 0 C' C'
. 11m~.m0)~ ~rGO)')CD~: c;c:O)~ ~O?qr'i)ro~m'P~ 11roro9ro ~m9t
r,;:c r,;:c ') c r,:c r,:~ c c c c~ c c
t:JQ)~'):O)e!Si .G8 mm(:}Jffi tlc:t.191 11roro9m O)CD~rot:J'P~c roc~:
frj QO)
61
cc
C: (:)QO)~Co '
Jl J
c ~ CDUQ
C\C
t
c:~IO)')
t JJ
"CDG($O):::DII
c
c.:,
o ' o .~ (\)UCO::::>CD:::n:
(X)ffiO) c c
t. t 1. .. - -r~
c
c:,
0 c c 0 0 ' 0 c C' c c C' .
!JdO)QOXD:CDO):::D ~GCDI:>GO)') !JdQCO'dGQ:CDo:> C:l 0)0):1.1gb)())(X) Qlnxt(D
il -- T ~ u c
Q)ffiO)(D
I.
c c (X)g(X)g :>: :>: ~ ~C' 0
C:QG
0 I L ll
c rr.;Jb)())())C
')C:
Ol
' c QQIO):::D
0
i.
c
-

C' O)O)GO)QQIO) C' 6 0
~p:m9 8dCDJ2:0C blG()J G()ICD~GQJ 11

ll il.
c c '1'
lll
') C'Jl \ Jl 0 A -IJ ~ tJ
():::D')Q
o
Gm')roQ:
C
roro:O)
~
:m roo:>;;,roro:roO):::n
.o 0 c c
O)rouroroO):::n
c-o c-
C.:. Jl -l- Ci.
o
Q)(X)<JIC'"
oc 'r' m
3dblGUI
0
l!
c
ro<::O):>:c
c:
6
ll
c
0GO)':)G 6
ll
:>C
-1,:
c oomo:>m
L
oo o c o (:}(:}QQffi:>mo:>
0
oo c
C
t.l l
l t
L\
OC' C 0 C 0 \ 0 C' C C C 0 C'
()CQCb)Q()) <X>OO())');GCDO):::D II (X)O)O) o:>OO C:bl') ~.S(D.SG(\)0):1.1 11 :1.1m())C
l ll 0 Jl t. ll c::, L 0 Ol ll J JT T c --;,1 ~L- A
0 C' G C' 0 0 9 C G 00 0 C'
!Jd~;;,oxp:C\{~<;i G~~.:O(l ~8do:>Ofqr ro2:~c:ro2.: ~(:}~ O)G0)')3dGCDJXD
948 BlJRMA LAW REPORTS
(,~:cb~cnw
. 11 )
6t6 S.DIOdH~ M V1 vmog:

'"""!
11 a::::ccro~eco
11 61 n
co:Cift r)
rn}~
e w1e~c
o~
.) \ 0 (()).) "".:>
.:>
u:loo:ob 1:hl:cec 1e~ &:co (M~lb:J) :ro~cc:2 :h'J&::dxo coooc:b.
y 0 .:> e'J 0 :..:lo e ~ .:>
b r
,J.,
wccw _l _
rococo ~
: coco 1 1
:crocoo ~ce-~ ., _l_ __ 11
o~ro:ox.oecoro ~w~~ !;\
'L'i
.:> o o e .:> o o .:>o .:> .:> o .:> .:> ;;
rocooh=:'l
.:> ~
I~ C~dc
;;
cod~
.:> 0
II (Cccro~:a:!ce:ftCC w:dft:a:!&-> ecc~cocc
.:> .:> .:>0 0 .:> .)
e2ccl!nro
.) 0
:Je
L,
oro~b
.:> .:>
crrowuh=:'l
.:> ~
I~ Cl;ldC l:hlc.oro:ce:oo IGwcccoo
;; el.:> 0 e .) ':).) .)
nr
:::>1gfte.G 1 ')o_
wwcocco~ c
1 ,,
ro:c ~
ro : :> roo ~ ::>eft~ o~gro:c:oc.oecoro
n .1_ ___ 1 ':':1
a::::cc
.:> 0 0 .:> .:> .:10 .:> .) 0 . .:>
(1;\c-RI-o) 5~:~&:>:2 nh::b ~oco:~co ~(o;~b br ox.obh=:l 1h cl;\tlc
;; :..3o .:> e .:> \ .:> .:> .:> .:> .:> ::::! ;;
S.D:IOdffii M V1 VW'd09: OS6

-1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 951
') r;;:<- ~ (" (" (" (" 0 (" ,$.
o~tij
<G!:<Jp:j90Glj?C: ~OO'Jy ::OffiGOJ D::lGOO?ffiSdOO?: or:001jll
Sd:;QUI
(" ("
0')
l
') (" (" ("
GI:OJGQI')(;;GQI?C~())C
U
~\ (" ') (" ("
U 4)
G::O:<JI?; GOG.S:::O:"lXD GO:X.lQUI<J OOGI:::o:-D
Q U T C.:. l oo J l IL L C
("
(" 0 0 ')
0<" ('
Sdill0J9J
0') ("
- c ... C'
G(,I?CG:xl?C:
('
a:>O)O')mox; mo:>: Q::O:-D Gl: <t>OJ:-D()) oo:;n:;;ro:r::: mro~cGo~:>:-D 11 .t.C
It -l ~ t. l. :. [.!, G l h. n. 1. C
0 (" ('
~'f~:; tDtSd~3 g)i CJ?~:::O'J ::OffiG::O SdGOO?\DSdro?: ~:0~ II S'd9cQ
S,\0 (" (' 0
@2~;)')8~
r,:c
0 (' ('~(" 0 <:: C' (" \ 0 . 0 (" (" r: OC'
t::l~~?~CCII
())9;~f~ GG?::;t.Y._C:~Il:ll tJ::001JffiSd'J G01J'='C~00~9~G:"D? Sd~:~CDGf::O~
~ c- c- <- <" c "l r;;:c <" c
G:':??CD~: O'JCO?:~:; 02::0())"1'~ m~;QJ:::O~ Gl:i:j<t>OJ2:;~ CDCOOQJ
<J:D~CUIII
OOC' ')
G~'):;QC
C"Q(" (
CD -a
0 ) <"
OOOJGU:Gb:>? GI:<J?CD:D~ SdtDQ ())CO;a:>
'l C 0
LL l l (.. l J C.:. it -[ L
C"~(" c c 0 c \ c
(" (" c c ~
G<J? ::t.Y.. c a:>?G"Pro <iroco?:::x>~~~9{':- QtD2:::x>~ u m~mGe:P~
0 c coc \ c 9 c . (" c h::: c . ("
-~GOJ? G<J?::~.:::m?: 'JcrtU e:<:Xlf:GZ)OJ~ :::l@~r ~I t::j<'(())CD J9 'JffiGt
:-DG.SUC:Q?C
oc c
GQI ~1
.,. [Y
c
0<t>G:D! :G.S?ffil
<" '1
o
~mm OOOJGU:GOJ?
c
:::Jal:S~
c
Ql
c.:. T I. u ll. T L I. c \ t.
-~ c c c c r,'{ r;;:c
9 ' o o '1 o cr oc
a:::l';:roro jj 'J<"'Otq:; ug:~xnro?ttl:tl<t>'fl 'JSdcp1jro Of'=-'=01 G<J?C[3lC
c ,........Q c ~ c r,: <" c~ c or,:: c r,::
CD?Gcpm '-~lqmro?:G~?C: GtJ'Xfi> ~~~?:OJ~~ ~tf:'?? ~:OSdGtj
r:"
S'Jr:l0"-1)~ <J~::O?G01J II
0 0

mu::;. rom:roo:>:-D mm:o:>
o c 3:GQrocc G?CQirom
c c o ,
QS'.,;QX1ffi
o oc <"
~oom
c:, -- -r ll u
2 ("
It T t ~1 ~ L -~ - T Jl J
:n
c \ c 0 c oc \ c 0 C' ( .,.)
'):;GU:~::O:"D()) roro? ~, uo:>G:OJOJ:-Dil :"lX'OO')C Sdt.:\.1 GQI
!..1
W.S:G::O?G
~ T o -~ c t L t. c.:. -.-t -r -6 J
c
GO ? Cn1 ~C
<- :l:>GOO?
c c " oc ( ) OJO<l~())C
CO .Sl:I?~CC q
o c W: <JlOJOO?;OJ:"D
<" c SdOJS:
oc
-:~ J " t:- l T 1 JL .tl "' " a ...
\ 0 oc c c C' f.!?" c r;;: c ,$. c c
90<>'P~~p:m ~00m2?2Wf: ~(;I:GQJ?ffi tl?:Gill?C:9J 9U;?o:J?:G::O? G!9?~
"r;;: (" c c c 0 r;;: C' C' c c :1
:QJffitl00J2~ OJCJ"JGOJ D::lGOO'::lffiSdOO?:<J~l:::Oi:j~ '1rCDfOJ2::~ q.>~UCD
CS:O<>GUI
1
c .,.
m::o:QIO)? SJ <D Gm~CGU<J:"DII
LU
c oc
L
c
c.:.
o
:QCOOJC
4
SdG
~.-r.:.
c Bc ?C:ro:~;IG::O?
itJ
o
.,. c- c._ r;;: c <" c r,:c c c c c
Sd~<JJ?:~::r.>UI CD'f:<>O<>GUI CJC:Il:JIG~?~QJffitS 8'dti0Gv:~jf~? <.:OJCf:ffiJC
c (" oco c
o:lroGX SdGOO?ffi~ro?: ~'Jf ~Goo:>e:; !I
cr;;:c c o C"r;::,!?C <-oc ~
aa~c:ev::x>e;; 2Gfa> m~~rocp:~Sd?; G~'::l:::tJ:.c;: G~?c:::o;;::v~
J
c
~CO';)()') 00-S~<t>U::;CI?!
.l
oc c c
I J AI
Q')::00<:.C Q')G())?C:
0:1
("
J o
C'
J
c 6 0
?:(;: G<;I?C:iUJOJC:'. GCDCD<Dc0
JJ ll
c
4
c c
5 J
c
0 (" 0-:::Jo) 0
(o
"!" (" c c c c ( c c
Gvl roc
0
GOJCO(l')QOJ:"D(})
oo l. - -J C.:, L Gl:i'::lco::::roc rol 'ro rorooo::o?::::D:L""=l'::l
6 L 6 t:..:, J
-~~ll:llli
c- c o c o c
O)CO()):;: (X)GQI?C:0? o;?OJ'::l:a:>a:>? <,ll'): ?::).):"1,? GQI?C;OJO
c c c
c.!J<D
J1 ..... -l-o LIJ. ~4 ... U C.!. IJ ,
r;::;::, c- Q <" ( or,: ) c o ~ c o
G~?c: 2;"''XjC otB:::Jj ro <:Xlro<X(~'::l:G::D?G~?'t O<>~Qaxp:CI.(m?:
o c, c o<" co <" ~ c <"
OOG~ro GQI?C:cx:>roc GOX\;ro;:1::o:::nmG::D? SdQiroG? G ?CQI0)8';l');
u c:.:. L tJ u
l
'IDG(l)')O)ffiffi
...
(" ("0G<D::O:Dc 6 OQ L
c
XmGOJ ('()O)QICTAJ) (;l.;.;..i\CGO II
c c ooc
J ..
c
:::J."JG'),\;QOJ::O
C'
L U o U t. ._ L t' T ''-
C" oc ( or,: ) c r;;: c ,.., 9 c ~ .$.
-G<J?:::<t>::Dy: ~t!-o J ro moc:t11Xi1:'P G!:::x>m;;:ozc G9:::ot :P=9J
( 0) oe:JO ~I
~<"
Of~?CJe
r.: <" "
.lll9C('<Xt:~

p:i Je (
<J.I'{>:~<J.IG<J.I? II .
C' ")
. -c'"'7
--s oa;o: -:-"gO?~~o:.,c"cx?w
~~ ':"IT ,'1'r ~C.
01212.1 .
.
c ") ...
~C~ u '"
,;sO~ks~}~!r:~&:<:bco:&:>ec 65o ~~~~ 'Lc~ob if
"'X.)C~ ~~~ b~tlc ccc~so~refo> d~ so&:.c~:~~ ~~e b~tJc .j.
. ntdd CO~~~~
,) ;) ~~~e
.) b!:l~C
:J *
11
.) . .
cu&we:c1c.oe&es
11 cu&wk:c1c.oe&es
.) 0
1r ,, 1
ftecoencoo.->oo
0 .)
~S6 Sl.~Odffil M V1 VV'rnfHI

11 .)c.orewc.cc~~:coccoro
:::1 .)
&x.o&w &c.occcjg:EO]oo:::
o ., e_,.,o
l,oc:ocjg
.)0
:~bxobcc.
., .,
ICCCCCO
., o
Oc.ooco:::::xJct'l:;,
.) .) .) l.bte<.c':)
.)Me:Cbco
,c.u..bx.ti .)~cc<Phl:orew
.,:J .) (c)
II CCCC<Phl
.).,:~
I()C.UCeB~ ICf,:cPocoreec
:::;tow l;.)
.)0 ., ~cc~~=~~!:J
.) l()~ffi.
., oJ., ...~., om
g~:)Ce.G~OCf)~
.) .,
e:cbco

II ree>e~bf) Ff)c.ocm~co :2co cc~cc oblc.urf>-
-..o ., e ., .,:J.>
:och:l~ecohlcocc
.) :::J ".) :~., CcCCf>
.) 1:cec ~coocw~oc.f>~
.) .) .) ec:~cc~
:Xo~wi(Z
.) ::>
IICCCCC.Otoh
., ., o o o
tcck5b" .>cl,MI!>co
.>
,~:!,~
:s' WC<J>:chJoeo
o :::l.>o
ccce>:cco:ooc
..,
oro .>:I
.,
01hlec cc co " cokB
.,
ecc~cc
.,
o&&~ec :!Xocece>
., " .>
JCCCCOC.f>e>c.ucc:2-
.> .> ., e
M&
., o 11 ~lX'b~
Yo tocccc!l-~:tecc~
o., ~~~crf>dY..s.m:le
., .) l; ., 1CCcc ~oc.ec~ocf)~
.> ., :>
,e
.,
Cb~e> ccc~c&>;eco .,
0 coc-Jm!l- d~c.occc.oc.ble> ICCCCXf>e>c.occ:2 II
., oo., ., ., :J ., .> ., e .>
ecce
co~{;~hJ c.ucbe:c~
., :::1 ., &Cb~~
o o
ICCCC
.>
(cJJto)
:Jo
X~">~cc:2
., .>
:hJ&cjg
e e.:l
olcccn1:::>
L!
c.ucoe>cco
_l_
:oc Je>cco~
If o. '
eco:occooec 11 ~
cc~ ~co:oc.omro
"
.) ~ .) .) 0 .) .)\ .) .)
c.uccc.oc@.e>
., ., ...... l!lLi;:~bcc
:>- ., ., c.o&xeseJ:oh..>
o ., o :01e~mce
.Jl; .)0 ., ~~ (cJ:.l6J)
., :Jo
~tnlow
.) o
:h.l&,~bro
e.::! ., ,ot.o~rees
., ..>C ~bd
-..e
0 ..>co~~ ~~~~ .,
IICCccc.ofu.
., ..> o
co~4hl
.,
tdbocf>~ :COOXf>~
.,:J o o ., ..>
~~ !l-o:::hoc.M ICwte
.> ..>o .> o
to@b IO~e.G ..>~bMi]cjg
eJ ..L .)...J
.
c.o~coocece>::>cM>
.) .) .)
~ch-le>ccce>re&)~
.,)~
~~ t;':::>oces~~cf)~
.) . .) .)
e:cbco

11ew
l;
II CCCC~hW c.otoOCf>~:ccoXf>e> ~~ .>o
~o:::noef>'?>
1
CCCe>C.Ocbe>
..>
tcococjg
o .)O .> :::Jo., o
)
o ., .> ., ..,
,(b~hl&c~ w~roocwe>ocf>e> ,~ti1lcc:c&~hl
.>:Jo .> ..> .> .,:1 .,:J :~1e:::>o~e>
el; .>
IOC~f>:df)
e :::J
11CCcc
.)
Weco
.::J !~wcbe>
0.)
to (cc-Rl:o)
0 . ...JO
::>C"'
.>
>:::>:ccoocf>e>
J
~~
.)
(oc-fill:o)
4o:::bcf>e>
.JO.) .>0
2<ll~e>C.OCCCeJ
.) .) :f>h:lccbc.occco
.) :::J., .) tceuto
0 " 0
II CCcchJ~e>WCCCeJ~ :f>5Jl
.) :::1 .) .) 0 .) ::::::1
C2bc.occwco
.) .) .)
ooc~"'>e.t>Co
.,) ,)0 0
Jccccoe>o~
" .)0
:c<ll<.of>(i)" .)wcoc.ooe
,)
C2ccood)
.) 0 .)
,~hl
,:~
cc:cco:F)cc too c.o:4ccocw,bJc.oc: 4~ uC2cct:7J:c.Olwo c.ocowo:::
~0 0 .;) ' .:>0 .> 0 .> 0 .> ~ ' ~ .>
J.)::>&<'les4e>
.>o
(tl-h!l:o)
......o
:4ccocece>W
.)0 .) o
1&ec M&
., o
((>-hll:o)
:Jo
::::>oo:2
., e
1<.o
~OCe.Ge>::>Cf>~CCe>
.) .) .)
II &!cc:coc tcoo:;4e> II!) (cc-hlto) blocf>e>W cjg:4w
-> 0 .) 0 Y uO :J.) 0 ..>
c.obcc
.)
ICCCC
.)
~eJ:)Ce.E;eJ::X:f)eJ
.,) .,)
e:<hro

II C2cchJ:coc
.) ::::::1
&c!;:~d..
0 .)
c.olxc
.)
ecce&
.) 0
::::>S
.>
IC.OC.~~
., o
ll~:>:c&wro
:> ..>
:obo t~cEOlecccewCo~C.O
.>o-.. .> ......J .> .,
w:oQ:c~c.oo" J:hl
o .>~ 6j
cco!Xocbe> oco~cohJ ol!iAe.G <'lChJ<'l:Cr(') l~h"J:C(l)(.()O efle.G~~ (l:lfilfu)
0.) .) .) 0 .) .)O 6 ::::::J :::J " .).)0 :J ...JO
ocoJ..coCu
.,) .,) 0
IC~:h:loo
cr.::!-.. eoro ~'f:crecce>c.occ
.) .) hlfu:dxo
~0
:cQec
~
cccc&:~b
.,) 0 .)
rich (bs~.fc) sub

Cc ~rco~co:fLO~CD ~~~e CCCe>:Lo crcc
ahl::)rew "C2ccQ0hl :df>:ccccjg~h:looe tC2cc& l;'e>oces~ocf>e> to
.)~ ::> " ::::::1.>:1 e::J.,o ., o .> ., o
:dxo eeow

M ":'x.o:::>cro~OCf)~
.> ..> ..>
&:recce>ll ll:occ4o:d :t;;lfu:c1co
.> .>o e e.::l
S~'MOdffir M V1 VV\ruOH
B~ LAVV REPORTS 955
co C' C' C' 0 C' C' C' C' ~ c (' & ( '"~')
~Cf0Xl)2i Cl)()JGO)<;)<;!Jm<:lJ?:f<: (.)())Cl){T.)~ I o:>COJc.ICGe;e;;:U>?: GC> I
C' C' C C' ~ C C' ~C OCo ( ) e C o C' C'"' OC'
GI.>?COOCCC: ~~ t::~eGCO?C~~fY?~CC 0 09cCXl:qc1 G8'd?:xx.>l8'dotC:
'1'CO?::x>:-nroGO)Q,l\CGCD:x>:"D
G<-91
C' 0 OOC' C'
II
C:, l 411L C.:.
" Circumstantial evidence must be consistent, and consistent

only with the guilt of the a'.::cused, the inculpatory facts must
be incompatib'le with the innocence of the accused and
incapable of explanation upon any other reasonable hypothesis
than that of his guilt. If the evidence is consistent with any
other rational explanation, then there is an element of doubt
of which the a~::cused must be given the benefit."
U re~:>.Ce(') CoCCCCb OCCCCC 4fuen C~
.>OC. .) .)
wPees ccc~fu C2ccecohlcocc &<.oix> J:cenbeecc~ 2cce:Cbco ~~coPed~
,) ,) ',) ;:j,) 0 ' 0 ,) ,) ,) 0
:cf."lcc~cocc e2ccb{:;J(O~ :X~::>:CttiOOJ~ ibes ~~ffi ure~~ft ::>kJ

,) ,) ',)...J ,) :::::1 t.; ,) 0 ,) 00 0 ,)~
cotn:!:.es C2G~ :C2co4bx!;::>:(')CO :Fi100>Co k(; li!>flft C2cce:cbc.o 1code;
.> .> ~ .> .> .> .>o ...J .> :>C>o .> .>
:hbfil d ew II re~bft ::>kJftb:C2ce:(')CC OOJ:ob Mreco :chlco cecoh I(.()(?
eJ..>:.i .> o .>~o .> .>o o .> .> ;j o .> o
c.ccC2cd5
.) 0
co~ft cb~co
. 0
:C2-~~o
.)
<:hm 1ohl
l, ~~
l()~cocow
.)
:Xoroe:cbco
.)0 0
LS6 S.UIOdffil MY1 VW110H

. .
11 c.o&e.oe:ckcoe&e.o
,)
'1 , 1 ,,
II .;)<:()CO e.oro:
0
ti)COe<;ne.o

uc.ob U'
.)
roc.cc
S.DIOdffii M.V1 vmntr 856

1965] BU~A LAVV REPORTS 959
~ c o r,;:c c c oc o c r;:;::: c
Gei:>C: G~9::DI:J~I G:x>8m ;;)J~o:lG::D:> 8d~t<'q (:)G()')J<j>OG:x>JG~:><; oelij
o o o cc ~c c ~.o c o o <: c c
m] Q1:o:> 8d<Xl:>IOC c: CD:x>:x> II m o:(:)CO:x>: !Jd(.l)Q mro:ro G(:l:JCG!T.l')CO)CI)
OJ L! ..~ !t . t=. C:::J 1! J ~ tl -- -r l G~?{
'T' <: c c C"
8dGOI GCD-:>8()')(:) ~CCO:>:o:>:u 11 G!T.l?C:))~
~60 c.:.
c:c c r- c r;::c c c CA; co o &.8
J
~'1!
.,.
ro'lr 8d!9CD8d<.>Jm 8dG!523:>C:t:'Jc:~~~ oo:>o:>ro9Jiq!T.l:Jro'i\: 02-:l'iJ
::DCDCD:> ~GOO~~
OXD::x>
-r g
:L
:~1
~ 1;1 c
<I)QC;;)I()')O)C
--~ l.l
c
c.
c c
C,j.. 1.6
0
G~l
'T' c 0
C:O:>:o:>:x>()') GO)C!ClO)::D II ::;orot
(..:. t oJI-1
0
c:.
c 0
.,i.
~c OC"
c:Jf~?~CCII
o:lC
o,
c I m] !Jd(.l)<;)(:)O)
C::J
o
:t .t L
c c c [00)()')1
o CD2:CD:>:G0:..9.SQ.S
T aT 6
c !JdG()')
o c
IDG:x>:> 8dG :>c:c cc:
() 0 c -rr,: c
~(:)J:l=<'q !Jdq;;)JtO G~l [j G0(:)211
OC G C ~ OC' C \ G C OC ( 0 .C:: C
o~m1l:>~~c1
LOO I i
co:coc:
!.
roocl ro(:l:roo-:>1 ::>:8doo:>.s:
l 6 .o.Ol G L T
co
l
-j ) ~
OC'
8d(:)O)C
u
C C C C C G 8C' C C \OC 0 C 0\0C C'
::>ei:Sj ~~01 (:)0)(1) IS 'J()')Gf! ~ e P'l 8dour~i~C ~crc:1J::;o~ II ~~qc:~
G c oc 8J c
::>:8doo:>s: Cl ()')::1)(1)oc
C o o )
( (I) -::> c
G(:)JC(I)(I)I c c c
G(:l')CO)C;::D.S ~C
c [OU)Qo
c.. 1. T L .. , l \ 1\. J ....o~ J 0 ;L
ro;;p:Of
o c
G(:l:JCGOO:>C:x>ll)q:[
c c o ~()')CD'):~:x>~
' ~ c
II
c
G(:l:JCG::D:>C:I::J
c r,: ( ar[j-<f
or,: ) I
G(:l ')CC:OrDCD~C
1. J
c 0 C c G:x>:x>
lL
C
G~')C~ICI)G(:l?CO)()')
o
C' co
~L
G::J):(:)G.S
J T
6 C
:TIG.S
t::.!,-1
6 :)):"1')11
C.:.
C
CO
0
t..
\OC C' C C C' o rc G C OC C 0 C
~oc:roc G~JCG!T.l'JC::DID()') Q::x>!t!lCI ::>:8doo:>.s: COQ GCG:>~I:o:>:x>l :x>G:x>:>
L A Jl: LJ o [., l T J A U C.:. ~1.
(:)QG~I II
' lJ g]OJCc G:x>::D GQ:JCQII!)G(:l')C()')
c c
U
c cc o c o c '
()('I)~QOC(I)GO)')
JI-J
c ()I
"' " (J)
c
OC

G ')QJI [OU)Q mro:ru G(:l')CGSd')C::D0
A
. It
_Q c c c
~C
c
L
G:x>:x> G~')C~ICDGQ')CO)
c c c 0
L
CD()')?:
-c tl -- -r l J 0 n. 0 Cll.
1::::: c c c c c c c c c oc
(:)J?:~::x>~ II GI:J')CGOOJCO)CI)()') rocoqc 1 G~JCQJIDG~:>CO') ~;;:aroxp1
c oc c ' c ...A; c r;::: r;::c r,;: ~ r,;:c C\

occqccoJm romJ~:>:::n~ 11 c:JJ~c rot::I-:J:::>?.~P:ro r:~fGI:l ~::;otJ<; 9r<$
(:)00(7)GO II
c 0
:Droo:lC
-~-:. -r o
c [OU)Q rom:ru0 G(:)JCG!Jd')C::DID()')
,~,. -r 1.
c c c " C"'I~

:>C::x>
c 0
OC' C" r: r,~ G C OC OC 'T' C C 8C C 0 C

(I)~QO) ~ G[j:>[j:l e:~O::Df: ~QGOI ~ roc:~?:o:>~ II O)QufO?~: o:roc
G:x>:::O G(:)JCQI<OG(:l')C~C
C C' C C" 0)()')(1):"1):1 CO!T.l<JGOI'T''=> roc: :)):"1') II
G~')CGO):>C:
C C 0 C 0 OC' C" C'
C:.
c
!l U J o ot. L J C
c c c c c c oc o o oc-- c
GQ')C~JICDG<J')C :::O::DI Q()(:l OOQ::Do:>:>:o:>:x> II ()') C08d(:l.S :>:roc G~')CG:xJ:>c:
tJ G 1.. os.o C t T 6
G C 0 C . C C C C C OC C C
::DQJC: ~COJroGf::D~II G<J')CQJ<DG'=l')C:::O~ g~g Od~~~fl ~:>OOGf:>m
oc 0 c c: c 0 c 0 c oc 0 c 0~ c c
oc:"' cc:c;g 8d<DroGro:>:x> OJ::J)G:x>:>c:Gd~:x> :x>:>:g::o~ coro::;o:>::x>:-nll
LJl-1 l lt. L C'11,.4), GL 0. 6 c,
c
G(:l')CG!Jd')C:::O'DQ')QI
c c 00
Qbi!JdQ::D OCCI
oc 0 C'~ c c
[OCO()')O)C :::Oc:ll (I)()')O)C G I:OJ(I)')
c:: c c- "' "'
J n. o1,.. :-1 o 6 11. 6
r,:;: <:
Ge1?c:1 Gg:>croco
c c ( or,:
art:l-::'o
) o c
ro GWarOXJ::n~n G~')CG[O')C.:))([) ::n ,
c c c c c
2
"' OCB c c c c c c <; ~ c c c
Gl:roc : CO()')!T.l(l)') COQ:o:lC GO)'"\"\ G~JC~II!)GlJJC~C GO)CII Gg')C~I<PGYJC
t. 6 6 , u J 0 oo:1 u
"' r.: c cr,~ c r: c c c c ". c r: c c
Of0 Gl:tJ~ 1rot:l: Ct()')Gtl::x>211 GQ:>C~JIDG~')C()') G:xJJC:t:jG'JI G8d%::DID
"' o
Cl()') "'
G l:~c c ~O)O)U) c c" (J) c o c
Gn:l')(l)mcol c
G:xJJC: m :>::x>CICI
c c:
G:xJ')C.
0 l
c
:::O::D 8d:X>
C:,
' 0
06 L
:>:CD::J)()')::D ::D?:C'OI
~(" "t. o L
c 0
l. l. .. _ T
c c
(l)(:l:~COOO)C 8dGS')()')O)()')~
1.. 6 T J
c c c
0
OOGQ::J)O'):xJ
-al oL
c 0
r,;: c r: c
tJO)G[j:oG~') G[OJCO)I!)!Jd'): sc:<::~~ G IO)Q:G'f?Cij~ I::'Jcarro:::o2 11 G:::OJC:t:j
c c c:: "' ca cr,;:c r:c o C' c c r:
c c
::;o::o GOd ' C::DGS:>ro::;o GC\J()')::J')I 8d:::O
c..:.
c
r
c 0
L
.9
L
c ' .6 T
c 0
:>:m::J)m::D O)'):C'OI a:>lJ:GOJ roc
1.. o --r
c .,..
o
c
~
...-, r ., ....., 1 . ~ lL.. 1 --J 1 r

11 cccc:c.oocot=K.occ. c.ccco:cccoecocroccce> :o cet..u cocccccocccoe :::>lg:te
.:> .:> .:>. o .:> .:> e .:> .:> .:> .:> L .
~ 0 IY ,, 0
:::> COteCOl)
.:> .:> .:>
:to:::>CO 1CO:::JCBOOie:::>CBe>
0 .:>
0 .:> .:>
11
.)
..-,
ccCCe> ICCCC
.:> .
. <JICC:::>C.eBe>XBe>
.:> .) .:>
,cb 11 , oo11 ~,J ... tr':"Ji!.
ro: co emro 11 eBcoro cocoJetee>oooo teo: cc:ox.o l)C.cco :oc.ocroe>
c 0 0.) 0.:> 0 e 0 o.)
II CCcctewfn
.) 0 .)
~CCCC:::>~
.) .)O
CJ!
.) ] _1 _ .. .
UXBJG
.)
1 It L
C.CCe>:::>\goo
.)00
:o:>]CC]s-e>
.:>
1 'J 1
:coe>:ro 2<Jis>e>eoe::::>O
.:>
l
.)
1 1 1 o 11 o-'"J r
CO CC I!CCCDC.B
.:>0 0 .) 0
:df}Cbwsc.cce~~b :::>c.f)e>CPPe:::>c.Be> t::)(:.h"Je>bco~e :)~:te ~:::>c.ee>CPre:::>c.Be>

.:> 0 .:> .:>.:> .:>:::f.:> .:>LO.:> .:>.:>
.....,
cccccc
.:>
' 1
J::::>c.
,,)
]e>CP.:> ] :c1B
o cb(J])G
.:>
1r L
c.cc~mo
0

,)
: :>]ccwb::::>o
~ 1
.:> 0 .)0
wco:::>c.Be>:roe>
1
0.)
:)~ ..J
.:>
~::::>C.CCe>
.:>
I:::>C.Be>CPre:::>C.Be>&:cc;
.:> .:> .:>
IC.~::::>C.Qe>ts
.:> ~
gJ~b
.:>:::lo
:dBcb(J])G
.:>
n
IC.Brero t~CPCCe>ce.se>:>C()e>
...-,1"' 1cb
11 cccccecoco ::>()(()s-o ceco
1 1co::::>c.
1 Jb'r
e> t5
0 )J .) ::> ::> 0.) .) ::> 0 0 ::> 0
1:7o 1 J . ... o l <1 ...-, ~ 1 J. 11
coe> e ~
J
cowc
.)
c.cce>m~:o
\ ,)
:cccocCPcc:::>c.roe~:::>c.Be>
.) ::>::> .:> .)
co:ooco
0
emro

.....,
, <11'?11.1~
11 cccccewc:o
,) 0.)
COCC()~0ro
.:> .)
IG~~ /:,wcccoc.
'5' .) .) 4-~e.s ng,tccce>
:;, c.e,&1b
.) 11 CCBoe>boeo1JJ
.) ,) :_j lbwMtc:c.e.s
'$'.) 0.)
~
0
J. ...
CO(J])Gf>:JO ['
IICCCC:::>S'OOJ ':") 1 1 1~
:::> :le~CCe>C!JCC
11cb
IWCO ()])(; COCOG 1 or J.
Cl~W(J])8
.) .) .:>0.:> .) 1.- .:> 0 0 .:> 0 .) .)
bJ II CCJccephl cbcros C.CCe>WC.CDOOe>CCe> ~hl:c.e.GOC.CCCC CCCCcb(J])8 CCCe>
0 .) .:>~ .:> .) .:>~ .) .)
~b ::>toCPwc.b
0 .:> 0.)
IICCccCPhlwreco
.) .) ~~b .) t, J::>oo::::hlwroa:ccococo:)~wreco
cb(J1)s:Je .):_j,) .:> \ J ::> ::>
d.."s
J
cobe
.:> t,
::::ro<J~wc~b
J OJ
c.h:cP('}cboos::>hle.s
,) J :J
c.cce>b~cce>
0
:>oocb:cee>CPCP
..) .)
co" (o-Filb)
....o
l5e>::::co:2
.:>
1-ocbce tto:::::c.roe.ro
e ..:> o .:>
~:::>c.Be>CPreoc()e>
'5 .:> .:> .:>
~cce>
11 (ccccephl co
J J~CC "
cooroecce>cocc) ucccc:oewPe::::to co:~cc~e> t8e> :::>mc~c.5b uccccroe>
.:> .:> .:> .:> .:>o .:>o -L .:> \ ::>
:c.tc:b:;cce~ c~:x.fle><JIPe:>c.fle~ flwcbefl &c.&c.Sb tcbcoeocob:J ~b:S.co:::>to
::> ..:> eJ o \ .:> o .:> .:> .:> .:>o
1:::>.:> ]CC!s>COOCO
o ;;
'> 1 (': r ..I,L 1o
:::>COC.S'C:J~ :::>~:.\:lO
1 1 1' 1 1
IOCOCS'ro CC!s>e(JI b :e>ro:C:O W!WICC
c-:11 l 1
W
.:> \ .:> .:> o L- o o .:> ' .:> e e.J .:> J o
:~CC~e>
.:> o
I c~mcro :roe>c. Pcoe>:C :r:;;)& II ccccccowcbe> c~c-hlro) :coe>crwe>:2
,J... .:> e ~ .:> .:> J :Jo .:> e
g~CCCOCS'
,, 1 1>
e>C:O IIOe>CCO::>O~C
0 1 e>fl!CW<JIOC:OWCse>
.i, 1:::>~ "
)CC!C.CC<lroCOCC Cfl'
.:> 0 .)O .:> J .:>~ .:> 0
. OC.f>e><JIPeoc:?!;J
J .:> .:>
(.(.)(.
.:>
~e>:hlhlc.hle>
eJ:..:f :_j &bJ
0 0
II cccchlchle>
.:>
w& (0-hleo)
:_j :_j 0 0 :_jO
S.epccgC
JO
~~
6 J
( J~_hlffi)
:Jo
<':cb:2 t(c-Reo)
o \ e ....Jo
:S.cc~e .Jvt G~ 1:~cEDle>coe
. .:>o .:> .:...:..J .:>
:)~:te wCPcc::~croe>
.:> t, .:> .:>
1~ & co::::c.~ooPeocfle> t:::::~.wcbe>ofcDwcbe>
0
b:>:cbco
0
d:'ow 0 0 .:> .:> .:> .).:J.:> .:> .)
ttflwbJ
0 .)0 0
.....,
IICCCCWCOC' , 1l 1CCfle.G ( COIC\)
111 ) gs-CCO!:l l v
IGe> fle>e.G ~
~:JC(?e>CPJe::JCfle> I OCOC.O
~" , uook~40
.)0 ,)~
.:> .:> o o o .:>o ........ o ;;o -L :;, .:> .:> .:> \ o
~oc.oo~@f))'
;) ....,
:)C(?e0Peoc~e>
.:> .J.:>
tw<':Obl:x.cce>:::>C.Be>
o:_j.:> ::>
M OCBege.Ge>OC~e>
.:>.:> .:>
ooolw
.:>~
II C2cchlc.hle>
.:> :_j:_j
;)
r
?~
1 --.11 . 1 r
1 o ,, o r ~
COIOCCW
L- e
C\J~OO ::J~:te
o o .:> L-
Cl>CCOC.e.Ge>
::> .:>
J:CeBCO:::>CBe>!eGe>
o .:>
0~
.:>
:XCCe>
.:>
IW2C()e>
.:> ~oc.es~ .
.J ;)
CPr~:::>Cf)e>
.:> .:>
IICCCCC.rococbe.(C:.hlro)
.:> .:> :_jo
:::>C.~e:e.Ge>:::>Cfle>
.:> .:>
ttcbS.~oo
o o
IICCCC&)~
.:>
rc.~~
n 1 ] _, .. 1r v 1 ., , v
1
W::X:.~eCPJe')Cfle> CCCe>S'eJC\) ::J COW8 C.CCe>O~ C>COCPe>WC.S'e> ~CO:::>rogcce>
0 .:> .:> .:> \ .:> J 0 .:> .) ,) \. .:>0 c32Jc
5961] Sl1IOdmi M.V1 VW"B:JlH 096>
99
:Xo&_d:o
.J 0
. II .JCCoo~b11J
~
:GC.c.>ro:Wes
. 0
~-~hi OCXv:to~<li @hlce~bl
~~--'W .;,:_j .J 0 .J 6 .) ~ .:~:..:1
<.cc~:C.w:w
0
:h"J&:dxo
E;":j
&wces:;, 0~ccco .J:XccM~I~
o.) ~
11 o~~eS.Peec
0 .)~
tc:c@:2@
0 .J
~bo~~corea.:!;h"J:&>:xo
.) .) 00.) .) ~ .)
~hl~~es .Jaccoces~::;ce::l
.J ::J .J .J
t!:cEobccc~
.J .:=.I
bt;&j~
0
wC2cc~~t4J
0 .J
:ccc.oo.:ceco
,)::J .) .) c&:oes~Pees
0 .)~
<Ccecoe
.J .J
~@MPees<Ccc
~ .)~ .J
@hl~b@ uo~be~Pees ~b:c@:2@ ocro~ccca:~o~C2ah"J:cuQco 4-b~~
.J :1.:~ .J ~ .J .) .J .J . .J 0.) ~ .J .J
tooce~ .@reoce~
O.J J.J
tcnocbcoeM:te
. .J
l:ooce~@re:::cf',~
.J.J\.O.J .J.J
&cc~ ccc~Mo~
0
CCcc@CCoces~oce~ ~<hEOl:de:cw@ to
o&xxce:oco:hl&:te
.:1 .:1 .) el t.. JGM::tfle>
~.;,:_j.;,o .:1 .:1 .:1 .:1 .:.=.~ o
OC('l~@reoce~ M@CC::>Ces~oce~ t'G@fl:Obl o&ero li:)cr.hl~.) :~ccoh?:2
.:1 .:1 .;, .:1 J .;, .;, ~ .;, o " .;, .;, o Y :..:Jo .J o .;, e
ucccco~@hl oo@cc"J.Qe @cc"J.Q ~hlwPeco~h"J :&.>oro C2cc~ro11Jro
.J .:~:1 .J .) ~ .J :..:1 .:~::J.;, .J ~ .) .J :..:1
~ocec~oce~
y 5 --.) .J
&::::co
0 .J
ckwPeeca.:ero
.J 0
cccd~ 0
S.b:c@:2<li
.J .J
:::&cbtc
.J 0
uccoo~bahl
.J .:~:1 .J
olb:<.cc~ccoceG~:::ce~
.J .J .J
ro:dx.ce&ro
0
cf,&ccce>cd:l .J
::~lie
.J \.
l:o::;ce~@reoce~
0 .J .J .J
&cce> cfl:cPe:a.:a:a::ccPero
.J .J
ccc~b~co~ 0
:cc;ctbccc:ec
.J .J ..
~::co~
.J
IG~ccccca:O:~
~ .J . .
cMPw cPecc~ t:c~tffi
0 s .J..J ~\)]~~es rooM&.>
0 .J.J
nC2cc:ctta:a:clb: ~
.J " .J
to&:!ccro~:(')~ a:cco~:(!, h;ooc<llhlec ccc~:cca:ro !Gwero:ochle
.J l; .J . .J 0 .J .:~:..:1 . . .J .J 0 ~ " .J :..:1
W ~OOG@hlro ~~c.uPelP ~cEObccc~&e : :::cEO!~ro ~t~fu a,2ccolx:11J
0 "' .J .;,:..:! .J .) " .) ..__) 0 .) ......... . .J .J .) :.:I
?hlwPecot;h"J
~:f.:~ .., ~ :cu::;co
.;, c~Aro"J.Qro ~
l!>~ocro~:::cn~h:~dx.ce&ec
Y.;, .J J o o&cb&.
.J o
11 C2cctoa.:ca:~to :cc:oa::a.:ccoe>es ccea:cc ::::cto1~ahl acc:::ceGe>::cf,~
.) \. .J .J .J .J ......J .J:I .J .) .)
~u:cbcoe<hro
O ch&ob:11J oce.se>(occ~ O::b:bc3JtG h.>::a~@re:::cf.e> tw
0 :..:1 .)
.) ~ .J. \. 0.) .) .)
~:~ccf;l
.) ;.J..L
tc~ :h"J~~I5~
ftj
b:~0
~ccco ccc~c.c.:\;:::ccee
0 .) .)
toc.c.:to
\. .) 0
~c.c:ccb:aro
.) 0
"?r!c~_tg
~ocoo~@hl
~
r
~ ::1
.;,0":
~rces~
>Ce!~ nC2cc0r::J :oQwb:>:o:)
.) .):J J:::b 0
Co?ccsocs;;~ tbro (~) (c) roc e~h :~socc~cb
196 sL'tlodmi M. v1 -vw'lliltr-'

"Held! To constitute a premeditated killing it is necessary

that the accused should have had time to reflect, with a view
to determine whether, he would kill or not, and that he
should have determined to kill as a result of that reflection ~
that is to say, the killing should be a pre-determined killing
upon consideration, and not a sudden killing under the
momentary excitement and impulse of passion upon provo.::a-
tion given at the time or so recently before as not to allow
time for reflection."
19?5] BURMA LAW REPORTS 963
Or::' C'A\ c C' C' C' 'T' C'~ C'
~[9G:l::!J ~~OO'f'l~ G<:l'JCG~'JC:OO~GOI 'f>(!o:>o:>t::J: lf8<:l ?Oj oefil
r;:c c o c c c r,-, o c c o r,~
;::
( ) ( ~) ~9 1 tit>fJOO <:q:')')o:>qo:>~ tf"'~nt CPJil:~fo:>e?~ Gm9tl: C'
G~')c
C' C' OC' 0 C' C'A\ C' C'~ C'
Go:>!3C1D~J~KT.>CO'J~Go:>:> 8dYt~ O<.OOJCP9JI CJC:~G>:>: 'f>(!o:>O:lt::J: <f8<:> 0~')8~
rc coc c cr;:c o C' c o r,;c
?oJ (J) ~9 ~t>8m:qmo:>qo:>~ t1G>~~ CPJil:~to:>e?<J?. G:t,?~9o:>tlc. :.8
J
~ (' ('
0 C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' l:j~<X)')C~
~~Q::D'P::\f GY:>CG~?C:OO~:>: GCO:>CSm O:l o:>CPO:l~f: CPJc;GG>'jf ~(' 0('
OC' C' 0 C' C' ot~~~cu
mY~QJ~O:l:\.(CP:De? II
----
~Cvr t
S~'HOdffii _M Y1 VW~OJI t96

BlJRMA LAW :REPORTS 96$
Q ~Q"
U:):roc 11
G Jl
:2e ILCCCCIOIXO~
.> 1.. wcccck~hi~:Cc~
o.> ~
c.g,:c.r~ I:CCroc.~:c.r~
.>
:ccc:~roeb~:a
.) e ICCCeJ~:~toro
0.)
rIC .)l,o
COIOSo Cbwco--hl
.)
IICCCC
3':.j.)
1o:cec&.>wro
1.. \ .> ;)C2~rooo..>ro
.J .
~ ICCccwre:2
.J .> e :c)J:~e>wc.
~ o .J
4~ .>o
ococno
.>
-c.~:cr~cbooc:o~ro
.) .)
.
ucccc,ob&>~
.) l,
~C2cc~wrro
0 .) 0.)
.)ocbe>:~ .)oc.~~:cP~4~rocbooe::
:::::J ,)O .)
IC .)COlO~
l, o .) .)
r
i::>Zo:c4oPw:4ocoo
.) .)
:~oc(J)eJ:I
0.)
owccc.C2
l, .)
dw:4ocoo
.) .) .)
:dwccccc
.)
I:::>Pw:4ocoooe>wc4e>
.) .) .) .)
11 wPe c cboosccce>hlw,o~
.) .) \~b l,
ccce>a..>4co:r,ro
.) 0 0
1mPwro
.)
lxo h:ro~oo..>ro
0
1cc~Xse~
0 .) .) \ .)
Md:&ch(oh)cb&roorouro
O.) .)0 .)0 l
l:dwd~ro
.)
A:>::::>c.Ge>lPoox.ccncc
;) .) &'.) .) - ur
II coPe C cbc.am c.cc~hlwlo~ CCC~
.) .) \~b l,
l;wProccco :x(j)~:x(j)~ ,~:cecwS. coro:r,ro 1mPwro
o-> .> .> .> .> '$' .> o o .>
.hco(!,:rooocoro
. .)
tcc~ro~r
.) .)
~~
.)
1o~~co
~ .) .)
<~4~
.)
uc "
--ci,:cP~sohlro
.) .):_j
c.cc~~b
0
~oexro~cc~
.) .) .)
ncccc(J)hl:doro,o<occse>
.> .>~.>C l,.>
c.~PecoCo~:>:ob
.> .> Y.> '->C2cc~l2->:::::J
~ :reoo.>~
~
.>o\ w (oc..hli:o)
:_jc
coco:::>cft~:::>e~~=d
.J o .> .> e
:~4ocbre
Ei':b o~:xro~ro~:>:ob
.> ;y .>
J~ .. , ,..,.
~~ J~ ~ ~
cccc:c.cc:recce>
.> II
':':)

Q ,
~WCOeJeB:
.> .>
Q
e
o:ree> lcoc.uroocc:
.> o oo o
11. 11 ':':)C] 1 lb
0 f 1 0 ':':) 'lolo (I 1 n.~ ':':) 1 lo
o:cee> CCcchi~WS' II CCCCOCCI.:l:OOe>S'(J)::::>CG :::>OOCO<"lU> II CCCCO CC
I
.) :.J.> .) .)O<:eCO~ 0 .) 00 .)O .) .)

0 0 .) 0 0
l1:ree>:t'o:C2b:>
.) 0w:ob .) IJ .)C2cc0!;100a..>Pro~wccro
.)~.) .) 0.) I:CCroccce>~
.) .) 0 b~ :f)e>:CC.O(J)
C.~:::>e:::>croe>:::>C.~e>
.) .) .)
d& II cccce:oe>
.) \
~wPe:~cooro:~cc~5o
0 .) .) .)(1 .)
(w) .)co~w
ecce>a..>cc
.)
lb:cec
'$'
.&c.<kS
0
b\ :t'o:ccb:>
.)
ccccoc~e>4(J):::>C~eJ
.) .) .) 0.)
nccccb~cc
.) 00
~:oc~e>0!;1
0 .) :::::1 .)~
oeocroe>
.) .) c~&:bew~ro
.) 0 tcbl2~:4bl:~e>
.) :::::1 .):_j
uewc.cce>I;(Oe>
l, 0
w oe:xccex~e>
0 .)0.) .) ICCcccrowcbe>
.) .) &cb4eJ
0 (j)hl:oPero
.)~ .)
0 iCCCC (chlro)
.) ~0
:::>C~eJ4~
.) .>00 we.~~&
.) 0
11 cccc~Mhl ~cb4~ ccc~ob eeoc~
.) .........,, .):_j '"":>":::::!.> .)
,. , on f:1 , or " 11 , 1 ':':'1 b
co::x:o:ro~XfteJ 1::n:cccrr,~ ro:::>"!l c:w~ co~~~ w:~ccx~~ 11 ecce
o 5o- .> .;...., ._, -> .> .>o .>o .> .>
1t o. , " 1.~ 1 o 1 ':':'1 b'r ~. '!. .. ':':'1 , r 1 1
ocoe> .weco=
o o o :s-ccocl'le
.>o .> .>oco:s-ro
e
ncccc
.> ocoe>
o
axccccoe:
o .> .>
e> 5::>lJl~reo
.>o
:c.ro&~ t:ccrocob:~oc~e> we.~ uccccb!;(Oe> wcccc~W:o~w&
\ .> 0 O.l .> 0 .) 0 0 .J :::::J .) .) 0
M:c.Pocob
.> .> :bw:2Po
o .>
Me:JCCOe> r CC~CG
o.J .> .> I~
.> r .Jcoo:ro
l:c.ro:2co&4ero
e '
o ~~ , .,. r ,
0"...0 IOeJ: e> WCO:::> CDO<O:::>C~e> OlJl :::>C~e>:::>e:::>C~ i::>e:XCCe>OC~eJ
.> ~ e o .Jo .> .> .> .> .> .> 5o .> .> ~.
o "
l:::>eoco:owmro o:cce>a.>c.s-ooro
;r 1 ~:>oe:occce>oc~ ncccc
1 'L ,, ( ~-'
':':'1 ]:cccco ro)
.,) '\ .) .) 0 .) .)0 ::>.) 0 .) .) .) 0 ;;J . 0
sJ.1IOqa11 MY;I vmna.

'.
o 9 ~c- c-o c c c- c- <: c <: oc o
o~G~ 8;)0)QOXO:!X>
it -- -[ l
:x>::::>:
L [,
CI)GO):> G::D:>C:QC
L
I G<:nCQCG~:>C ~C G~')CO)CC\J
J 0 Jl,.
CO)
ol,
c
~~?C::;,c
0("
'"r
OdGUI I '('~::Drot.j:<-?0\:1
CfC C
c~
<:
c
C
rJj r,;c
CQ
r,;
8d9 tjCI)'[Gt:~:>CDX2~ ~OOt3ZI qc:~8d?:

c
c
c
OC C
ra c o
o 0'
o1 c7
r,: ('
&8
. ('J
!JdC\X)
l.
\:l:.li\C
J o
GO:DCSCllJ :::>
\
.\CI)Q) ())IQGQ:J9S
J U .T
!D\:I.S.\C
-,.J o
8;)0)QO)CO:ro
ll -[ t.
coo '"r c~ c c: r,;c c c 1 a
tJ~OO?CO? G\:I?C~:qmGUJ I 'Pe"o:>rot5:<-?S\:I ?jl:l m9 tj0~00C~:>:::D2tJt 'fc:;oC:j:l
r;:c- 0(" .
l:ff~?tcC II C CCC C C c C C C' OC
CjC:fJ;;l')~ m:y.>~\:l:~s GOO?CSCID J 1CI):UJQG09f QJ~fO)G::D? !D\:1~\:IJ?:<pr
C' Q C') C C CfC C'C CO
:::lUGS!itC \:I:'D;J?o:lUI II \:I:'D::D C\J())QtliCG :>::I G~?COCG:::DOO: :x>:>:::lJ.:i)('Q
t:. J o C.:.1....0 c.:. a.~ o L o c :.
c ~oc c c c c c o o , o oc o c c c
coco:>:<D?
Jl o
\:1 .li\C::D
l
CG:x>:>cc:J
o -1
Gro:>cQcml co:n::n oc:QL1mmm;,
t o ol t --L T
m::nro. (j
o ~ o r,; c r,:: c r, cr;::;::: c ~ c c 1

G::DGCI)~~G::D:> me:1ro~rq mroG~::~:>:nG0~c:9-=> ' Dt ~oe:1:x>~u;?9!G::D:>c:p
o c oc
O)ffiZC\JO)(D(J c QQ::l)
.li\CCI)(J: o Be c o 'T'
CJ CC:0)8JGUI C\J::l)O)~
c Be
C fr.lGO: <:;O):)):'D~')
c
T l J l 6 Jl 0 l OL ll .IL 0 -1 11. J . c.:.
C ') C 0 C C~ C C C C C G C C
~t<>'::D211 0;19?~c 'f>C':x>roe:1: <-?S~ ?j j 51c:roc:QJro~c; m21 (J2:x>~.
r, c c c r,;c c c c ~ c~ c
ro'P:Qm D('t<>G::D? BC8Xp:D~J mtlc:8dro;; p:nJCG09'f t.j~m9!G::D?,
c r,; c c c- c o oo r;: c- c c r,: cr:;;: c-
qs:l mt:lc:mro.p pmJCG01ol2~ ::D~G::D? !DGft:lSG:x>?~c:J Dt::\:(Ot:jC:
.~ o c o c- r,;oc r,;: c '"r "'
~ul:c-q:o~:J ro'P:cq:J):n't lolij~C::DtJSI ro'{):Q'=lJ?:!DGUI !DG'J:~OICDI
c~ c- . c . c rc ') ' c . o r;::;::: c-
'P~:x>rotj: <-?0\:1 ?Jr
m 9 ::n?~c !DG'I:U?c9r:::D? l9a:>OI::D2ll C?._Ge3?S
c o
Gn:l?ro~p U:'D')OO)m:::n
t.!
c oc- o
C.:. Jl
c- c~ o
L
c;,
: Qllol())G::l)')n:l(J~(7) ()~1(7) I n:lO)QO)CO:OJ
1L
g UJ iO t U il -r- t.
~'p: n:lG()J ~CI

'T' c
'P~::Do:>t.j:~Siol
c~ c
rJ? lD9::D?:'I3JC
c r,; c
tj0'[Gtj:>O)~C~
r,; .coc-
r;::;:::
00Gtj?c:~I::D2<.J:(::D?I
c o c ~
g)I~:Go:>?:U
c-
o:lrotl:J
m !Do;?Qro~:cq<Jp:
o
CDJQ[j:
r,~
r,;c- c o c c oc c "l c r::;: c e

G::D? 8;lijQ)8("8)J"{OC CDJQGCI)9f !Jd\:I~~QJ~roGO:OI(:)~ !JdGt_'_pc: GCOj:>ffi
. c oc c- ') a c o o c
OO?::x>?:G:U::D:'D II CO C G8J'):Y.)()I CQCCXJ: ~m:mro?: l:li?:OJo.1:n:
A L .:.t. -1 j I. lJ L ~
cr, c
o:>ctl~?::x>2 1l
C
c~;;:Gm: f,S ~'lc<:~c:~::~o:>
C CC[;C'()
:.>
Q
n:l'[ 11 <:~m;;roc;;.poo?: ~S ~'lc<:~c:
CCC C' C'C'
o:>C'()I v-
!D<Jll &
Jl
C
$0' )1 .li\C :Y.>QC<:IC: o:>
J t J
C'CC()
:::>
\
n:llol~C
. C
JLJ o
S?~l'):
1 ij
()
7
oC
c 8;li:IO)IJC
JL ""'-
i,;:C C
tJ.CI)GC0:D2 ,; . .
0 C" 0 c ') c c 0 0 ~ & c ')C
:JJ~:9 O)ffilf cqrooJG:;x)?CliJCDG::D? 02?~ Gd~:~G~Gfl:j: e:GCDJ?GOIC
c~ c \ c c c: 0 0
()) Q)C GCDI?m::>.) o::>?::x>:-DG?I G::Do,:> G!)d?CQCCDI !?'.)O)QIO)ffig(D(oll?:ro
JJ ~ c.:. J IC. l '"' -L- L ll
0 c 0 c r::;: c C'[; c c .c ') c (' 0
q?:~m~e:1::D2<:f?' ~Jrotlc:x>.roG::DiolJ?:!D'] coc~p:uJ::x>211 C]C:~f? 9~
c r;::;:::<> 0 ') C' 0 0 c C"
G::l)? . nmcp~J?:Gtj~ G:x>~:~~?~901::D2'11 !D<>;(QO'X[-~O:.~J?~::D2 G!D?C
(o) (oeo9-o~ 01)! ~~ J s;~.~f<n~ ~98~:QJ?ll 4l? ?jll

(J) G~~~~~.,(9)' (oe?o) ro?o1 4l~J~P '29'{11
(r) G~J~6J~') (q) I ( oe97) $?<:1:)')00~~1 4)-:lC:>J~f-:> 9onil
(9) G~J~g~" (4} (oe9o) ~()9& (~) 4l?<:~J~P 79~ 11
696 s~~oda~ Mv1 v:w~oa
"Where several accused persons struck the de~eased

several blows, one of which only was fatal, and it was not
found who struck the fatal blow, it was held that, in the
drcurnstances, it could not be said that those who did not
strike the fatal blow contemplated the likelihood of such a
blow being struck by the others in prosecution of the common
object, and that they were all guilty under section 326, :md
not under section 3 02, of the. Penal Coqe."
Q C \ C OQ C \ 0 0 C' ~ c C <:
q co9c<Xl:~co:>:o:>211 CXf<D9c<Xl:~Go:>:> '[a.p:zmp~i ~Gro~;; ;s ~'lc
<J8:oS (~) ~a~-

" If the common intention of the <recused and hls associates
by committing an assault was not to cause injury' known to
be likely to cause death, but to cause grievous hurt, through
the combined effect of the injuries actually caused was likely
. to "Cause death, the accused is guilty of the off~nce o~ qmsing
(:J) ~:c J !:JdoSCISJsn (~)1

\'ti1 rororo~?:J 4>?1,/J~P (ijeu
(ti) (oe9o) 9f0ff~98~:J 4>?1,/J~f' JjOII.
BURMA LA\ REPORTS 971
grievous hurt and not of culpable homicide not amounting to

murder."
972 BURM;A LAW R~PORTS
c . c c c c c c oc c co
oeG~;
0
:::o2 c;;;;"){)')O):;o~ roGyfS: 9ror.f:;>'tlc roote:~G:::O") ro~:'J:l:ip:~c

r;;: c c c:o c c o " c 'IR o J;;! c
G~Gyn"dtJO GQOX~ro~C9f n"d~'JII 'Jf"if~ o:Jq>:<J't}: ro'P:O;(~:QJLO C" ("
c: c: c: c: 0 c 0 c: c: C' 0 0 r;;:c: Q C' c: c: ::PCO<Y.>O?f:
0 ("
oo~c O"Jtqc:~:9r ~:::0211 ~2:roY::;>Jroq <:>:::o:::ntJ~ 2:c;;rop8c::oe::
G~Gf t:fa:>jtt
c
oe~:Sj ~I ~-~?Ot'lro
c c: cr,q "'Q J
c c: c
9roG~<f:::O"J 9f"iff!it ro'P:I:l<i_):~c rooororo;;: G<Y.>J;s8<:l
c: c: C' "\ c c-Zcu
Oj. T
GQG.Sn"d 0 ~OQC::J:?C:Q:::D:::O II I () c.:.
0
Q c c c- c c r;;:c c c' c oc:

2:corop8c::o2 Odoororo-r: G~Gfrot1o Grox~rot:::D2 m?a:>Od<fC:
r.::
0 o C C' C'o"\ C: C C' C ~
rr.l~~~e:Oi oxp:~::;>JlOro c;c:ro"J: roro:;>t:::02 ~ I ~fro oei:S9 Je ')())Gt<fO~
c: c:~ cr.~ r.~ ~ o r;;: c c oc c: c:
G')~())())")lrotOtj2t:j:lj~~=PG:::0?')1j::Oij~ oe~j ~I <i~cro 7 ')roG~~C
C' oc. c 0 c: r;:::,!( Q r;;:c: c 0 c "' c
qc:Od?: ~CCGro"J oxp:'i):~lO G~Gy~: ro2:0dtJO a:lffiQ')yOI G9j"J())OO?:
"\
Q:::O:::O 11
G
c 0 c:
OOGO)I")())O)JGOI roc l:lroQI(J) Q l:lQ GCIG.S
tlJ .A
....-
~
c:
J
c:
ll
c: 0
:1l
0
]l<SI T
8 :l:lt"):
lJ
Gffi"JCO:::O
C'Q 0
..,.t
0"\ ~ CQ Q C: C C C C: C C'
GO:~~~ G~Gy~:~o~p: G())")CIDffi 2:Grop3Ct:lt Gropro~?:::02 ID2:rol:l:
C
~c~o~:nt
Q C C
roCXXT.>ro.s: C 0 C:"'
GQG.sro o cc:roroot ' C' C\ C
c;;:;o")cbro:;J:::o:nl:l") C' C'~
9.sro.s
J "' ~ T Jl T l 1.. dl C:. J T LT L
0 c:
ro<:p:~o~'i):CJtC
C'
G>J']C:~c::::nrt
C" C'
oe~j
c
~I C'~"X>t']ro
"'Q C'
jO 'JroG*'fiD~:::O?
~
C: C r,;:c~ C' ~ C: 0 ~ C' OCo C: o C:

G')~())91:l2 tJO~. rotiDI:llj~::o:t ~e:e~ ~CCGro? oxp:'i):~l0
r;:;! r;;: c c c c ~ c ~ cr,:' c o c: c c
'G;JGf~:tJID'\y ro 9 ~3d:;lJC; l:ltj2~G:::O: Of(~ i?lft1t:::02 11 <:qrot~ffiQJffi
o o c: C' Q c: c .C o o c:C' OJ;: C' 0 0"\C:
ro :x>:=x:J.s :::>:G())I")8Ce-tl ~rot 0)1.\(.)0)c;;t GQGI:l")()):::O GO;O:;> C:
l L - - - lT l~ tJ c, t CJ l ..l tj1 J ..... f>l o
r;;:c c- e c c c:: o r;:;! G c e c- c- c
:.tl0:::0211 2:GffiJ?8Cc:ll 02")1] G~Gfe1: 2:eGI:l"JCffi [?.:GroJJ8C:::02
c: c c- t'a:ll:l:
o c e c c: '~ c o c
:::OG(X)")CQ)
~.::...::,
C'"\
IDIDQroC roe:ro 10 n"d<J<Xll:l::;>o 0 &oro:OJ: OCiolO).S;
c roro::::o
roc-oro
-[ T il
l
E3
-It')
:c:~~
l Jil
c: ro?an-;>ro
0
L.

:;>c.D
ll
\ \
:::o:o:;>:::n
L ~ IL
I JL
{#
.:I
C' "'
oot:::n:n
. J
C'
C...::,
L
11 20G8rororoc
-r A
("
t. eJ T
c c "' c or,: c ~ "\ o c: "\ c: c c c:

~l:l:ffiJCOI:::O~ II ~ljC g)1CJ?qr 'f"J:~:%'J:::02';t"J 02:ro~o~: f2:eoo8
o c- o c '~ r,;:c "'' c c r,;:c. oc: c-
GJJ:ot Grox:~"J l:l:::Dqjl:l:~~ tJID'JOI:::O~I Od~oyro?:tJ<? ~CCGO)") o:><:p:
(" Q c: C' c 0 C' c- c C' ~ Q c C"
~:~JlU()) e:GroJ?8COd?: roro:;>:::Oet oe~9 ~I ~~ro Je 'JffiG~CcjiDSJ e:corop3C
::0:::0C' o c 0 C: "' C: C"\ "'' C'
o:~;,t"J:roc n"dl:lOJffiUI G:;()")CQffiQ>OI:::O:::O II OOG
0
")CC: n"d(X)())O).s:
C" C'
GCIG.S
c.:, ~ 1.) 6 Jl. L 61 ., c..:, .tL T ~ T 0
r;;: c o c c: c c c- "fR c-r,; c

mtl<D ro~~m:::nro:::n2 ro11DGmpotlj~ roct:l::oe:; 11
r;:;! ("Q <: 0 C" (" c: c: 0
G~Goy~:gp: GffiXOOII OiLOO"J: OJJG'{>ffi GOO")C~ffiGO)? 0~~
r;:;! Q c: r;:;! ("Q C' C' c
-G;)Gf~: 2:Gro:G~JXro
G())")COO) ro~~ffi'JO)a") G~Gf~:~Jp:
c: c- c !:" ~ r,;:c-"' c- c- c: r,;:c c
f2:20G81:lJ?=t<? :;()~())JCGy~ tJ1001::0211 OdOOroro.y: G~fndtJID rom:;>
r,::c- C" C" C" OC" oc- 0 C' C' C OC' C"
tjc:::o2 os<JOO<? :::om~c'P ~c oxp:~:1 ~~ro 9r"iF'tlcro~ro
c crR c c: c: c c- r,:::c c o c r,;:c:
9t"i.Y~Gro") oxp:~o~wqc ~?:G<:pmo'Xjc:~:tjc::::o2 q'!-'c.n:;o<?rot'Jo
C' c: (" C' "' (" C' (" r.::c: 0 r,:
rooocro~e: t2:2oo8<JJ?:m o;,o:>~Jrooo"J:otroJm IDJ9c:~:0c:ot gDL
c: "\ e
OJOO) e:Gropscro
c: c c: c"\r,:::c
GOOX~m::t:tc::::o2
c: c Q"'
ID2:rog;1<? l:l2<-?ll
c: c
G~Gy~:gp:
J;;!
C'Q C' ,..f', C' 0 C' OC' C' C' f;:;! _C:: C'
e'l GmX{)
c o r,:c
:34Gf'T~ {)e:::~:~p:q G{)?~co;>:'};>o;> ~o:>t.'I<?:::O? ~O?q( mtqC'l'X)
~f:
0 (' u1o:>~ ~u1o:>2n
~~ c:zro~:
GCDJ~s8Jl OC' C'
~CCGO)?
C' 0 C'
GC!a.S~Il()(7)0)4)?:
0 C' "'
rorou I GOOX Cln:>Go:>?
C' C' 0
()OJ?q :34{):'}
0
0
crn>n .. t.'
!;:;!9
<il- T U
0
L
('(' C'
L
('
G;!Gft=j: e:o:>G::oo:> e:~mpsco:>~ =>e~j ~~
A1
e~?O"'!ro
~
jO
C J
('
'JCT.>Gt~'f
l
('
0
C'
.sm.s C'~
oxn:<:~Q:roc
C' C'
{)'XlC:o:>c:~o:>o:>(;j?
C' '\ (' C'
roc~?:o1o:>o:>u
'l C'
COG ?c('
9 T(' '- T l -- T
0
t.! 4
A;
- -~ .)
C'

_C:::
C:. J
(' ('
J

C
_Q ('
L
C' 0
~~:200s:3491 <X{Gt~o:>? qc:c:~ :Jdcomro;;:G~Gf ~~~mo:>ro~
C' C'C'"' C' 0 C'~ (' r.:..s: Q C'C'
G'JO&OO'J<;jafolo:>~ II ~~ ~'J:m o:>roet?Go:>?:Jd?:t.'l"; e:Gmpsc
c- c r,;:c c'\ c- c c c A;
Od?: :Jdcorom;;: ~~Gf:Jdt.'IIO rom~~o:>~ ~~ ~.pro J~ 9roGt'JlC~:~ =>et.:S9
c _<: c C' o <' <' <' r,;:c 'l <' o c- 9 c <'
qc:c:~ ~o:>m~ G')0&mcqjcro2: t.'l001o:>211 ~ro e:Gmpscm
C' <'f_<?
'J'W!1L axp:y~:~c
0
C' C'
~')~C:~c:~Go:>?
C' ' C
O@t.:Sj ~I e~'Xl i9CD
"'G jO Gt.CJUCI09J
C' A;
c cr,: c c- c- oc. c- c !;:;!
G'Jqmm:l ro~IOlj~Go:>:l G~O&C qc::Jd:l: ~CCGm? oxp:~:~JLU <e;~Gfe!:
r,;:c <: C' r;::R <: r,;: <: c c c <: r,;:coc c
mt.'l{) rom:;>9<;j2~ t:Jtroc ~:t.'lro:;>Jm QJ'JlOOOj]Cro~: ('j{)~c<:~~ro?:
0"' 0 <:
<:IOJUI ~ ~OJ211
~0 Sl - !:" (' <: C' 0 (' <: <: C' <:
~~~(;j~l:~ :Jd;;~:cmroc~o:>? m~uo:>~ mQc rocp:~()')Gro?
:> C''\ (' 0~ C' (' <: Q C'
o:>
~L
c:mm:;>o:>:o:>o:>u
--r ,~,. c.:, coL J
? <:~:r.Gro:roc
en ~
moomro.s:
T
Goo.sme:m
~-T
10
C' C''\ '1" C' C' _C o r,;:c c '1" c c c
GOOX~m~o:>? GS I O)CO)CGO';J:c:l ~('jiOOJ~ II GS I O)CO)CGOO:o:>~
_o (' t c ~ r,; c- r,~ c- c c- o r.: ,.
"?:JdUGo:>? 3XJ~:34~JC:(;jp:T<? t:::l~t:::l:Gfxn rooomm;;:G~roe:m('j{)
<: C' C C? C '\ C Cor,:::: C C C 0
rom~;; oxp:~ro:l~ Gropmoo?:~o:>2u C\)()')OOe:1x: ~~
OC' ~ C' C C 0 <: OC C
<;j~Gro::;>~coxp:l:) oxp=~e~:m ;c:muo:>2u ~;;:m ~co:xp:<:~~:O&c
c c
{)'XlC:o:>c:
--, 6
c: <;j~Lo:>' GSI'1"O)CO)CG:Jd:o:>o:>
c <: c c o c"' GOO')CC\m~o:>o:>U
c ::Jd<,j(\)0)()1
;\, L
c c'\
Ar~- .
c
c.:,
c c oc c _c c c o ' c- c oc c c ,
~{)~totC= qc:c:~rom~~ ~'It Q)CJCo:xp:~:~ G9J?roOO?:~
, C' , C' o , _Q c c (' c'B c (' c
e~:m roroillG<.>::;>o:>o:> 11 como:> oomrom GOO?cClm:;> :G.sJro roo:>Gro')
1' C.:. Ol T
GQG.S:Jd
J
(" 0
LwL
C'
.A
1!)0) :;>tlXl.S Grol?mro? roco:>c:Go:>?:DQig GSI O:X::OOC..G:Jd:o:>o:>

c <: (' "' ..,.. (' (' c
<!H T 19 L -rl IT JJ A ~ J G
c c (' A; oc c c c C' r:
<:l~o:>~Gt'JOOOOIO:JJ Q~Cro'f?:~:qc O'X)C:~::::o.p2: qGo:>? t:j::Wf?
..,.. "' c '\
GOI GU im~o:>~ll
c --~ r.:: c r:' ~ ('
0 '\ 0 A;
~:mroe::: Ol0?~ IO'X)C:roc~:~c: <:IDt~GeJ?C: G9;?9j
C' C' c
(' ~ C r,:C' 0 C CA; 0 A; C (' C
Gf?OOGeJ?C:t:::ltm? G~roG~O? o:>OO'Jl0':>9J ~G~'JlOSJ IOJ9C:~c:o:>~~
c ' c o A; c c c c r,;:c- c c
'JlOOo;l~OJ~ II CJ:{G~'Jll091 G'J~rocqjC ~roGro"J G~GfO':l('jiO Qo;(9t Gcqj')m
'\ C' C' r: C' r,;:!: ~ ('Q (' ('
co:l:Go:>? G~~o:>~ 0)~10 <;jt:::lfGo:>:o:>('j'i: G~Gfe!:~p: Gm')C{)m m~~m
' c c c C' 0 c '\~ c
ooo:>o:>o:>u
o ~
0
L ~6 U l --T A
('
com~mm:;>1mm oxn:roroGroJro !:>C>:<S
1:1J\) 102:10:l:m? GSI..,.. 0
~ c c ~.sm?:
rocrocGm::::oo:> c Be oc c
c !:>Cir.axn:UCI:~c c o c 'l
C.:, JT -u- -- l ........~ J ro ?:e~:<;jl?:roc
1J ll A
~
JL
rorou
L
B~A LAVV REPORTS 9i5
'976 BURMA LAW REPQRTS [1965
c- c- c- c.., c- c c- c
oeli~ Q
e:Gn:>J?SCro:;c;c:otroul GOO?C~~~~ ~0?:cyD0? O)C~C:~GO)?
0 ~ 0 C' '
_c;: c 0 c c- c- 0 c- c c c
~~: c:1 ~'Xlc:m roco:>e:o:>:n n co~gt:>l:>::::o:n oars"' Q~o~roc:m
c- c:
~: Jl 2ll -. l 0 c:, ;.. Jl tJ l:.:. c. J lJ ~
r.:c- C:::: c-
~Gf c-~M:
C" 0 C Q C" OC C" o C
c-<:
!JJ~J?: [j0::0~11 <:lfG~~ 2:Grop3c~?: ~ccGro? o:N7:<j)::J!Oro
GCT.>J?3Cet c c r,:c c- c ' c c c- c ~
0 !JJcomo:>f: G~Gf~[j0
rom:~:~ O~CS9 ~I ~yro j~ qmG~tj09J 000:
CT.>~ II e c- c c- c c oc- c o c- j;;;C o c- '1
e:Gn:>J?SCo:>~ 'jy~y~C ~~c:~ oxp:'J:t:>p:qc G~GyroL:J~ otroul
c c-\ c- ~ o c- <" c- r,:oc-
GOO?C~m~:n~~ ~Zld~IO'XJC: :n~ OOGCO?mOOCO?: "'ti~CGO II
Q C" CJ::_ 0 ~ Q <:" C' Q c- c- (" c ("
e:Gn:>JJSCI:I 0~~ G~Gft:j: e:G~:Gt:>?Croro~: c.c:'C? e:c;;mpsc~~
'~ 0 c- 'l c- ("\ '1 (" 0 c- (" 0
0? ~1?: (\)(}.)()! GOO?CCl0)0010)J"Xn roGo:>?ro:n: 9J())9JO)I
6 A. 0 L bJ C -1. t C.:. U
r,:c- c c _c;: o oc c- e c c c- c- c- c:
~?:[j<? :ecsq ~'0ell 100u:l<(C:~c 2:Gn:>J?SC::D~ t:l~::O~ 'J:t:>p:~c
c-
t,l:YlO):Ylc ~gg1?:~ mrnroc c- o c- oc- o c-
CDO)UI'l c- c-' c OOCc-oc-Bc
GOO'JCCIO)Q::D:Y>O:: o
~C C! gOGO II
1:.:, 1:.!. JL tJ ~ L t. L ~ o C. -"i l J1
Q c- c- C' r.: c- c r;::: c- 0 c- c 0 .
e:Gn:>J?SCO)~ G~Gy~[j0 o:>n:>:tjc:~'P f~:euGsgp:rq G::O:J?~?
~\o~ ~\o
Groo:>?
o c:c- (:1
!..O
:t:> m m:n
C.J o OIL
c-
:lcnG~ I ?
6J IJ
c-
J 6
c:- ~~:nm
t:>?:wc: ' c-o ro 1 ~ucn
c-e-o romo:u
0-1 C:. L OJ l c;;L
c-:"1
1
c- 0 c:- ~ c:- ("(" 0 cc
0)~11 ~~C G~Gfe:l:t:>p::n~ 2UG8 0~:mt:>:(:lp:rq GCD?CI~,Y~?
~ c 0 _c;: c c;: ~ c c ..,., c
GC\?ro:>~ qc:qr(;ll ~~o:>~p:CJl romJl:roozmcp' ro'P:<>J:t:>p:o:>c: rot;;;
0 r.: c c (" c- (" c- Q 0 c- c- c- f,\,.,....
oxp:~ [j~y:G4Xjf GOO?C~CD"f5 ro~ro2 GU!~C9f<jC: 9JtjwG0
000)
00
..... -1
0 c- c-
0(J)CO())
t c.
O)())CO?:m?
0
GOO'JCCiffi
("
61
'6g:-rx.n
c-
c-I
c-c-
CDI~()())
6Jl
0
~L
c c II
G~-?COCO):Yl
c.:.
0 0 C" (" (" <:"0 C:::: (" Q <:" C 0 C ("
~~ GOO?C~OX)y ())?Oy~jGt:~?C: 2:Gn:>J ?!JCOO?: ::OO?G0:o:>2t OOGf'~
, c r,~c c- c-r.;q c c- c- ' c
rocomo:>y: G~y~[j0 ')y~fl!l: ox:p:~:qc 0'XJC:~:~o:>? oecsj ll
'lG c- cr,: c-r;~ '"I e c:- c c o c- c-
e~?O"lro jO 'jmG~tj OOT0tl~tl:G::D'? ro:~tj::D'? e:GmJ?8Co:>~ ~CCGcn?
c- ~ r.: c 0 ~ (" (" r.: c (" r.:c- ("
oxp:'J::J[O ~~y~:~[j0 0{ :ott~ ~~O'dQJC: tl~~~~ I:Jifo:l~
c- ~ 0 r.: ~r::::: c-
~1()<!? ~:[jcn~o:>~ n
l9
n:o
.)
''"'"
.)0.)
ol:eroofl
.)
aoc:eo
.) .)
~b w c c aco
.)
c ,
:k:,rooA:cbco-o~"J.OAo~"J.O
"
:or:l:Acc :or:looo:Abo
-,o~ .:to!j .>::I.Jo .)=::~., .l
bee (oo) (c) ~ Ach ,)
., ..,
aeoc .)~cccooot.oo
., , , r v
co:Gewoem
,.
:c.Acccorocc.oc.coe
n , ~
IG!!:e

cl:lvc-:o ooo:A
bo
.:> - ' 0 .) . .) .) .) :J .) .) .)
, 1:1 "'
w :c.mAIOO 1r
".cooooro 11 "
:<.Accroroccoc.coe-aoc:eo ~ 1 <1 r~
oosamc.ccecoaJe <> "b c.~fl:(l)co
ocoA 1
0 ' d ..;) .) .) .) .) .) 0 .)0 .) .) 0
nc.ob
.)
cr
COC.CCC.OCOG
~ .)
Ll6 SJ.'tlOdffii M V1 VW'tlfl1:

uc.rcooc.c:2 olPe<.b!Soccoe>~~~ coc.ooe>
.J e .J .J .JO .>
COo:>
.J
Cl>hlrocnc.cocc
.>::.:!
c.co~:IS
.>
l~occ:2
.>o e
n
10 :ec~
uf 1.,., 0
3'J'
. ...
.)
-~~-a
SJ."'d0d'31! M.V1 VJAniDH 8L.6

'1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 979
g))ro~~g e:Gro:-GnTa)'):cro roG-:J&:roy~ :y~:~ ~Q~:x>~ 11 oe~:~

(' (' (' (' c C' C\ r,::;:: c c c
~?GJlOo:l2; oxp:oc SdG'J?C!SdOill ~?GJlO Y9CXl0 Gt?l!Sd~ro roe;rom Q
;;: o c c r,;:c c c o ' c ' o 'l c e:<>~*

QJlO~G~o:>~ I!)?QJlU'1!o:l') t:JI!)o:l2;11 9c:qrro?! qj 1ii!)GO')')C~ Cfl!'JY! c"
o 'c c c c ' cr,;:c 'lm
!<:
1m c q~~= o1 jlt
C0')!~o:l2; :;q:x>e;<pro2: YotCXl(;l'ff 0o:l2;1:]~ GQJO~e!Go:>')Gel')~l
or,:: c c o '1' c c c c c..;:, o r,q c
<X?t:JC!QJroqr SdGOI <JSC GO')')O')QJO')YJ?! 9CXl~CD9) 02;-:l~ ~.;[fill
mm:y
T-
mm:o:>
-r :~ ~:roc
('
.'ii!O>~ro::nroG::n
J
c c
ro "
::nro0
L!.. l
c \ C'0
00GW!Qo:J::DII
o C
0 c
coG.s?ro
ot T
c c c o' \ c c cr,;: c c
0?QJ[O::D2; CD'P:OC QJ[OQ:(~G::D') qj SdG<fC!SdOU) 0?QJ[Ot:J0::D2;11
g 0\C' COQ 0 CCC C C')C
~!GQ!O')
!,..,
COO')!4)
:ii0G())':JCO')L :::>!GSd!CXlSd?!
l. AI J c Ol .
O)U)(\)OQ.S
I.- lT
rororo
0
CD~.0C I!Q(,)g
J J -~
c oc c c c c c c cr,;: c o c c o c
CO?!o:l2;~[9C!o:l2;"CD2;! 'ffrofo:l2; 0o:l2;tj~l SdG()) Gffi?ffiQJmqr~c
O\ c oc \ c c o Q o c c
Q
roG Go:m"JI C:::>!GQ:u
ro0::n::nromc:r
LO U., L
mAJr ~ccGm?cm
J
:::>:Gro:mm
l C L
.sroe1.>
l C
C C OC g g C\ C OQ C' ..C g 0 o t;JC
GO!Sd09f SdYf. 80XJ QJijCD~o:l2;11 CX(09CQJffi'i e:Gro:qrm ~J?~QCIC
o 0 o ('\~ C' <' Cf7:C\im C C
oxp:Y'J!q( ro~QOC~GG::D"J002;! YGSd"JCt:lC~~GQJ IISd~Q~:::ne;roe;:
o ' o c
Yroc:m:x>OC c c SdQOQOGOI
G\D')(l)QI()) ';2 GO)"
c c 'l'C Cill;;Q::Dc o o
C SdU)Q()) c
0000
IL 1! o t. lJ -~ - -~ "' ~ ll o tL l
0 (' ('
otmGro:::oe;n
g o o oc c \ c cr,:c c Gf7: c c
2:G~!ffi'it00bJ!q(84b1f.Sd~C!qj t0G())')CtjfGCJ!G0'JfC'"J'JDL<XlOGOO~?m
\
o C
C'
CO?!Q:::O::D 0
II O)ffi!Cl!o:>m
-( Jt! ~l
('
Sd(\)U)O)())
6 IL
c: (,)~l :::01:'
GO:SdOcc Cl
o
())I' Yl?!(l)0
6J U L
(' c g (' (' 'l 0 r,q C'
O'JY!~Y!;;Q!GO:'Jf G9J':lffiCO"J!G::D?SdQII 02;?~ ~.;[fill O)'P!Y O)'f>!
::n
a. @:ro mm::iicOC'
-- -~: t
o 0
rom:Cl:o:>::n::n
-l- JU c:t C.:,
rom:::OY"J;Yr"J:
U
C C 0 :x>'
C c r I C L cc:ro~
O.C
Q C C \
C'?'JYCXlC Y::Dffi::D romrom GOO')CQO')'J(,)C'l)())J
0 C' C C C C 0 o OC"
~I')(.)QQC
o&1 C
ro GQ!.'ii!C
JL4 C.:.l 61 C:.t. Ul"'il LLIJO
c C' ('g g 0 ~ (' (' ' ('
~OQJLO~ G())?<JCXl 2~C0q( ro~2?C1nYJ?! GCXl':JC!Q'?Groo:>2;11 2~gm
oc c c c c c ~ r,;:c Q o c
o:>'J?!80G88d<J.{C! romrom GOO')Cilro'Jf Sd~GO::x>t:J<?I e:Gro:qrroro
(' co ' 0 C' c (' (' (' ' ('
Oill~~G-fGo:l? qj YJ?!~ GO!SdCJG0'Jf 1j!ffi O'JY!CX(o:>OO~ ~Gro:x>e;ll
g o , c o r,: o c..;:, fR 1m c 17:' c c
t!Gro:qrm qj O)G(l)')C~ Grx~ro9) Go:>tj<Jt SdGe:1')C!tj~o:l211 (j)Jf
' c o oc c c c c c r,:c ;;:
qj o:>Gffi?C~ o:>? o:>'P:,cm 'J!ell O'JY!CX(CXlOO~QJffiSd'J tjyroe;
0\ c 0 0 ' c c c 0 C' ..;:. g
'J~~G(\)::D2;11 9~ ~ o:>Gffi?C GO!SdO'Jo:l2~ YGffiJ-fOG::D!9JI e:Gro:
0 OC o~ C C C Cg Q o 0 C OC' C \C
o:>m ~cro oo:~c SdOQU[OY Go:>"JYo:>CO:::O o:J')!Gmro o:>Co:>.S!Q .scrl
L -u L 1.- 1 J " J-. ... o -T L T o TL
OC ~ 0 C' C C'Q G C 0
~J?<lG'aC o:>'f>!Y oxp:~e:J!~!q( 00GOO:GO:'Jf Gro':JYCXlffi o:>OO~GO:~
r;;: c o ~ c or,: o c o cr,:
:x>r:~~' oe;')~ o:>'J?:~~:mroe;: ~t10l?f':l~ o:>'f>:~:QJ[O~ roctj
g c C' r.<? c ~ C'~ 0 c C' 0 1m C'
ro0'JCQ9r' mttm oxp:Y q:>'P:~e:J:ro?: ~fel?=otm:x>e;n qrGe:J?~
c oc \ . C' 'l' 'l.C' 17: (' ,....;:. 0 C'
o:>m:;qc'f> S'd~~YJ?:;~ GOI GOKDGo:l? tj0l?f?o:l2 ~~:~G'J?o:>N'J
c
G0)::ne;n
oefi~r
.
Yromm:yy
L ~- T JL
0 :~c
~ C" C"~ e 'T' 0
UOXDO) I e:Gs:l:-GSI CO?:OXlXD
C"
c.'" c:.:, ~C\C
OC"
l.f
mco:y
-- -r
0
o:OJ
0
::nO)~
0 '"'B
OC~ :
J
rg II
!J.l(l):;> Q:.SYG:l:>?
OC"
!J.l;;)l~
"lC"
000)(\)0)
(" ("~ (" 0
Y~O:>Q1
etco~~ '] +L.
("
U.
c-r,::c-

~r,:;:::
tl. kT
0 "l
c:J
~ (" (" C"
C ..LJI
("
~~ . GOOJC~O)t:,C: YIJI.t:jGOO'?G~J II ~s:l~l s:lGt_:ec:s:lOIJ<DYJ?:~~ vQ)
("A; C' (" (" (" ~ ("~ c r,:;::: (" r.:: ("
~~: o1 J"
0 0
OXDSJ '~:OJ2'jc:1 mU?t..,'i!:OJ~<;c: tl~t:12!4f4( s:lGt:lx:t:lc:cp

00 (" (" 'J:~r.;:c-~ ,..A; (" ("~(" (" C' r,:;::: (" 0
~~ ~:o:x.>ooGro:~tj:tjG>~I
~'J:ro ~OX90)tiCOOC'jf s:lGt:jJC:Y~
0
GQ)')GQ)III :'l'X'OQ)C
C' Q 'T' 0
:Gs:l:-GSI CX>?:roOJ:n
(" C' ("
G())')C:l:>COU)0Yd?:YI?: 4)
'"
IJ ~-L 0 2 Ol c JL tJ
r,:;::: r,: C' c- _o _<: c- c- c- o c- ' o _c ocr.;: c
t:j:l:>[9~1 <;c:~ CQO)()U)~C 5!Gf:l:>~ ~ Yp:~ oxp:'i):c:-4 !J.l(:l~[j~
C' C"C" OC" C" C' ~OC" ~OC" 0 C C' C" C"
OQY:rou C: :ny:ro:n: c: ~CY ~CO)I ~r.m~ :;:>~4)1 GQ)?COJCOU)
-I C ll l L l C r ~J IL
:l:>Y?: s:l~<:8':1G9: ro?q(l)OJ~ 20GS'lSY

(" C' (" ("
? () (
~ <D
)
s:l9 4>2:4>?:~:tjm
(" r,;:C"
(" 0 ("
Q.SC\):)):'1)()) O)I ~Um
("(" f)
0)00:)) '"CI m~'" 0
COOCY("p (" ("
<.9CC\)4)0)') (" ("
~OO('f)G:l:>?
C'
- IT L c l AJ L -.l .L C:::J Ji.. L ~ 0 J J
~~~~<.lp:!)d-:>:
(" 1::::: c-r,:;:;
r}dGt:j?C:t:j?:~~~ II
' ("
OOG9 :t:j: GOJ?
~
20GS
r:
tl~f'
C"
Q)C\OGOI GU.('f):)) Cl CX>
'T' :) C" C' 0OXI.S?O)0 s:lG>:C\elJ
0 .<: YOIS~C
'l C" OOC' ~
.:D~C:
Q C"
4>']COO: 0)
o C'
-~ I. T L L -~ IL J o Cl.JL L
C" C" r,;:<' 0 C' 'l C" C" C" OC" C" C" 0 C"
'Jfs:l~O)I :DO:>?U)8';1tj4) 9<DOIGOO:>C~~f ~CCGOO:> G~Gf<JtO~ro~:
~ 0 0 c-r,:;::: ' ("
g)j~:ox~rot:j?:~:n~ II
e~ c-r,:: c- C' c- c-A; r,;: c-r,:;::: e "l'
C'?9IJI.C\f0t:JC:;~oro~ro9J I oxp:~:YJ?:i94>t:jG:l:>? e:GOO:-GS I <X>?:
0 C' ~ C' (" (" ~ .'il 0
~0) oxp:Y<DJ<:O?: COG SO) tj~?f:CX>:>:G:l:>? :))0):))?~ s:lYdl ~d[ :~
.
C" OC"
GOOJC::;>~C
l
C"
~:n II 3dG
c:.
6 JC: C" OC"
s:lOCs:lCO
L
OC"
L L ).1
C'
~COOICI C'?Q
Q~C" 0
IL
t)(' o
0\C:ro roc:c
l ... II
C' C" OC' C' Q C" C" OC" o '"'"
Q.S GCOI?<DCX>:>:oli:C:::O~ II <:'X!YQ)C ~IYQ)G:l:>? s:lY.SY s:ltO~ c:1
1T ::u l c I Jl c uJ T:~ J ~.
oc- o (;';'" c c- c- r,::c- c- o o ~ c-oe-r,:;:: c-
s:lY~C>t t:lcoocGo:cq;; G"ij:>mro:>:t:lc: >:x>~~ DL"?J~Cr..=~:::oe:;u
o
::nmroc
C"
mm:c;::Yu:>:O)U)Q)CO)
0 C" OC" 0 \ 0
CX)O):)) GOO?CQ<D c:
C' C"C" IY. ' G:;>lll
Y l ~
-1'-- A ~~ -L Jl l L L <>L. 61 U
<:: 0 0 C'
00 0 0 0 (" 00 0
mro:YYYI?:OOC
~~ -L A 1J ~
mm:ro
-- -l- L
rocn:~ro:n:n YY())t:ll s:lOO s:lGQIO) YYQ)
-l- L C..:.. L &. 1J l t.
0 C' OC"~A; 00 0 ~<: C" 0 00 0 r,:;::: C"
~U)~DL9J' YY~~ :::O<DG::DYJ?:~ YYCQ<D Oj?t:j9:::02:11 mcp:roc:tt:
'"'"C:l
~:00:
0 '" (" (" (" C' C' C' C"f':C' ("
.SCOICCO:n: ~GO)I.SU:::OO) s:ltOQOC CaDCY <.9CC\:>li::lC:G>:x>;:D
l T lJ C:. \IT ll :L Jt 4 J L:J ~
0 0 C"~ C" OC' C" C" C" C"OC" C" o
0)0) ::xJt GSO) QC CX>?:~~OOOOC: OO<DCOCP GOO?CQO).'>C m :n:n II oocn:l;.:
'*L L ll L U L 61 L C L- U
C' C" 0 C" OC" C C"OA; C' C"~C" C" C"
s:l~r1~ OO"Jyroc;p:~ GOO?C~O)tjf"iJCCO~:r G4>?~CX>y:'J:::02:CX><D<l9J
0 C" C"O C' C" ? OC' C' o r,;: C" C' . C" ~
roc;p:ot oxp:< ~><9m~c;p ro<9ro<9ro~c.oY:i?1ro:n~ t'JG>rom:n~ u g)l
c- c- c o c- G cr,:: c- c- c- c- '~ c-
Gy<;p~C c;peoro~:;>c:Yp:~ G>G>GOO:G>cqct:lc:t<: m-re:::cc.o ott:l?::::oe:; 1
c- c- c- r.;:c- c- oc- c- r,;:c
c;peo~<c:YJ?:31 YJ?:G~~ro:>:tl~ <f4>p~m 9cm-r::::otl~' SdG'J:U?t
c (" r.;:c- C' (" (" (" - 0 (" ("
G>OO;;o:9:n~ tlG>G:::O?C02::1 'PC'OQ)~ <DJil:~y~YJ?:~ .:l:>~GCOJ?G:l:>?
~ (" (" 0 (" (" c! 0 'T'C" (' (" ("
t:la)!J~ . GO:')y OO?Of:l:>~ s:l~:')S'X>UI 3 . <DJG'f'<DOJ~U 'f'C'OOO'f.
(" 0 t) C' 'T'A; (" (" ~(" C' 0 ~C?
<Y.>Jil:~f~~~ ~')G~oq<nG<.91 SJ :::oc;GCOJJG:l:>? tj4>8~ GO:~ ~
u2ccGro~~
.)~
:de~::~ce~Fil
J .:J .J:..J
cc.u~1e~
axrroe>e.G~W
.) 0
coolre:(!,:dxo
.)
ICC:cc:ococftoe~
0 \ .)
f~co&cc~ 0w:cr~~W
.)
&:!cc~~ce&->
.) .)0
eocc~~:~ccoe>~
.) 0 .) 0
4b:oecof,Pe~(")ro~oo:)hl
.) .) .:>0 .:> .:> :_j
ccceb~&,e
0
a>e>
G')l~Si:cro:::JQ:cee>G<l>
..., ~.) :J .l ~ .J
w:d~:;;cbco
o ~
IGe>Ghl~:c
.> ::J
r~cC>e::Jb(J)ro
o .> e
11~:cc:ccro:~
::> e e
~cqe>OO
.:> ::::::1 o
uC2cc::J~Ge>
.:> .:>o
~ba>:cbco
.:> e
cocoftl~ C2ro~~Geo2:cbco
e .:>
C2cc:cP("):~
.:>
:cbr...o 0\;:tD::J::J~CO
.:>0
~~hbQwe:xe~hl &117. 11 C2cc:oe~ce~hl [;coMe
.:>:! .:>::::1 .) .:J:_j 0 ~ .:> .) .),_J J.)
w~~w
0 .:>0
cccocProe~
.) .)
~fb:,b~e
.) 0
Ge>GQ.):1 0
w:cPOC2cc4e>fl::)CIJ
.) \ .)
&of~
:dxo IGe>a>Q .:>:1 0
w:dOC2cc~edeecofe
.) .) .)
:~:cf,
.)
cMbJ .)
be.cGeoc:cbco
;cco:ceeoo J
IGC>W:S~
C'o-..L1ee '5'.:; .:>
f;~ce~hl
~ .)~
coolre:e,:cbco
0 .) ..., .)
,~froorolu0
w:d~&n
0
CCCe>Ghl:hlcohl:ee co:d~:bCOCWe> e:d~:~e ~coo.:;,cb ~CWe>OJ

.:>:! eb ::1 .) .:> .) .) .:> ~ o
II CCCC<l>h] ::Job:~e.G ~ccbwcbe~C<l>e> CDWCCO w:be~C00CCII!itc
ur Ll') :ro~&o .) .:> :1 .) 0 ..') ..') .:> .) 0 .j. ::> 0
:'cccC2hl &C2hl C2ccro:cbco co~ro tGe>a>hlct!cc~co &:l!l ccooi':D'J!Jfiro
~-.,
"'
.:> :_j .:> :_j .)
~~&,:;,~ect; co:d~:C2Ge.c~e.c
0 0 .) :!.:> .) 0 0 :.J .)
..') :_j ta>oohlC2cc:~co:Xoco

:ee>:c
e ccce>C> b' &C2hl
'S'o ..') \ .J:l.:> .J .:>o
tcdG~ E:d~o.xb
.) .) .) cccoc0:cr~ ~cQe&
.) ::::::1 0 IICCCCCCDCCC:~re:roecl;c.
.) .) .:i
b
186 s.niOdtrn M.v1 vw~og

Utccchloco
.J ~.)
coolre4~~~
.)
CCO~::>::>~
.J o.JO .)
WCcOeJWCO
.J
~cC2o tnCCccloOihl 4b:o~ wi:D:o~te~~ cn,g~ro toccdco~:)cc w:C,iffi
o .J L .J~ .J o o .J .J \.. o o .J .J o ~
x Q~&
::::1
.:>
11 ro&~ 4coccww Mwrecn~ccb wero ~c~oa :->IN~wc.w~.
o L ., .e ., o ., ., .:> .:> o .:> ., "
cnr8ero
.:> L o
tcwto
o \ o
l:cccoc.cc~Oihl
.J .J _,::J C2~b~co~
.:> .J
tn::>*:LJ~
.JO ~
:obl:@re:~cc
_,::J .J .)0
.
,d~low:~bo
.:> ;:J., .:>
w:c.r~ \IW ccc~e~
o
ecnowco t~to:c.co
\o .J.:> .:> ::> o
1ce>-:ro~:a
,J.;
olh>
e .,
tnWC.W~COI8ero
.:> .J L o
C.~:::>cbl:;,:CPW
.J :J .J
Co
o
(co) (c) C ~SO :)c.Q~&, IIIOe::>~
.) .J ::::J o \.. '\.JO
.,obl~
~
fG:4k~~oco-,;;)
'5' ., .:> .:> 0-j oC.O:W~~rolffi
IS ., ~ :ok:le:4c5hiC'e:b~
'S ,cb01h1 "::1, ., :J, C.Oc~oc
o
:::>CO I~C.Q~Ccc~4~2u CCO~COCO(I) WCoeG4b:oe>::>co:)~ to:b~l:l/:oocc
,) ,) ::::1 0- ,) ,) ,) ,) .) :J 0 ;'J.
ll:J:cr~:c~cccnco&:occo~
;:,- .:> ,)
M4b:o~ ,)cn&.>rocwro 0w:b:;,ro:)ero
.) .:> ,)
t~:cr~
::>
.
:c~cccnco&:occo~ uo~ :ok:l:c.cohll.,~ c@Pwco :C2row:oc.8~i:Dtec.cc
.:> .J L o .) ::J :J,J.; o " o .> ::::J o o
w:cr~:d
0 \
IW ccnbw
00
:C2~o
.J
CCC~.)0
:te::>h:c~cccncotc::>CCO~
.)0 ,) ,)
gi~:cbco 0
C2cclliC2cc01
.:> 0 .)
:d \IW ccnbw
00
:cc&o
.)
ccc~o~}Q~ :oQ:@re:~ l:ok:low
.)O:J .)~ .> .JO .J::J.J
:~bo
_,
uroe}Qt"J
L ':_j
:ok:l:o&&!co
.;; ::J .J .:>
rwroc.oro&tc
o o o
,ecbe:4c5hl~:b
_, \ _, :_j,
~
o
ur Lo ;en~&o ( co) (c) flGO c
"
oeocb& IICCOCIOe:~@b cccw:lr~~f)eG bws C.CCOO)Me
" o " L \ " o IS .JO e e _,
:,~
o&>:lPfl::->ei!i ccc~Wl:r(;Oihl woo:> w&>cccc<ll oi;:hl~;~ o~bl~ 1Cf.J6)CO.
:f$:~ _, \) .) :::J L _,:J .) o -' _, ~ .) :J .)
co:CCO :CelCCCOCOtc::>CCO~ IIIOCO~fl C2cce:~@b to:lrfl~fleG CCC~tcCu
e _, _, L ., " \ ., o ~ .)0 o \
c.~i!irolffi
'S &!cccoMe
_, _, _,::>Co~:cbco .)&!cc:J(;Oihl
L _,:J :ore:::>Pero
_, .J :c~cccnco
_,
C2cc
_,
86 SJ.~ocimr M.v1 vw~n g:

~eG:~ C' C" ~~

~~o:><OOlJ ne ')~Dt~~C:::De?Gro')COflC\X))::O~'):~J'):OO~OOG'J:CD')<">'l(.l)
q;::c C' C' C" C' C"
.. ::De
(" C' C' cr::: C' 0
eoG8~~CDJC~C :~::De? ~5!o:>2fl1>0)'JQ)q)GQ:>:~:i:j<J.>'}ftj4)::0~ II
C' 0 (" 0 C' r.: C' cr.:(" C'
~:~~=
<-:6 Q ~ .._.Q ~ Q OC" C' C C' C" C'
2:<o~:~ 02 ~ G~Gft:i 2:0}>::n;;:ro <pew 00~:))2::02?"'~:
~~: o1 Jll c C" G r,::c ~ C" C" '1 C" c c
GroX~~'): roe:t)oot:pc:~op <DC~'J:01::0211 O:>UCD ~::De?
~l'):ro
0
come>ICDCD
C' 0 C' C' .
~ro'i1:roc9c:1 oc~ mtxle> c:roccc:1
C' C' ("c :roe>
0\8
:
cJ L 0 t. rt. &: c. CJ -t '] c. I l
o., c r,::c ' o G o coc c- G 'T'
<.J9,01 JI ~OlJC:tj4> ~ ~p:fl1> 2:G~:({tCD ro'f?:OC~::D211 2:Gm:-G81 CO'):
0 0 C' C' C' C' C' ., C' \ C' 0 C' 0 C'
rooo::n
L <L
ro~4)C\X))C\)OQ.S:J;)roCD
J L~ 1T 6
CJ I :'}<:l:Go:e>::O:::n
C.:,
II COOOOll~l'):roro:::n:~ro
t tJ U l C IL
c o c r,:: C'\f,"? r,::c 'l c 'l C'
~:'<;: us~ ~;;>~:~ ro::DGO)')ro2: ~:t]o:>~cj: tj4>vi::D2? fl CJI:a:>e
'1 A\ ~C' C' !;JC' '1C' C' OC' OC' C' r,;:c-
O)gl:~ l tlfGU:'Jf 000\JfCDJG::D') 000ll51 o:>cp:oc <-iC~Oflro~:t]4>1
c c- G c- r,::c G ~c- f:::C' r;:-;
Gro')C~rou:> ::D~'): roe:ro2:t14>G:))') e:G~:OO'): tJfGU:~c: ~!)tit
~:mrocrocmc
. C' C' C' C' C' \ C' G 'T' 0 C"
I; 0 0 -~
oo c:moo.sT O:OlOl::D::l"l
l 0 C2.
2:Goo:-Gs1OO'):rosn:
. <'L
Gro')c::nIL
C' C' C' C' 0 C' C'
(\)U)~'):~p: OO<g<;:OOG'J: CD:J~(.l)O)~ euGsq SdCD')OO~u:> ~G'D~2?
0 (" (" (" C' (" C' (" \ C' (" 00
~9JC I
~ 0 _Q
4)::D::Droro 'l ("
c:. .... l CJ I:CI~:O
-,
G;>')CDt;:pcqc
c.:. l
C' 'l
l .
C'
c.
a., ("
Gro~:::n ~())roO Ifl 000:>4>00~: GOimo:>: rorom1
ll
C'
(\)(.)):))~'):
(" OOOlJC:OlJC: ~
I)
*'): (\)U)~f CD'!OO')
'1 C'OC' '1

<:mO:>GO\IXtCDOC C"Gro~::l"lC" ~())0:>0111
C''l
OOGOC'
'X :xJG:;,m
0 C'
tJ L
CI:CI~:
J -1 c l L c- - L C').S:
C:J T
\
Ol::D::l"l
(" 0 _<;.
~ID:Cic:J G4)moS')~C
C' ("
Cl:::DCKDQ)ICDO:>CD
(" C' 0 0
~roco:o:>:ID
'("C:l SdOlC:J;)GCl:
C'
C!. L , -- T J lC61- u l L 4 -r- l 6 6. -1
U):::JC:
r.;:c:- C" mroCDI
oliCGIDc:jS C'
~
~OC'
Q
e:Jc:JC:ro C"s OC'
~~g()') :G::O') ~sg,'):CD
0 g)Q:CD

!1.0- .T A -1 el L ~ J T" I L C1
~C" t C" C'
C" '1 Q C' OC' C' ' C'~ C"
tJCQ)C4lO:XK1XJ ~J::D<;:OI<~ e:O}>o:>;;:ro G9J:lm(\)O)CtJ0)211
(" (" (" 0 C' ("
rocO:(;l(J)ICOO:ro GroXX(\)(.l)o:>l:l:J:.JI'):m SdG())') rn:x>c !)';10)')
T U l tt U l
(" .. r,~ r.:C" C' 0 (" C' C'
00~ GO:tl: t]4>::D211 ~lDG9:~c;gp:t~ IJ9_G(\)"Jo:>G::D:~ ~Q)
C' C' (" 0 '' (" (" (" (" ("
B
::0 C Gro:JC\:>SGCl:
JT I
m4:l:QCD
L -,
,, :) r.: C' C' ~ ("
GroJC::l)(\)U):))~:l: ~OCmG'J:
'!::: C'
tl
r,;: C' C' ("
4
CD:JCD(.l)o:>:::D
("
A 1:.!.
(" ("
2oGo q t1~m tl~p;;:ro:~~c: t110::n~ 11 mc:r,>GO::De? ro<9m~
GroJC:::n(\)0)~'): 1
C'
t\.
- (" ("
O:>Umroc
b
("
G QC
Jl
C'
GCG
~
CJ1:QJ1co:>0 (" 'l
.t'-.
4:)(.>1: mGo:>') rom:~
A -L
6 ("
~ o r,::c:- c- oc- c _c c- c:- c- c:-
~p:'<;: mGCDan:tjs ::DCD~o:>~ll 2008c:J 'J~~o:>O>JCD rr.d'ID::O'J')
~;)ro:::n:
("
Grox::nrom::n~n:roCll
C' (" 0 c O?oro~ ~m
0
ro')mu:> C' C' C' ("
G4>XGCl?rru:l.S.
J 1.:.:. ll c; l lJl I. llo Jl :- - tT
C" C" 0 o~o C" C" C' C" C" OC' C"
I!)O):::D
C
II roO)OCO
-1. l
~roc
lJI 6
G())')C::DCOill::D~?:gu"J:
IL
lDO\IC:OliC:
U U
illC:<>c:
l
g~ C' C ' c:- 'l C" C' C'C' 0 OC' o C" C' C'
0).:::D
.t.C
~~1:co:
C l
c:ro:::n:
C.:,
OIOCO):l)
C
II 61 L "l L
CDI~Oro ~CCroC Gro'X::Droill::D~')!
t::. !L
C" Q 0 Q C'OC' f.:C' C C" ' C" 00
~p:::n2 roe:fl1lroe: roro~Co:>G~ -CI:(OOO'):tj~<JC= I qj p: ~e?:CD')OO?
(" '1 C" Gf:::C' r,;:c:- C' ')C' A\ 0 C" .'il C" C" C"
ro;;ro?uro') 9':'l~w~2~c:r:Js<Jc: ~oJc:~l{ FuL=~;;mm::net ooG~
~ (" <"A\ h C' g \ ("
moo~::n211 !r.lm<.l:>9J ::D') OO~:J: (\)U)~0: roe:~ qj *'): 0~2:
00 0 '1 C" '\~ C" G C" C" C"
O)CJ{l)')ffi
,-- ..L
CI:C~Y:::D:4>0l
J - ,- L A
:G::D') .
(\)(.).)~'): o:>8:o:>:::n
C. ~
GroXOX\)U)~'):
il
1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 985-
C'
8dQC8dGQ: C' C'
(J)')(J)UX))::D 0
I)OG8(J) C' ~
8;!(J)')8;l(J)(.))O,?ClJ 0
()) (J)I' ~?:
("
Ol!):x>: :~es~
6 , 6 u ~...- " 6 ,L.:-1 t a..~ 6 ~c
00 I) 0 OC' C' C' C' ' OC' C' 0 C' C'
(J)QU)')O)(J) OC~C CI:XlXl)9?:8d:>: .sooo:::n G.S~C~::Dro(I)ICI G<D'JC:O
I rl (, l J: I T l C l JJ n. E:c;~:
C' C' C' OC' C' Q 0 C' ~ C" C'f C' ('"
(I)U):O~:>:
C' ('
8dQIC:QJC: U)C:oc:m::nl :Jd())(J)OJO : ()).S(.l)(J)
U
('
i.J l
(' (' 0(' C' .
ILC.:. Ill c.T
(' (' 0 <::
:O::D GGC.U
c..!, c
&C
'
~G~l
.o1 jlli
o:>:m~::o::n O)I!)())ID~C GOI?(J)ffiUXIGO~::DII G<D?C:OCIX.l)~?:o:>ct~
l ~ J u "'-- ~, c. il "l
l lJl. l .::.
&.
~CD ~(J) (J)')(J)U)GO:')~
I '
0 C' C' ~
ZJ
C'
C').s::o::n :XlG80XD CO
T u. c-
C'
c
C' 0~
l l
~
l.!l
_<:: C:Q
OOGO:;m:G:O?
I L.J
ll C'f::C' (' C' C' (' (' (' 0 ('~ o:
ffi() CT.>'J0i91!):0~11GCD?C::li(<DU)~'J:8dQJC:~c:~~:~:'~ OJ(J)[j?:GI!)(I)'t
C'
~.:x> II GCD?C:XX:OU)~'J:~I ?:elJOOr/)
~
C'
IL
C'
u
_C ~:maO)I!):c
o C' ~ I 'C?.S:GO:QG:O?:-xJG8(J)C'::D
l '"'!L_.. :L .:"!
C'
CJ T
'
c-
0 C'
L -,c.:.
6 0
C' 0 "' ., ' (' (' ('

f!<.D:O~ OCJ:(<DO"> ~<D'[J: O!:~G0~9JC Go:>'JC~(I)U)OJ{}'):~J?:mo:>'[J:eoG8
0 C' ') C' .,........ C' 0 h. C' '1 OC' C'
~p:qc;c:1 oxp:~:~p:orc;c:1 <XlG~:4:r):cr--: r2?.:ot:ro:>~c:o~ H
. (' 0 ' (' (' (' '1 (' '1" ') (' 0~
GOJffi(I)'J~C
20G80':>Cl0(J)
1 l
GQ:;;o c:,.s:c:omc
IAc:lTTA
G.S'JCOOQIQI'J:CDC
T U ,,
GOI
l
c ~ r;;:c c " r,o o c '~ c oc c C'
:02? [jo:l.)f'J t10'Jt.XJ?.~~ 6l'=''i~GOO'JC G'J:~tl@:>r:~co.:>~ OOO:..>O:>GQJ II
Q~~ro~G:x>') BODf? e~90gp: GoTGoloSro?GO)') OOQ1~1 euGsel

(' ('
Q~Wo.lm Sd~O:O?'JO~C... GOI GOJ(J)(I)?GOJ'J
(' C' 0 (' '1" "' (' "Oli.S? ('COOOOJ(J)
(' 0 0
ro.s:
Q
rC.,AI " J .. J ...: T --1 "l L T

(' 0 C' Q (' (' (' 00(' ~ 0 '1 C' (' 0 (' (' ('
0X>OO: (J)(J)::DGX>?C I!)()(J.)0~1~C:a I OOGUIUYSCOOGO:Cl.s O)')O.S:O::D
l l c U;L :1 fJL L:. -IT T c..:.
C' 'T'C'
oxo:~:~ulOOOGOI ~ mtGcpm:o::n
C' C' 0 0 C' C OOC'
GXX.T.lO ::n~c:
"c: ~~OC' C'
~CGC.U?C';J
-- T ... ~ u c.:. II 000?
l ... . U..M.: Ll
C'O C' 0 0 C' 0 ~C' C' C' C' C'
G:O?C~Gt9JC~m?:l e<JG8~ ~::r.JO:O~ [jCOOCGO:'Jf GOO?(J);:)'j~OJ'J
o c _...s;, c _<: c c c c c r;;:c
~GOOJ~ !I ~~~m?: toG!jl;ll 9~U);:)J(J)OJ~ OOC~?:Gy:OtJ~I
0 C' C' C' C' '1" '1 C' r,;:c C' 0 0 C' C' OOC' A; OC' C'
<X('J~~o.:><;;Jm~~ GOI G()J(J)G:O? t:J090~~ VOO)()rt~C:9J !Xj~CG(I)?m
(' ('' (' 0
G::r.J?CQ(J);:)OJ~Q~OJ?GQJ II
C''1
~000)01 OOGf ?C:O)G
C'"f'=
?C m~ Sd~OJC
- ('
(J)I\ Qt?:m
0 :-)
C ,:ClQ:~GOJ?
(''
GL 0 QJ .. t :. 6.1 u '- I I
Q 'T' ? 0 ' 0 C' OC'. OC' C' C'
::>:G~:-Gc:sl co:>:o:>ro com1 Ql?:m mc:o:oc ocroc~OY.> G<D'XOJOOU)~':':
'-' I L6Jt.l:.. "t.- l L ' ' L
g CC' C' Q _<: OC'9 g f,';C' C' C' C'
roe:!:!I!)OJ~ e:G~:::r.J:>:J oxp:~:~ ::r.JQt~(J)'J3:l'J tlof(l)~ GU:OOO'Jf
C'O C' C' C' C C' C' C'
<D?Ot~J:02;?11 Go:>JC::l;?C.UU):O~?: OO~I:?OOG'J: (J)')~U):02t 200:3:0~
("('c:m ('(' .
~8'<:UOJC
(' g~ 0 . Q 0 (' ~ Q 0 ~ ('
cr.
c:::..; 0 ,iL
~?9 roo
l. .. L
m:>:oommoc oc: Q l
11 ~")Cl~m
- , !l L
.SU)
.. T
C'!::. C' C' r,::c C' C' C'
cxp:~~;:m romQ~I GOO'JC~mGU:L3c:::n~ axp:e(.)G~~~C)C:ioxp:~J<DW
c C' o C' Q C' _C C' o C' C' C' C'
$.ccc: mm::n:o::n 11 mco:~::ei o:>x.sc-mro:m cx::><:~:Gooxc:oro::n: Gmm
J"' t L C.:. C:. - -T !." T-OOT '- T C -1.-
C' ('(' 0 . 0 (' () f (' ~ (' . 0 Q ('
OJ:TI(J.)CDI~:;m GOJQ')OJ::DII OOG ?C ~()) mc:o:Q~:m e:>9~00c
C. "" bl L .. 1. oe Jl . C..:. "t. t . ~- "1.- Jt. 4l
1.!
C''
Qi~~o.:>:>
OC' 0 0
~~~o:>m
c-
CiJ:m GXJ:)(3(J)
g)]" C'fooco
C' C'
s OOG
f 0
x:~:::1 11
C'
u~ .- 'Jt\ L . L! ~ I 1 Jl
<" r;;:c o c "' c C' o C' C'
~:GCD'J O)(J.)')U) ooel!) ~(J)OIGOO'JC~mGO)? O~'J~ (l)mGCO?m
O C' C' C' Q C' C'O
~ccGo:>:> G~Gt~Jto 2:::n<0mp:r.n: ~:m m~:GmJ:g:eom')U) me~
r--' (' . (' (' (' (' .
G2J>::;: 'T<D<D!.I:CDCOJ~II
u4oc.co46o~hloc.o
.> ;, .)o:.:l.)
zc.gecoooec
:>
'l:og:OCllGroGrroeioe-:@4
o .> .> \.. :>
:Ac.ooc.l;e
.) 0 .)
cfroflk
.J 0
lbok: oPe:C!
$'.) 0 :> 6
tOGG~
.) .)
c.ccecc-:flco:@G
l .) .) .)
c.!-bc.ro:c.&o~:oc.fle
.) .)
:c.rflc.ccecc
3
oC.O:oc.h.leG!;l&lcc~hlalco-~66:h.lec.l"roe
.) .) :::::1 ,)~;) .)~,) 0 =:::::r.) .)oc.h':le~:oc.oGro
~ .) .) C.Proeioe
l,
r
:)~
uco
.)
cr
b
.:> ooc.cccocoe
l ,J
c~~cbro)
S.D:IOd3li M.VI VWliOH 98&

oefi::~
0 C G C
O?~:~oo~m ll ue:::n~fg II
t
oo&p:~oo~mll
C G
112:G0?m())G9?CII
0 C C e=G~-,e~
Q OC'
'g
C' 'l
9 C~ _0 9 9 C 9 OC" C' C e=q)t01Jll
OO[':o;leJ: e:o:>o:>G<9ll ll())'f>:~
e:GID?2::x>21 ())'f>:<;> e:0f>~C~<?
'G
.2
(' 0 0 'r ('9
:G~?CrororoGU I ()l(l)IO:oo:Q:~rororo GCOU?G
l Ol l:l l JLI JL 6
C' C'
:Gc4) c~a
c.,Or.?G'!
CJ
rouuC' Jj ~'J:
0 6
0 [ (' ~('
-ro0l I:ICQG
-~ l
'0
L a
('
'JC: a:x:o:IOOO:lXD Sd~ 4>Gro:x>:n II
-- -r 6 Jl
('
c,
0 (" C' (" (' C' ~ ' C' C' (" C'
ro'f>:~ro ~c::x>2 ')f~f())O)'J())~C Gtj:~Gf>GO:>'J ~4)())() G~'JG(])'J
t oc c r,::;:: c o o c- oc r,::;:: c c c- r,: c- r,:
O)G::D'J 4>f>OC:~ 2~ <iC9CG~'JC:II oxp:wp:'f:l ')f~f-Gtl'JC~tl
G C' J;: \ . (' C C t J;: C 0 OC OC
G'):~c Gtj:~GyGO)'J ())(DO G<;?G(])? ::DG::D'J GjltJ20:>'J~ <ic;;qco;r~p:
r,;: cr,::;:: r,::;:: c c.-
C'' c
c.- c c c.- c
tj4>~G~?C:II ~f~o:>~ ::>rJ? ~;101 (])f'G:;Q?C~f>: rorof: ::>r 9ro
C 0 E ') <.'OC C r,::;:: C C C' C E
( ::>@~::> ~I ~O:J)'JC\) jO ')(1,) Gf.~C0fOC:e:J~G~'JG(])'J::D~ ())O)?(])'f
6
C' ')
oom:::>Jro'Jm
o -L
:11
C
::>::> .s'JoGG~
T
G'
~~~
C"
~....
roG~.sroc
<.'
T ~
C
~moe
tt L
C'~
roro.s uT
C"
T
C 0
L~
G
<;>G.S'Jcroo'Jro.s:
T
<> 9J;:C' 0 C' r,::;:: C' 0 r,:;::: C \f,~ ~C"
-~ e'f>O(])tll08dG~q( G'f>O?~:>:Gt:j'JC:I O:>roGO:et:jroGJro~tJ: tj4>G~
\ 0 J,;C C'O r,::;:: C' OC' c C' C' C' C' C'
:-~q{ tliOCQ~ G9Gt:1'JC:0?.9?C: OC~'J:'f> (])O)O?'f Gg')GO)'J(])IOC:o:>~
r,;c.- .<: <.'\ (' (' (' (' (' (' (' co r,; c.-
r:~4>c:J
roroo::nroro<;:'t rouroJm G'Jrot ~o:>G~?c:ro:>o:>2~ G9,?tlC9
r,::;:: (' 00 (' 0(' C' (' 0 (.' r,::;:: C' 0 'I
G:x>'JGt:1JC 4.l~ro~:roroc: :n-,:~2()) 8dGJroGu:roroGt:1:>c: 11 rorou
c.-, c . L "cc.-Loc c.- L c.- c cc
'G~?Gro?roro2: roro'J:ro 8dGJm~tGt>:roro:x>ti rororo rorororo ~ro
(.' G 0 IL(' (' l (' (" Cl> OC' (' (' L ('
~~x:ro?'f>l ro;;:q( G'f'roro?ro ro::nroG~?Gro?:x>2 4:>;;oc:~ G~?
'G())?CDO:>
L
c o G
CX>?::D:'nO?
e:Gt>:G(])G~?C:
C
L
c
L
G())Q:l)
tr. l
c
C romo::r.>O?O:> cL
c o
())~:Go?C
}I
Be C\ c o oc c
0 C' r,::;:: C' 0 C C c c OC' C' r,::;:: C C C' _
<:
GO:O(O?')Gej?C: II ~~ ())::J.>roG~'JG())Jro 0yOC:t:12 G~?Gro?c:w
5 c 'I oc- o ocr,;c c c.- o c r,::;:: c o 8c
rorou'J::nro fG::r.>:~ ':<ic:~ ro'ilftlc:oo;;~? OCOfOGt:1?C:l ~ro~df>O?J<t
c c.- c c r,: c.- c s;r,;:,c c o r,::;:: c
O)::J.>C?'f G~?Gro:>o:>~ Gjltj~o:>? G~?G(]) -'t}-100:>2~ G9.?'JGt.:j :>e: II
c o r,; c c c ocr,;c C' G r,::c.- coc r,::;:: C'
<.OC:q( GjltJ2:x>? G~?Gro:>ro s;l)lftJC:<X>f'~'J t:lj<? ocqroGO:>'JGt:j'J<?
0 (' (' r,::;:: C' (' (' c:: 5 (" 'l oc 0 0 (' (' 'l (' '
o;;oc:t:1~ G(,J'JGroJc:J rorodx:nro;;G::n: Gl:<f:'il o:>qo:>roa-, Gorro~
~'J:tl:
m C' C''O
G~?G())'JCD~ G9~J?:OCCX>?Gt:j?C: II
C' " r,::;::c
Gjltj~o:>?
J,;C' <.'
G~JG(])')e\1
C<:
(' ~ ooc (' r,::;:: (.' (' (' oc (' f.Q (' r,::;:: ('
GroJ'Jro~:t:JL:qiDfOC:t:j~(,J?Gro~~~J?:~ tJ~o:>Gf>GO:>'JGt:j?<?
(' (' (' ('\' r,:: (' r,::;:: (' r,; (" c (' (' 0 ('~
_SdG(])'J()C GO?~roGG ljlroU?t'~Gt:1?C:II Gjltj~O)'J G(,JJG(])?O? OCCJt0?9J
<>c c r,::;:: c c cc:: c o oc ~ r,; c r,;:c
~.yoc:t:12 G~'JGro?ell rom~~ ro;;:oo'J:G:x>? o:>t:JL:'p tlro~'J:o:>tJ<?
GG.S'JC(])
co
Q')s;l.S: GO:>'JCGUI ())C
9
00()')(l')OCD?:9G
(.' 'r (' 0(' (' [:>e:
(' II ('
G~?G(])?CO::D
C'\0
T L 61 T A L 0\,
C' r,;:c.- G C' C C' C ,ljl CG <.' r,::;:: C'

<090C::Dlj~ f>CCO o:>o:>G:n?CCX>'Jo:>~ ~f8d~l't'J UJro4>:~f>GO:>'JGt:j')~
c oc c c- . c , r,:;: c oc c r,::;:: c-
u2~:<f~C~J?:OO'J: G~ JO,O?O O?JU GCX>J?G0:~9Gt:1JC:II 0f>OC:t:j~
!965] BURMA . LAW REPORTS 989
OJ~ oo _c:: 'r c c
oe~~
OC' C'C'
ro'fl:cxrc:~ ~Ol:f~~ rocp:Q~~ G~J~?~J?:~G<.>I <[o:>~OiJCD ~~()
C' 0 ~ C' 'l C' C' 0 C'\ C'
~'JC ()~?9J o:>'f>:O?tt:j:m G~?(D()I GCD?CDQJCD~J?:Of. cxp>~GOXD~ II e:G>?e:
c 0 ( C' C' -0 _<:: C' C' ~~
011 O@tsO ~I -roo:>?CO jO 'JCDG~~~ oxp:~ G~')GO).:J o oc:-
J
c:- 'l
oc c r,:;:: c c o _O _C:: c
C' ~ o C' o co r;::c e=>t~OIJII
4>-fiOC:t::j~~~ ro'f:O'~ G~?GO)? GlltJ~o:>?~ ctCD'=>'JtjC:'t?
0 OC
~ooro? ~c lS roc G~l j C'
~c
C
G~?Gro?
C' 'r C' OC'
co?:o:>:n~cnc:

GCl :no:>?
C' C' C'
1..0 G L .iilC
Jo c.!, I.
c:: c c o_c:: c 'l c c
e1 roroc~c o:>G:::O?o:>?:o:>el COCCJ?:Go:>? GUIGCOU? roco:x;:gG
c
Xo

Jo .,._ Jl o Jt
Su1::nro?: 11
C' C' 'I 0 C' 0 OC' C'
II (.})Q')g.S()I(D oxn:roo:>:n ~ro<:O? ~<.>C OJ g :J() OX:
J ~ J T -- T L c.:. L A L J ( "
'r~ C' 0 C' 0 0 c C' ~ 0
G~ I ljCO?:::D2~ctc: o:>'f>:<;lgJ?:CO't G~ l:s@,O@j CDJU j j (j?:Of.
GCOJ&.:~~ ']o:>{u1o:>ro?: II
0 C' C' C' C' C' 0 OOC' ") C'
?II oxp:cxr::n~ g~::ne;::nm::n?~~O? 9~~cu1::n;;~:11
c c c
Gn:>?CT.>QJCT.>S3~o:> 0 II
o c c c c c A; o c c~ c c
CJ:fCD?CD<;JJCD~~ ()O)OJCDSJ o:>~f:cxr:::om~ O)Cl:::ICO?Xe o:>mGOJ(:If':
c 0 c 0 C' ( 0~ ) c c ( 0~ )
ro;;m1 ~G(DO)(DG::>.:X:IJ?:'t? qGoo:G(:I?C ~cj"J I G(:I'JCGCDf> ~tfr
c o c ( o~_ ) or;;: cr.:;:: c o c o c c r,:;:: c
~~ ~GOO: ~~@ ~tl4>t:jGCO::D~ II O?Gro:G(:IX<j? G>fOC:t:j~
c c _c:: cr;;: cr,~ c c 9 r;;: c c o c
G(:I?Gro?~ roroctl>l:::l: Gg:>eGCDJ?'t? ~m?t tl>o:>~ u O?cr.,cG~:cp
9 r;;:r _<:. c o c o o c 'l o
OJG:::O?o:>?:roe: (9~ II CJC:~ Wf ?CctGCB~ GcpmGo:>?~~~ o:>o:>GO:
r,::;: C' C' 0 \f,~ C C C' C OC OC' C' r,:;:: C C
2t:J~~ro<;JJCDO?~tJ:' G'J G~?c:s?t >~:m~=~o:tc: 4>;;oc:t:j~ G(:l?
c o ~r ~ 5 c c o c o Q~A; c c
Gro~ 13~ rom~?:::oro oo;sxO?rog:O? ~!Yl91 rog:'t G<.> ~ <;Jt
")__ c c C' c c c c c c
~10)')
0
GClJ.SQO)G(:I?C:CO?ml
ILTl l.-
ro:::orogJ GQW.S~O)G(:I?C:CO?G::D?
IlL
G(:I')GO)?
0
(D Q()rog;rog:ooc .C\)GC::OCGS:l')(D:) GO)'
c c c
CCIG :>e:
c c c c
c c
II O):::O(DGg')GO)')O)::D C'C' C'
L J J J T- tl 0 /l l c
c _<;. c r,:;:: c r;;:c c c o c c o c \ oc c r,:;:: c
'ic:e~ rog:Gt:jx:tl>o:>e gromq rog::::oro~ gmuo:> >roc:t:j~
c C' _C::
G(:I?GO)?;tt C'
rog:G ?C:c C' c 0
>Go:>? QG.S')CO) c
m~:o:>mo:>mOQI
c 0 '..... c
rog:CJGO
. T I. L J
C 'lA; C C r,:;:: C G 0 C ') C C'
go-jO <;)~~~~ ~(:I')C: CO?Gt:j')C:II 00')>:~ G'f>CT.>G::D?OO~I Gg')GO)?
c c c c c c r;:: o o c c r;;:c
j OC:I:j? rooc:t~rooc: (:IG5)?C::D?o:>e; ~Gtj~Gfq:( ~G'f>CDGfo:>tl<;;
OC C,.... C' C C C\ C 0 OC 0 C ') ~ C'
"Q:lfOC:~~ G(:I?GO)?(D C\)(DQ:::OCDq:( rog:G<.>:~(DGO)') 00~1 Gjl(j~o:>?
C' C' C' OC' C' r,:;:: C' C' C' <:: C C' '). OC 0 OC'
Gg?Gro?o:>~ 0;;oc:t:j~ G~?Gro:l;>J romp:::oro ')>Go:>: ~1:<-f:Of. 005];'>
c .
~
C' C' C' 0 C' 0 C' C' C' 0
c:co.sc? ocromromG -oc: comoo:x>?: Goo:>:n 11
Tt> L L l> Ll> C.:.
-- _C:: ... r;;:r,:;:: C' ~ C' C' C' _c:: C'
oxp:Q~ OJCDGo:>gJ?; tl0t:jo:>e; Gjl(j~o:>? GI:I?GO)?C:ll ro<OC
o~ C' ( ~ ) C' 9 o c c ( r ) o ~ c
~t:j:Gg')C .Q(j-0 ~<? ~(D?f O?~f:elt <;J[g-j -~~ Gjll:::J~o:>?
990 BURMA LAW REPORTS [I96S
c;- c;- c-r,;: C' G~
~~j
C' C' C' C' 0 C' 0 C' C'
G<J:>Gcnxn~ coo:~;;~4>:~ <JC\X'D~ roo:rq :P'tDtroJro ())(,}:~ Go oy
') c;- c;- c;- C' C' C' C' G 0 C'
e:s4>?e: ~10)? G'Jrof~o:>G<J?C:C0?9_)1 ())0)0) G<J:>Go:>XD~ 8df:~ GcpmGOJ?
(' r,:;: C' 0 r,;: c-r,~
~8
.
Q OC' ' C' 4"\,
"' r,: C' c:.
8d~l~ G.iJti~OJ? G<J?GO??e!l ~?:cpcoo:G~x:q ~O?tl: ~())G<J?C&
r,:;: C' r,: C' c- ('
2 :4>f~C OJ jll QOJ?Gt:('~ G.iJti~OJ? G<J')G())?()') 4>mq <.>J<i.>eJC: Gf?()')ljf~o:>::Jl
C' 0
C' C'
c-r;::c-
C'
c-r,:c- C'A\
C'
c- c- c- ' c- o c-or;:: c- r,;: c- r,:;: c- c- o r,:;: c-

:>qo:>GOJ?ro~: <J'}O) oc~rool:lc ::? ~4>G~x: ~ro:;xp~?:e1Gro:~ll
C' _ 0~ c 0 C' 0 0 C' r,: c C' C' C' g C' 0 c ')
CJC:~ Ojl~C>JCOOJ?:q ~em GiJti~OJ') G<J?G())?~ 4>:;;c: C\f<i.>OI'
r,:;: c- o
C\)?~0)~ Ct.fGOJ?C:e)~
c- ~ c- ( QtfiS r,:c) c- " c- ( ~-~) o c;
c-
1 2 : 9cG<S QC:f'1 ~()') Ga:>? roQ-
c o ~ _C o C' r,:;: C' c r,;:c- 'l c 9C' Q C'
~ro:;r:p~?:~CJII qG:?C:~~? :PC>JC: ~~1:4>2 8dC>df<i.> 0)0')?~~
o c- c- c c- c- r;;:c- c- c- c-or,~ g c- c- c-
O'Cl0J~ G<.l:>Go:>?~C roroc00~4> ~~C\fOOJJ~tJ; :'DO??~~ G<J?GO??
c- C'fR c- .., c- c r;;: c- o o c r;;: c "' c- r,<? o r,: c-
9fCJ'1fiJ(5 G:Jt()')O?Ca:>?:OJ~'; ~<JGf')O ~IOGOJ? OI:QU)(J!Jc.~ Gjjlj~:?
C' c-r,;: C' 0 C' '1 r::: C' r.: C' C' Q C'
G<J')G())?~'? ~()')0 ICO?eJC: tjiOOJ~ II e:~CG<S~? o.t'J'?Gf?CGQ G<J?G())?
C' C' C' C' ;r
.<: OC' C'C C' 0 C' C'Q C' C' C' C' t: c;-
eJI OCQC
l Jl
IOO):'D
C
II OOOJroGOJ~IOe:OJ:'D
l J C.:.
G<J?Go:>?,. OOOJO~C
L J
8d0::>()')G<J::
A
C' C' r,;:c- A\ C' r,;:c- .., C' ~q C' 00 0 Q C' 0 C' '1 . C'
oo:Go:pc:~J ?: tli09J :PC>J~=t~~D<ii:I02 ro 41;;ro <J<J~ ~:;;c: ~roo1ro?:2?
c- c c- o c- c- c- c- or;::c- o c g c-
G<JJG())~? <J~~~~ ~OJG<J?C:G;;OJ~ ~l:lc:q o::>?<J;; ~:OJ~<JJ?:
c- ,O,RA\ ' C' oooc-~ . C' ' '
rom ~ 8dro<.>oo ::l:>'l~ct:1<J~? ~o u
C' Q G _() _!:. C' 0 C 0 C' 0 C' l7: C'

:))()')GO) 8d::OJ:~ ~ro~C>J()')Sd'J ~"iJC oxp:~O)()')()') Gjjlj~OJ'>
C' C' C' 00 c C' C' (' r,::;: C' C' C' C' r;::c- ~ '
G<JJG())')OJ~ <J<J~())G<J?C:')<J~ COO:Ge)?C:~ ~())G<J?C:I:Ic: <JIY..O)'
OC' C'
T
6
C' C' C' .<: C' C'
t..
C' C' C'
IO.SOC: :'D G<J?G())?c;u CO<J:G ')C:ooc:~ C>o:>GG?C:CO?OJ:'D(J.) 10010
c.:. t.
C' C'6
c.:, " f4 A
c;-,
C-l
f,~ C' C' C' OC' C' r,::;: C' C' C' ('
OO'):tl:l oocp::;;<.lp:O)ro~ro~: roro'):~oc 10;;oc:e1~ G<J?G())?OJ~.
r,:c- c- c-c c-r,::;:_~,o c- c- c- c;-, c-
GiJti~OJ? G<J?G())?eJI C\)(,}:G~x:ooqr occocpro ~O?G<Jx:~OJ~(J.)
C' C' C'' C' 0 C' C' C' C' C' 0 C'O ~
T
ro .sroro..s
J T
IOOOCO?:Gro::-n 11
ll 6 c :lXno:>c
-.1. T ~
G<J?GO?? ~coc:
J
())('J.)(,}o::>::n.
L l:,i.
9C' C' C' C' C' (' 9 ' 9C' r,;:~
roe>d~? cn;;corox~;;:roro-;;: O? 9CDGt~ oo t'Xl~~Qdf ~"':8 roo::>?-
G..SGo::>?G
T 6 _<:-
?C

C' C' C'
rooc:~coooc:
Gro?C:4>?
J 4
GO)
o
C~CG
L
?C::
C'
~O:IdOC
J
C' C'OC' 6 C'
r;..c- 'l C' r,:c- c-r,;:c-'l .. .c::r,:c- C' C'

~tlC:<J~I:OJ~SdtiC OOQJC: ~~l:'f' GSOJeJ ~108dCDJU)OOOf:~? GO f00 ~
0 0 r,::;: C' r,;: ("
eoo C'Q C' C' C' 0
00 ~G~?C: '102:t-00)<i.> OJ()')G~J?:ro 8do:>8droc: OfC>OO?:tjOJ~~
C' C'. ~
C' C' C' 0 (' 0 C' r,: (' C' C' ' C' C' c-r,: c
G<J')GOO? j ~c: qro~ GSOJOJ~ ~IOmJe:<J<Jto:>O) OOG())')OC <i.>J.u::>tl*
C' r,:;: C' (' r,;:c- r,::;: C' C' C' 0 ' 0 . r::: .~
o::>e ld9Gtj?C:~c ~0Ge)?C: a:>c~?::~ll ar'?q{G:'D? ~GI:I~Gf<Jdl:
C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' C' OC' C C' QC' C
r:J'f'OC G<J?G())? j OC:o::>e? ~? GSJ?C())G: ~())G<J?G:~CO)et
C' r,::;: C' C' C' OC' 0 C C' C' C' 0 \
mGCOJ?ro G9Ge:J?C:S?f 4>~:0')(.1:<Jp:roqc: 9<i.>t?F<J?C:9r <JC\fO'>
C' C' C' 0 C'O C' ~~~ C' C' 00~~ C' C'
o:x>e~gro0C: CJq0')(.19GroG:P?C ...uv~ ~? Wv.f"'"'-'tjt('J.)C\)(,}:,
!965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 991
OC" C" C" OC" C" - ~ OC" C" C" C" 0 C" C" 0 C"
mroc:;~mG<:i?c:~cGo:x>~ 11 m mroc:ocro~:
I. L C::. t C:J l C.
o:>moo:c:o/i\C
l TJn
c:o~ro~o~t -:>:
lJ
oeS:J,
~C
CC"C
:l)OOC:Gc:!G"
-:>C: CO
:l)OJOOOGOO':>CGa: C"
OJ0':>91H~
C'\()
0 0
O)rr.;JQO)C C' Q G
J -: o
L..,. ~I 11~L I l ~ ol. Jl o e:G~?e=
'
axo m~ rr.;JQOJCC" Q::Do:>~
('

m;;o:m C"
t
C' 0
o:>GO;CX:)')::x>::nro Go:> C'OC" C'
Cli\CGOo:>::D II
C.L oo, l ,L~ C.:.
f:.:t 0 oc (' '\
OC'
o:>
f}L -T<::::J
C"
1T<:
c C' rR ~c c- 1,; C' o e:~t~c 01 J II. co
GQJGO)?CD G'JGeJ?C:<p:l:j: ~O)GQ?C:ro?o:>t:OXfGo:l? tJ:::OOP':f? rr.;JGCD
C" C"
O)).ST ')O)QO Q())Q)GO)JG() II I L 0
oc (' r,;:c:-~ C" ' 0 C" C" C" C"

m'f>:CI1~ll o:>CDGo:>QJ?: l:j0eJo:li?! eJtGrr.:l:G<:i?CI GQXGCDJJ;<?
0 C' 0 C" C" C' 0 C'O C' 0 C" C" 0
CDmcGm:mCD.,.GQJGo:l? j 0C: O)CDQGO)? G.SCOQ') QG.S?Co:lCDQ:o::>mo:>
t. :ot M t. T-r J T L ~1.
c- c- ~ c- c o c-or,~ c- oc c- ~ c c- c- .... .
C'PJo:>~q ~C'P~eJG::x>:>ro~: ormQt:I:Gf?C'P 0fOC:~~ GQ')GO)')O)C:
(' ('
0())0?CD())Q;Q C" 0 (' 0
<:I<X>C'Po:l G::D:>CGUI
(' 'rC'
2 o:>:>:GmCD())CG.SO)::D()) cc:mrom
C" (' C" (' 0 0 ('
Jl 1. CJ o. -r T c 1. 1 . ..~. t
0(' ('. (' 0 (' 0 (' (' (' C" (' 0 C"<>
9c O;>:::>cx:>?:o:>~~G~') rr.:l0JC'PCJt GOO?C'P~cq[C GQ?G())') j 0C: qmQ
r,;c c r;:;: c o c c c-r,; C'
Go:>? G<f'f>':f? tj0(\)(l) G']G~?C:I ~<J.?()) o:l'f>:oop:o::>CD':f o:>Ct:J::Di:l
OC'
mroc: Qroroo:>m'=l:o::>ro:n
L
C" 0
l
C' C 0
~...
O~Q
l:'l T
C'
vc:~ .s:o:>::nm
L c. m;;oo::>mmmG
ll 0.
C'
T
6 ?c: QG.s::n::nc n
C" 0
11 T
C'
c~
rr.:lmmSJ ro'P:"1roci::J::n~mqc: G<:i?Go:>?
o cr,; C" oc c: c
J 0c:::n~ :::>Gy:>corm<:i:o::>mc-
c c- c- o c-
C' 0 C"OO C' '1
o:lC O)(DQI:I;(:i.SOIQ rr.;JQ)())QQGO)') 0.SOC: ::D GQ')G())')O)::D O)C'PQID
0 C OC' C' C' C' C' C' (' ~0
0 t 1J .1T 11. L -~ T C.:. C t.
0(' ~ 1,; C" (' C" Q (' 0 (' 'l'C' 0 C" ('
OOf:Go:>?lJL: l:jo:lGf::D~SdGCUJ?CD :::>GfXor CD<J:GOI go:>? ~romo f:'P
Q.s
(' 00
ooromroGoQ::n 11
"IDroo::>roC'PQ:o
C" (' (' Qroroo:>mQ:o:>
C" C" ('
o:>?:Gmro;;oromo
C" ("" 0 0 0 (' 0
-IT o
1. L C.:. t L }I L c.f. ~ -.:-
OC'
~cro~,X,~::n
O C" C'
QOJo:>GOII
C'gJl C" C" C' 0 C 0 OC'
omo:>ro rom:axmJdC:Oa:>? rr.:l03 a roc
C'
m:::>ro~c
C'~
Lot:.:, L UJo -rt. L~ t.Co
oc:- "~ c-
0foc:eJ~ GQ?G0)?0)2 mqm:::>'Jtj:Gf')('))
m c: ~GfXq " c: " c:-
c o CD<:i:::r.;roqc
" c: o ".
o C' C' '1"\ _C o o '1"'8
C'
;;Q(D(DOCX)');O):TI()) Q'J.)())QQS G<lll Qellll COCDo:> G<SI ;Q') GQ?GO:::?>
C' C" C' '1.
~
C"
L C 1,. L JT o l o '"'L o J
C" C' OC" C' r,:;: C' C' C' C C' ~ C' r,;: C' C' 0 C' C"C'
j 0c:::n~ 0fOC:eJ~ GQ')Go:l?ell o:>Q:GeJ?C:tliD'P ~Gf?CorCDQ:o::>~
o c-o c or,:::c: o c- r,;:c- C" c: " ' c o
qCDQ::D~<">C(tJC:CJt rr.:lG<Xl')())rr.;J~tl0GID'Jf 'jaJ(l)~())f <X>O$C8')') ~GO
(' ~(' 0 C'l,; (' C" r,;:c- '1 1,;. ( C" C'
0)~11 ~t:IC ~::::>~ O)Ct:I::D~ rr.:l:::>JC:tl~l:'f> Gtl<l O)(DGO)Q rr.:l':fo:l
a li\Cc oo) <X>Q?
o mcm:Dii\C o~c GQ?G<Xl?
o c rom::::>roc;u c- c-
c: ;;oa:>CQI'): c-
0 ::n~
c J Ol, J -- L lJ 0 T L u
o c- c- or-e C" o C' o c C"
O)Grr.;J:GQ?C~C CD!m:GQ')CO) ~0~:0(0:m?: m"::nm 08Q jOO rr.;JQ.
L
<:i;;x)CQ
<3C"
J 0
GCI(l)')~ GQ?C:~CQ
(' LD C" ('
t.
('C
J [,
CO~IYl"'JO:o:>c
-1.
C"o C'
T
mco:0~s
'\ 0
l
C" C"
L
--. [, J Jl T _._.... jJ A --L o-11T rr.;JQOOGOO:o:>

Jl 1t..
0 C" 0 c Q ( r,; ) (' (' 0 C' <>
rr.:l'P~ 0:::>f:j[: G0?~o:>IOO:cn?: ~t:l-0 CD GQ?Go:l?orCD'f> G80)~
ro:::>uc: '1 B
" "001: " G6 ?l:l OOG~:G~:
:GS?CD Q C" , , " G
o:>?:GCOCDGCl;;;Q:;>:;o::n qQU?::
T 6 ILil 4 A 6 T -~ 6o U L
r,;: c-~ o C' cr,; c r,; ( c c:- ) c- o o c- c
tj0SJ <X>'f>:oto::>CD':f mci:j:x>e Gtl<l O)O)GO)Qrr.:l'j()) 0J OOC'P '{'{':ffCDf
~ C"O <>
@ ;q
C" C" O') ( C' C" C" )
qx'f> rr.:lGeJ?C:~:n~ II moqo1 o:>CDGO)Q !:P't()) 00 rr.:l9 ~
( 0) ( oefir) ~?~ ~'l6o:i:~pt ~') jO~ (JJ>) II

BURMA LAW REPORTS ~93
(J) E.R. (1857) XI. MOORE, 307, at p. 312.

68
11 :1P"'xese>:211
e,., ~
11 .)co&>ed:o:ckcoe&ro
0
u@cc:~r2@b 'coco
1

~ ,) ~ 0 0
ck GCJ) I J.w~b
.) .;,
C~vc I(6)<-t:e
:)
lOb:
.)0
tal~ ICOCOAOOtalgW
.:> 00 0
IGIUliCC
0 0 8 ~
~t r 10 ::~b:1isl'l
I,; .>
urc C.)c.tc lo(:c
.>o
tal~ ICCCCCO~~Ol ~~ .JCOCOfiOOtalghJ.
o e .> .Jo ~ oe e
ofiCO~O(I);Jirco
~ .> o o .J
uiJ~c c.)c.tc lo(:c
.lO
lal~ :crAa:o~cohAbcol!oc.co~
.> o o.> .>
oHestollroCOAC.C.O~W
.> .> ot. .> oo
~~~~ohco6>~COcb~oo
0 .) .)0.) .,) ,) .)
balc~o2tcbco co:(!,l~
~ 0 .) ~.j 0 .) ~ 0
kcore,..J:I:tel:o OC.h.'(~,.00
ure~IO~
.,)l,;
IO~~~c.rAobc.~ccchl
~ .) ~.)
~ccbO<P<:ooe
.).)
o.tr.tdccchl
.) .) ~
GOOd &?cc:h.'l;boo:~al
) ~ .)
:@roecbcoAPe
.) .) .)
coPecot::l:b
.)
"l:ccd:.o II .)@cc,JJ:..J:leco~re
.) :_j. 0 '- 0 ~.j ~\~
coPecot::l:k
.) .) ~. ~.)
'!;@co~ ~IO~al:c.rt'l
coPeeccl)cocc
~
~~ teCbcohl:te
.5~-- 0 \ .) ,) :J.
cokA-cok
.J .)
so4o
.;) \
6)~0re:2u
,) 0
uwrecol:l:be
.) .) :J.
u~kA~k c.~ccca~o2-c~o2~a: tJ5;rro5 :c.flcc~kw
S~~Odffil M V1 VW'dOH t66

ndic c~ 1fwfb (C~tlc) (~)cm1~1cs:> (d)
nrc CO I~Cro (dbtJc)(od) l(~)ct.t::l#le&:l (r)
ntJ~c C.~ ICC~~ (~btJc) (C~) I(~)c.t.t::l ~IW:l (C)
S..DIOdHll MV1 VWB:DS 966

a~oocl~nech>6oc
..) 0 0 0
ccc:xof,reec.c.o~:f,
..) S" j
:h':l&:Cbco
LJ A:cbcococo'b
0
~~~~b
0'1.> .) uoe;~eob
.., \ .)
Cc coccd:ococec~
0.)
tof~
.)
b~:~tlc
;)
cccec.oMe:Xo
.> j ..)
ccC
coha:~bc._,
0
Atclxo t<Df~
.)
bt~tJc
;;) tI
nob SO~~~&w 'b:>~eec <'!tcbc.o I ~~e b~Vc *
fugfl ~ ::>bl okwcc

... o o .):J.> o .>
;~):0 bc-C I'ICh c~ocbb--:@4w&be bm Cl.c c'hm ~woeeoc.4e ceoeC!
.) 0 .) .) ;, .) .)0 ' .) .)
weccocc
., .)
:Aw:@Go:>c.co-core:c.oowc.rc:uo
.> .> .> ,:,
4b:>~:>c.oeo:oerw<~~bm-:.lbc~fl:cbco
.> .)o.) .> e
r
:.!!:
;)
(::cPfl~O::cbco~tnes) r Lo t::~:~
S~t!Odffil M V1 VW{{flg 866

II ( ~0)
(;ft, C<D t:~5~JWJb (oblJc) (f)
nbC c< rfwfb ~~~e ictJc (~) ccar~og:rece (c)_
:. ~66
CHIEF COURT
Before U Kyaw Zan U, J.
DAW HTAI YIN (APPLICANT) c.c.

1965
v. Nov.Io.
DAw AYE MAl AND FIVE OTHERS {RESPONDENTS)
Code of Civil Procedure-Order 14, Rule 3-framing of issuses--not confined

to pleadings:only--may frame issues fram the contents of documents.
Held: Order 14,~ule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure mentions the

various materials in addition to the pleadings on which issues may b~: framed.
The obvious intention is to provide against failure of justice upon technical
rules of pleading and to add other materials on which proper issues may be
framed. Issues are thus not confined to pleadings only. . Order 14, Rule 3(c)
of the Code provides the Court may frame issues from the contents of
documents produced by eit.'ler party. In the instant case the materials are
provided in the legal notices filed in the suit for framing the preliminary
issue proposed by the applicant. It may be a very important issue on which
the entire suit rests its fate and it will cause grave injustice to the applicant
to shut out this legal issue or defence which goes to the root of the suit.
G(lpal Ram Mohuri v. Dhakeswar Pershad Narain Singh, I.L.R. 35 Cal.
807 ; S11rt11dra Nath Roy and others v. Krislma Sakhi Dasi and others,
15 C. W.N. 239; Giyana Sambandha Pandora Sannadhi v. Kandasami Tambiran
l.L.H. 10 Mad. 375 at p; 502, referred to.
Mr. N. C. Sen for the applicant.

Mr. V. San C. Po for the respondent.
u KYAW ZAN U, ].-This is an application to revise the
order of the learned Subdivisional Judge of Bassein dated
T2th June 1965 rejecting the application dated 6th May
1965 of the applicant who is the defendant No. r in Civil
Regular Suit No. 6 of 1962 of the said learned judge to
frame a preliminary issue in the following form :
" Whether the suit as framed is not maintainable in law
for want of legal notice."
The respondents who are the plaintiffs in the suit objected
as the point raised in the proposed preliminary issue was
Civil Revision No. Z4 of 1965 against the order of the Subdivisional
Court of Bassein in Civil Regular Suit No. 6 of zg62 dated 12th June 1965.
69
not taken up in the amended written statement. It was.

contended that as the lease was for a fixed term of five
DAW HTAI
YIN
years no notice was necessary and the learned Judge held'
v. the same view.
DAw AYB
MAI AND
FIVB OTHERS. The suit is for ejectment of the appljcant Daw Htai Yin
from the rice-mill and is based on the registered lease deed
dated 19th September 1957. The lease was for a period
of five years beginning from rst .October 1957 to 30th
September 1962. Clause 7 of the deed however required
that about a month before the expiry of the term the
lessors must give a notice to the lessee asking whether
renewal was d~sired, and it stated that if renewal was de~
sired it would be accepted. Three days before the
expiry of the lease the lessors who are plaintiff-
respondents sent a legal 'notice dated 27th September
1962 asking the applicant to quit by I.st October 1962
saying that the owners themselves were going to work the
mill. I may state here the lease was granted to the
applicant's husband (since deceased) by the rst plaintiff-
respondent Daw Aye Mai and her husband who had
transferred his right, title and interest in the mill
to the other two plaintiff-respondents and the other
remaining three defendants who do not join with the
applicant in this revision but are added as respondents.
On 30th September 1962. i.e. on the last day . of the

term of the lease the applicant sent a reply through her
Advocate to the aforesaid legal notice stating that she had
made preparations to con~nue working the mill as the
lessee on renewal of the lease.
It seeJilS clear that the lessors failed to comply with

the terms of Clause 7 in not giving a notice about a month
before the expiry of the term of the lease asking the appli-
cant if she wished to renew the lease, and under the Clause
B~ LAVV REPORTS 1003
the renewal_ if desired, would have to be accepted. But c.c.

1965
about two and half months after the expiry of the term of DAwHTAI
the !ease the lessors sent a reply on I rth December 1962 Y1N
to the reply dated 30th September 1962 of the applicant DA.wv'Ave

complaining that the applicant had committed breaches F~~,::RS.
of the conditions of the lease by not effecting necessary
repairs and by practically allowing the mill to deteriorate
during the period of the lease by removing some properties
from mill premises, and determined the lease asking the
applicant to deliver possession of the mill within 24
hours. No lease was subsisting at the time and even if
the applicant committed breaches a suit for damages
should have been filed. The present suit for ejectment
was filed on 13th December 1962 about two and half
months after the expiry of the lease. It is not known
how the lessors could determine the lease which had al-
ready expired and which they had failed to renew. The
lessors also alleged that the applicant was setting up a
title. I fail to see how she could do this when she had
asked for renewal of the lease and wanted to continue as
a lessee. It seems the allegation that the applicant had
committed breaches of the terms of the lease was an after-
thought inasmuch as no such allegation was made in their
first notice dated 27th September 1962. It was used as a
lever to evict the applicant. In their first notice date9.
27th September 1962 they merely asked the applicant to
quit as they themselves wanted to work the mill. The
learned Advocate for the applicant submitted in his argu-
ment that the notices dated 27th September 1962 and I rth
December 1962 served on the applicant are not legal. He
contended that the notices not being sent by all the lessors
or coowners who have derived their title to the mill are
invalid as pleaded in Para. 5(b) of the written statement
of the applicant to the .amended plaint, and he relied upon
.c.c. Gopal Ram Mohuri v. Dhakeswar Pershad Narain Singh

I96S
(I) which was followed in Surendra Nath Roy and others
DA:;1~TAI v. Krishna Sakhi Dasi and others (2) . It is not for me to
-~ " come to a decision on this point at th is stage. The learned
f' .~ 1;J: A~vocate for the applicant also submitted that the lease
P.IVB oTHERS. could not be forfeited by such notices as there was no
express condition of re-entry in the lease-deed and that in

cases of forfeiture a notice under section I I I(g) of the
Transfer of Property Act must be given of the intention to
determine the lease. In the instant case the lease had
already expired.
Order 14, Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure men
tions the various materials in addition to the pleadings pn
which issues may be framed. The obvious intention is
to provide against failure of justice upon technical rules
of pleading and to add other materials on which proper
issues may be framed. Issues are thus not confined to
pleadings only. [Giyana Sambandha Pandara Sannadhi
v. Kandasami Tambiran (3)]. Order 14, Rule 3(c) of the
Code provides the Court may frame issues from the con-
tents of documents produced by either p'arty. In the
instant case the materials are provided in the legal notices
filed in the suit for framing the preliminary issue proposed
by the applicant. It may be a very important issue on
which the entire suit rests its fate and it will cause grave
injustice to the applicant to shut out this legal issue or
defence which goes to the root of the. suit, which, I very
much regret to say has been unnecessarily prolonged.
In the result the application is allowed with costs and
the order dated 12th June I965 of the trial Court is
vacated with the direction that the proposed issue or an
issue on the lines indicated above be framed as a prelimi-
nary issue and determined by the trial Court as early as
possible. Advocate's fee: five Gold Mohurs.
(x) I .L.R. 35 Cal. 8o7. (z) IS C.W.N . 239.
(3} I .L.R. ro Mad. 375 at p. 502.
B.URMA LAW. REPORTS 1005
CIVIL FIRST APPEAL
Before U Sein Thinn, J,

c .c.
DAvv KHIN KYI AND oNE (APPELLANTs) 1965
Dec, 4
v.
DAw MA MA (RESPONDENT).*
Will-Succession Act, s. 222 application for probate of the will-interpretation
of the word "devise "-consideration of extrinsic evidence.
Held : It is true that the Will does not contain the words "immoveable
property " but the use of the word " devise " which is commonly employed
only in respect of immoveable property taken in conjunction with the testator's
intention of making the respondent her sole heir to her entice estate clearly
shows that Oaw Mya bequeathed not only her immoveable property but also
the suit property as well.
Held further : The lower Court is perfectly justified in taking into
consideration the extrinsic evidence appearing on its record in construing
the will.
Mr. G. N. Banerji for the appellants.

U Than Tin for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-The facts giving rise to this appeal

are as follows :
The deceased Daw Mya, a Burm~se Christian
spinster and adoptive mother of the respondent Daw Ma
Ma, was u~e owner of the property known as No. 72,
r6sth Street and its site hereinafter referred to as the suit
property. On 27th September 1958 Daw Mya died
leaving behind a Will in which the respondent was nam.ed
executrix of the entire estate. The respondent Daw Ma
Ma then filed an application in Civil Miscellaneous Case '
No. 184 of 1959 of the Original Side of the late High
Court under section 222 of the Succession Act for probate
------- -- - - - - - - - --------- '- -
.Civil First Appeal No. 16 of.1965, against the decree of the Additional
Chief Judge of the Rangoon City Civil Court in Civil Regular Suit No. 341
of 1962.
c.c. of the said Will. Her application was contested by the
lz965
1- defendant U Ba, father of the present appellants, on the
DAW KHIN
KYI AND ground that although the Will relied upon by Daw Ma Ma
ONB
v. was genuine, on a ~rue construction of its contents Daw
DAwMA Mya died intestate so far as her immoveable properties
MA.
were concerned, and that he (U Ba) being the younger
brother of Daw Mya was her sole heir. In spite of this
objection.. probate was ultimately granted :to the respon-
dent Daw Ma Ma and on appeal against the said order by
the deceased U Ba his appeal was dismissed in Civil First
Appeal No. 23 of r96r of the same Court. In the
appellate judgment it was pointed out that the question
whether or not the suit property belonged solely to the
deceased Daw Mya or jointly with the appellant U Ba
does not arise for consideration and that the same will
only arise if and when U Ba sues for possession of the
said property. It appears tha:t during the pendency of
the probate proceeding" U Ba took possession of the entire
estate thereby necessitating Daw Ma Ma to file the present
suit for declaration of ownership and for possession of the
suit property.
The main issue in the suit before the lower Court is
the following: " Does the Will of Daw Mya whereby me
plaintiff has been appointed executrix in respect whereof
probate has been granted relate :to any immoveable pro-
perty of hers?" It is common ground that Daw Mya
was originally the sole owner of the suit property. It
is also an admitted fact that the respondent Daw Ma Ma
who was the adopted daughter of the deceased Daw Mya
has been .appointed sole executrix of the last Will and
Testament of the deceased Daw Mya. The only question
in dispute is whether or not the suit property is the
~bject of disposition as evidenced by the Will under con-
sideration. The relevant portion of the Will is as follows ;
" Secondly I give devise and bequeath to my sole adopted
BURMA lAW REPORTS 1007
c. c.
daughter Ma Ma, aged 2 r years, Burmese Christian,
residing at 72, 165th Street, Tamwe, Rangoon and my
legacy (all moveables) as the said Ma Ma was brought up
and adopted by me from her babyhood when she was
-
1965
DAW KHIN
KYI AND
ONE
o.
only 12 days old with a view to inherit my estate." DAW MA
MA.
The learned trial Judge holding that there is latent
ambiguity in the Will as worded took into consideration
extrinsic evidence regarding the execution of the WilL
U Ngwe Gon (PW r) the alleged writer of the will was
examined and he would have the Court hold that Daw
Mya did intend t<? give away all the properties both
moveable and immoveable to her adopted daughter Daw
Ma Ma. Relying on this evidence and also on the facts
and circumstances appearing on the record of the lower
Court, the lear.ned trial Judge construed the Will as indi-
cating that Daw Mya bequeathed all her _properties both
moveable and immoveable to the respondent Daw Ma Ma.
He accordingly passed a decree as prayed for by the plain-
tiff-respondent with costs. .Hence this appeal before me.
The first ground of appeal is that in ~he absence of
any reference to immoveable property in the Will the
deceased Daw Mya must be deemed to have died intestate
in so far as her immoveable properties are concerned and
that as there is no ambiguity either patent or latent, the
evidence of U Shwe Gon (PW r) is inadmissible in
evidence. As regards the first contention it is true that
the Will does not contain the words " immoveable pro-
perty " but the use of the word " devise " which is com-
monly employed only in respect of immoveable property
taken in conjunction with the testator's intention of
making Daw Ma Ma her sole. heir to her entire estate
clearly shows that Daw Mya bequeathed not only her
immoveable property but also the suit property as well.
In the circumstances I am of opinion that the learned
trial Judge is perfectly justified in construing the Will in
c.c. the manner he did. In respect of the second contention

1965
.regarding the inadmissibility of U Shwe Gon's evidencel
DAw KarN
KYIAND may say at once that it is not tenable. As pointed out
oNE
v. by the lower Court the purport of the word " and ,.
DAw MA appearing between the words " Rangoon " and " my
MA.
legacy" is not altogether clear. As the word "and,.
precedes the words "my legacy ' it .seems to indicate tha~
not only her legacy consisting of all moveable properties
but some other property as well have been the subject
matter of the testator's bequest. Therefore although on
the face of the Will there seems to be no am~iguity yet
when it is applied to the properties belonging to the
deceased it seems clear to me that there is a latent
ambiguity as pointed out by the learned trial Judge. It
is an elementary principle of law regarding construing of
w ms that extrinsic evidence of the circumstances or
surrounding facts in which a Will has been made, so far
as tq.ey :throw light on the matter to which the documen~
relates, and on the condition and position and course of
dealings of the persons who made it or are mentioned in
it, is always admitted as indispensable for the purpose not
0nly vf identifying such person and things, but also of
explaii.Aing the language, whenever jt is latently ambiguous.
or sus-..:eptible of various meanings or shades of meaning,
and of applying it sensibly to the Circumstances to which
it relates. (Please see Maxwell on Interpretation of
Statutes, 9th Edition, page 23 .) I would accordingly hold
that the lower Court is perfectly jl!lStified in tak.lng into
consideration the extrinsic evidence appearing on its
record. U Shwe Gon (PW I) was carefully examined by
the learned trial Judge. From his evidence it is abundant-
ly clear that Daw Mya's intention when she wrote the
Will was to devise and bequeath all her properties both
moveable and immoveable to the p~aintiff-respondent. I
do not also see any reason whatsoever to discredit her
evidence.
It is also contended that the lower Court did not take c.f
into consideration Exhibit 3 filed by the defendant's ~
Advocate. Exhibit 3 purports to be the letter addressed K.~ ~N:
0
by the deceased Daw Mya to the Superintendent of City 1 oNE

Survey, Rangoon Development Trust. The letter was DAw" MA.
dated 3rd February 1948 and in it Daw Mya expressed MA.
her willingness to make her brother U Ba a joint owner
of .the suit property. This letter was not admitted by
the plaintiff-respondent but even conceding that it is
proved, I do not see how it could have created any right,
title or interest in the suit property which is immoveable
and whose value is more than K 100. Therefore this
letter which is neither a valid deed of gift nor conveyance
could not be relied upon by U Ba to prove the joint
ownership of the property by U Ba and Daw Mya. As
pointed out above Daw Mya was the sole owner of the
suit property and in the absence of any valid gift or
conveyance in favour of U Ba the latter cannot be said
to have acquired any interest in the same.
For all these reasons I would hold that the lower
Court was right in decreeing the suit. In the result the-
appeal fails and is hereby dismissed with costs. Advo-
cate's fees fixed as 2 (two) gold mohurs.
CIVIL REGULAR
Befo~e U Thet Pe, J.
c.c. DAw KHIN MYINT AND ONE (PLAINTIFFS)

1965
Dec. zg.
V..
u TUN SEIN AND FOUR OTHERS (DEFENDANTS). *
Code of Civil Procedure 0. VI, Rule 17-cause of action 01z the remarriage of
the surviving parent-amendment of plaint based on cause of action on the
death of the parent.
Held : It is an undeniable fact that the cause of action for the proposed
:amended plaint is quite distinct and different from that of the original plaint
The original plaint bases its cause of action on the remarriage of the surviving
parent U Tun Sein to his fourth wife Daw Myint Myint which took place
-some time in November 1953, whereas the proposed amended plaint has
its cause of action on the death of _U Tun Sein which occurred on 24th
February 1965.
It is the fundamental principle of law that different suits must be brought
for different causes of action.
Ma Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Hnau11g, 4 U.B.R. 30 ; P.M. Chettiar Firm v
Ma Shwe Pon, 5 Ran .. us ; Ma Thaing v. Maung Chet On, 7 Ran. qo ;
Muthaya Chettiar v. A.R.M. Chettiar Firm, (1948) B.L.R. 855 (H.C.) ;
A.S. Hutton v. I.M. Madha, (1949) B.L.R. 484 (H.C.); Tarab Ally v. Mohamed
Ayub, (1950) B.L.R. 361 (H.C.) ; Pethu Reddiar v. Chidambara Reddiar,
.A.I.R. (1931) Mad. 533 ; Sobhraj v. F .O. Variomal, A.I.R. (1942) Sind 4 ;
Sashi Bhusan v. Tulsi Charon, A.I.R. (1950) Cal. 107, referred to.
Sheo }.;arayan v. Ram Prasad, A.l.R. (1923) Nag. 241 ; Tlla Sao v.
Harilal, A.I.R. (1949) Pat. 276 ; Gopaldas Khettry v. Pulclzand, A.I.R. (1946)
Cal. 357 ; Tarachand v. Abdul Ahad, 67 I. C. 894 ; Ghulam Haidar Khan v.
Sardar Ali Khan, 73 I.C. 748, distinguished.
U Than Maung for the plaintiffs.
U Ohn Mau~g l
U Than Aung } for the defendants.
U Win Kyi )
U THET PE, J.-This .is an application for amendment

of plaint under Rule I7, Order VI of the Code of Civil
Procedure. The plaintiffs are the children of one U Tun
Civil Regular Suit No. s6 of 1964.
sein by his first deceased wife Daw Hnin Hla. On 7th ~9~5
December ra64
-"
they sued their surviving parent U Tun D AW K.HlN
Sein for administration of the parental estate on the ground MYrNT AND
of his remarriage with Daw Myint Myint, the fourth wife o:_E
in November 1953 Some other persons were also uA~:;o~N
impleaded as defendants and it is unnecessary to mention oTHERS.
them for the purpose of this application. Before the suit
-could be heard U Tu11 Sein died on 24th February 1965
and the plaintiffs now seek to amend the plaint by which
they claimed for administration of the estate of U Tun Sein
.as a whole. The proposed amendment is opposed by the
defendants excepting defendant Daw Toe on the ground
that it would amount to substitution of one distinct cause
,of action for another inasmuch as the claim for partition
-of the parental estate from the surviving parent on his
remarriage is quite different from a claim for partition
'from a step-parent on the death of the surviving parent.
The sheet anchor of the defendants' objection is the
-decision in Ma Shwe Mya v. Maung Mo Hnaung (r).where
tit was held that-
" All rules of Court are nothing but provisions intended
to secure- the prop<>.1 administration of justice, and it is
therefore essential that they should be made to serve and be
subordinate to that purpose so that full powers of amendment
must be enjoyed and should always be liberally exercised,
but none the less no power has yet been given to enable
one distinct cause of action to be substituted for another,
nor to change, by means of amendment, the subject matter
of the suit."
"The above dictum of their Lordships of the Privy Coundi

'had been quoted with approval and followed in a number
of decisions in Burma. See P.M. Chettiar Firm v. Ma Shwe
:"Pon (2), Ma Thaing' v. Maung Chet On (3), Muthaya
(I) 4 U.B.RJO. (2) .5 Ran. us.
(3) 7 Ran. 140.
c.c. Chettiar v. A.R.M. Chettiar Firm (4), A.S. Hutton v.

xg6s
I.M. Madha (5) and Tarab Ally v. Mohamed Ayub (6).
DAwKHIN
MviNT ANo It has been argued by the learned Advocate for the
0
~::"? plaintiffs that the amendment should be allowed so as tO>
13
:.
~J;~~:N avoid multiplicity of suits although the cause of action

oTHRRs. arisen subsequent to the institution of the suit and he
has referred me to the decision in Sheo Narayan v. Ram
Prasad (7) where it was held that-
"Amendment, altering the character of the suit entirely,.
was, under section 53 of the Old Code, expressly forbidden.
But section 135 and rule 17 of order 6 of the present Code
make no express restriction on the discretion of the Court,
provided it is judicially exercised."
A close examination of the decision however shows that

the defendant therein did not object to the amendment
which had probably outweighed the consideration of the
Court.
The learned Advocate for the plaintiffs had cited the
decision in Tika Sao v~ Harilal (8) where it was observed'
that-
.. In many cases where the plaint is allowed to be amended
the subject-matter of the claim is necessarily enlarged and
the defendant can hardly be heard to say that it is unjust
that the plaint should be allowed to be amended simply be..
cause it will result in his having to pay the just dues of
the plaintiff."
The above decision deals with the enlargement of the

subject matter of the suit and does not deal with the
substitution of the cause of action. It is therefore
distinguishable.
(4) (r948) B.L.R. 8ss (H.C.). (6) (1950) B.L.R. 36r (H.C.).
(s) (1949) B.L.R. 484 (H. C.) (7) A.I.R. (1923) Nag. 241 .
(8) A.I.R. (1949) Pat. 276.
Gopaldas K.hettry v. Pulchand (9) is another authority

c.c.
1965
pointed out by the learned Advocate for the plaintiffs. It DAw K.HrN
MYINT AND
was held there that- ONE
" Where the original relief claimed has, by reason of U T~ SEIN:
subsequent change of circumstances, become inappropriate, AND FOUR
or it is necessary to have the decision of the Court on the oTHERS.
altered circumstances so as to shorten litigation, or to do
complete justice between the parties, the Court may mould
the relief on the basis of the altered circumstances."
That was a suit for recovery of possession and arrears of

rent. A Receiver was appointed after institution of the .
suit and the Court therefore held that a prayer for damages
for the period which followed the Receiver's appointment
can be added by the plaintiff. It is clear therefore that it
is not a case of substitution of cause of action as
contemplated in the instant case.
The decision in Tarachand v. Abdul Ahad (ro) relied
upon by the plaintiffs is also distinguishable inasmuch as
the amendment was granted there on the ground that t~e
suit for partition equid not possibly have been satisfactori-
ly adjudicated upon until every portion of the joint familY.
property had been brough~ into the suit.
The decision in Ghulam Haidar Khan v. Sardar Ali .
Khan (I 1) can also have no application to the facts of the
present case inasmuch as it was held therein that-
" An amendment will not~ however, be allowed if it con
verts . the suit into one which is not only different from,
but is inconsistent with, the plaint as originally lodged,. and
when the defendant is prejudiced by the amendment.;'
In the present case it is an undeniable fact that the

cause of action for the proposed amended plaint is quite
distinct and different from that of the original plaint. The
(9) A.I.R. (1946) Cal. 357 (xo) 67 I.C. 894.
(u) 73 I.e. 748.
1014' BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. original plaint bases its cause of action on the remarriage

I96S
of the surviving parent U Tun Sein to his fourth wife Daw
DAWKHIN
MYINT A!','D Myint Myint which took place some time in November
ONB
v. 1953, whereas the proposed amended plaint has its cause
U TuN SBIN of action on the death of U Tun Sein which occurred on
AND FOUR
oTHERS. 24th February 1965. It must further be borne in mind
that if the plaintiffs had by the original plaint obtained a
share from U Tun Sein they would have no further claim
in his estate vide, Daw Yu v. Maung Khin (r2).
It is the fundamental principle of law that different
suits must be brought for different causes of action. In
this connection it has thus been remarked in Pethu Reddiar
v. Chidambara Reddiar (I3)-
" If it is the law that for different causes of action differ-
ent suits must be brought, that law must be upheld. If
plaintiff wants the privilege of a fresh cause of a'-.:tion, he
must pay a fresh court-fee.
A plaintiff cannot be allowe~ to amend the plaint by
tacking on to a suit a cause of action which is foreign to the
cause of action on which that suit is brought.
If th-e new cause of action is barred by limitation, to escape
that bar by tacking is to offend a principle which the Courts
have invariably maintained. If the new cause of action is
not time barred, such tacking is a fraud on the revenue, since
the only apparent reason for not bringing a second suit is
to save the court-fee."
See also Sobhraj v. F.Q; Variomal (r4) and Sashi Bhusan v.

Tulsi Charan (rs).
In the result the application for amendment of the
plaint is rejected with costs. Advocate's fees K 17 for
each of the two sets of the contesting defendants.
(t2) (1951) B.L.R. 236 (S.C.) (14) A.I.R. (1942) Sind 4

(r3) A.I.R. (19.31) Mad.s33 (zs) A.!.R. (xgso) Cal. ;c
CIVIL FIRST APPEAL
DA w THAN MYINT AND ONE (APPELLANTS)
v.
MESSRS. SHWE NI TRADING COMPANY LIMITED
(RESPONDENT) .*
Set-off-Code of Civil Proced!lre, 0. VIII, Rule 6--'Whether it catmot be-

claimed.
Held : Under Order VIII, Rule 6 the claim must be legally recoverable,.
that is, it must not be a dead claim. So unless we import such words as
"legally recoverable at the date of the institution of the suit", in one case
and "legally recoverable at the date when the counter-claim is made", in
another case, into the said enactment there cannot be two different termini'
ad quem for the purpose of limitation in respect of Order VI II, Rule 6 of the
Code of Civil Procedure. If it is time-barred, it cannot be claimed whether
the set-off is _legal of equitable.
Messrs. NanigramJaganoth v. K. A. M. Slzeih Mohamed and others, (1947)
R.L.R. 478 ; Ariff v. Jadu Natlz, 55 CaL 1090, referred to and followed.
Pragi Lal v. Ma~well and others, 7 All. 284 ; Harendra Nath Chattdhuri v.
Sourindra Nath Clzaudhuri, I.L.R. (1924) 2 Cal. 485, dissented from.
U E Maung for the appellant.
U Hla Thein for the respondent.
U SEJN THINN, J.-In Civil Regular Suit No. 413 of

I959 of the City Civil Court, Rangoon, which was insti-
tuted on 8th June 1959 the plaintiff-respondent sued the
defendants-appellants for recovery of a sum of K 3,13625.
It was the case of the plaintiff that on 9th June I956 the
parties entered into an agreement by which the plaintiff
undertook to grant a loan of K 6,500 for ~he purpose of
repai.ring the defendants' mill which was to be let out to
the plaintiff on a rental of K 90 per each working day of
Civil First Appeal No. 12 of 1965, against the decree of the Addi..
tiona! Chief Judge of Civil Court of Rangoon in Civil Regular Suit No. 413.
of 1959, dated the 22nd December 1964.
c.c. eight hours. It was also agreed that on any particular

1965
day when the total working hours fell short of full eight
DAwTHAN
MYINTAND hours the rent was to be calculated proportionately at the
.,.
ONB
MESSRS.
same rate according to the actual number of running
hours. As regards the manner for paymen_t of rent the
SHWBNI
TRADING stipulation between the parties was that half of the rent
CoMPANY
LIMITED, was :to be paid in cash and :the other half to be set-off
against the loan. In pursuance of the said agreement the
plaintiff after advancing the loan of K 6,500 worked the
defendants' mill from 3rd july 1956 :to r6th November
1956 for a total period of 74%. working days. The
plaintiff therefore claimed that as half of the rent due
had already been paid in. cash and as the remaining half
which amount~d to K 3,36375 was to be set-off against
the loan of K 6,soo, he was entitled to the sum of
K 3,n625 being the balance remaining unpaid for :the
original loan advanced by him to the defendants.
The defendants filed a written statementadmitting the
grant of loan of K 6,soo in their favour. It was however
asserted that the rent agreed upon was K 90 per diem
irrespective of the number of working hours. The
defendants also alleged .t hat on account of the continued
occupation of the mill by the plaintiff a large sum of
money was due and payable .by the plaintiff to the
defendants and. tha.t for this sum of mon~y they reserved
the right to file a suit. But on 2nd March r961 an
amep.ded written statement was filed by which the defen-
dants claimed to set-off a sumof K 8,ooo which the plain-
tiff owed them for his use arid occupation of their mill
premises and its site from 3rd July r956 to 3rd March
1959
The lower Court found that the amount which ):he
defendants sought to be set-off against :the claim of the
plaintiff being an unascertainedsum of money, they were
not entitled to a legal set-off as provided by Order VIII,
Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It was also held c.c.
1965
that even if this claim of the defendants be regarded as an
DAwTHm
equitable set-off ~t was time-barred, the amended vvTitten MYINTAND
ONB
statement in which the set-off was claimed being filed tl.
<mly on 2nd March 1964, i.e. more than three years after MBs!>RS.
SHWBNI
the accrual of their right to obtain compensation for this TRADING
CoMPANY
the trial Court relied on the ruling in ilie case of Messrs. LIMl'l'BD.
Nanigram ]aganath v. K.A.M. Sheik Mohamed and others
(r) where the following head-notes appear:-
"Held: That under the provision of Order VIII, Rule 6,
whether the set-off is legal or ~quitable it cannot be claimed
if it is . time-barred."
The learned counsel for the appellants questioned the

correctness of tlris ruling on the ground that it was con-
trary to the views expressed by the Indian High Courts
in a long . catena of decisions starting with Pragi Lal v.
Maxwell and others (2) .to Harendra Nath Chal;ldhuri v.
Sourindra Nath Ohaudhuri (3). In all these rulings a dis-
tinction was drawn between a set-off and a counter-claim.
As regards the set-off the period of limitation was to be
reckoned with reference to the plaint, while in the case
of a counter-claim the period was to be determined with
reference to the date on which the written statement was
filed. This distinction did not find favour with the
learned Judge who decided the Nanigram Jaganath case
on the ground that " the rule adopted by the High Courts
in India had i:ts inception and justification in considerations
.of equity and these considerations cannot be allowed to
over-ride the plain pro\-isions of an Act ofJ-the legislature,
namely, Section 3 of the Limitation Act: see Ariff v.
]adu Nath (4)." With respect I am in enJiireMreement
with the view for under Order VIII, ~e :i>6-he~tlaim
must be legally recoverable, that is, it must not be a dead
.
(x) (1947) R.L.R. 478. (3) l.L.R. (1924) 2 Cal. 485.
(2) 7 AU. 284. (4) SS Cal. 1090.
70
101.8 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. claim. So unless we import such words as "legally re-

I96S
coverable at the date of the institution of .t he suit", in
DAWTRAN
MYINT AND one case, and " legally recoverable at the dare when the
ONS
v.
counter-claim is made in another case, into the said
tt 1
MEssRS. enactment there cannot be two different termini ad quem .

SBW.JlNI
TRADING for the purpose of limitation in respect of Order VIII,
COMPANY
LIMITED.
Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It has always.
beeri :th' practice of this Court that in interpreting a
statute we are always guided by the following principle
laid down' in Maxwell's Interpretation o f Statutes, Volume
IX, page 14.
" It is a strong thing to read into an Act of Parliament
words which are not there, and, in the absence of clear
:necessity, it is a wrong thing to do. We are not entitled
to read words into an Act of Parliament unless clear reason
for it is found within the four corners of the Act itself."
A recent instance in which this Court adhered to this

principle is the ruling in the case of Ahmed Violin House
(Burma) Ltd. v. The Financial Commissioner (5). In the
circumstances I see no reason why we should depart from
this principle and dissent from the view expressed by
U E Maung, J. in Nanigram jaganath's case. The reasons
why he did not follow the rulings of the Indian High
. Courts were very ably and succiritly explained by the
learned Judge and I can do no better. Therefore the
contention put forward by the learned counsel .for the
appellant that this ruling should not have been followed
by the lower Cour.t is not in the least tenable. .
The lower Court has given very cogent reasons for
its findings that the terms of .t he agreement en.tered into
between the parties were as asserted by the plaintiff in
his plaint and that the sum of K 3,!2625 was due to the
plaintiff by :the defendants. In fact the learned counsel
BUR,.\I!A LA'vV REPORTS 1019
for the appellants has not seriously challenged the correct- c.c.
1965
ness of these findings which as stated above were
DAW 'f1iAN
warranted by the evidence obtaining on the record of the lV!Yl!'<I' AND
lower Court. His real quarrel was with the finding of ONE
C7o
the lower Court in disallowng the claim of set-off put MESSRS.
SHwNl
forward by the defendants in their amended written TRADING
statement. But as this claim, as discussed above, has CoMPANY
LIMITED.
become barred under section 3 of the LimitatioiJ:: Acf, l
have no alternative but to dismiss the appeal whiCh is
hereby dismissed with costs. Pleader's fee fixed. as two
gold mohurs.
INSOLVENCY CASE
Bqore U Thet Pe, J
c.c. IN THE MATTER OF CHAN KAR LI (a) U \NIN MAUNG (a)

1965
U KAw LI (DEBTOR).*
Dec. 8.
Rangom Insolvency Act s. 41 arznullment order-application under 0. 9, R.9,
C .P.C. to set aside the order-incompetent in view of s. 14(2) of Rangom
Insolvency Act.
Held : In the absence of any specific provision to the contrary, the
provisions of the Civil Procedure Code cannot limit or otherwise affect
those of the Rangoon Insolvency Act. It therefore follows that the application.
under Rule 9, Order 9 of the Civil Procedure Code is incompetent in view .
of the specific provision of s. If (2) of the Rangoon Insolvency Act.
Venugopalachariar v. Chunnilal Sowcar and others, I.L.R. Vol. XLIX,
Mad. p. 935 ; The Law of Insolvency in, India by D.F. Mulla, . znd edition,
p. 331, para. 355, referred to.
U Ko Ko Gyi (3)- for the Insolvent.

U Soe Hlaing, Official Assignee.
Mr. C. A. Soorma for Peoples' Bank No. 9
Mr. S. A. A. Pillay for Creditor No. s.
U THET PE, J.-This is an application Under Rule 9,
Order 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the
order of annullment made under section 41 of the Rangoon
Insolvency Act.
On r6th December 1963 the applicant \'ias adjudicated
an insolvent. Then on the date fixed for hearing of his
application for discharge, neither he nor his Advocate was
present before the Court and my learned predecessor
annulled the adjudication under section 41 of the Rangoon
Insolvency Act. The applicant now seeks to set aside the
order of annull11;1ent on the ground that he v\ras prevented
by illness from attending the Court on the date fixed for
-hearing of his application for discharge.
Insolvency case No. 9 of 1963.
The learned OffiCial Assignee and two of the creditors

objected to the application on the score that the provisions
of Rule 9, Order 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure do not M~~:::!sov
apply to an insolvent proceeding and that the remedy of L?(a)uKwnm
the applicant lies in section 14 (2) of the Rangoon Insol- MAUNo (a)
. her app}'1cat10n
vency A ct by a!lot. . 10r
.c
9-d'JUd'rcatiOn.
. There U(DEBToR.)
KAw LI
is much substance in their objection.
S~ction 14 (2) of the Rangoon Insolvency Act specifi-
cally provides that a debtor in respect of whom an order
of adjudication has been annulled on account of his failure
to prosecute an application ~or discharge is entitled to
present a fresh insolvency petition with leave of the Court.
Since Rangoon Insolvency Act is a special Act it will over-
ride the general provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.
To put it in another way, in the absence of any specific
provision ~b the contrary, the provisions of the Civil
Procedure Code cannot limit or otherwise affect those of
the Rangoon Insolvency Act. It therefore folloWs that
the application under Rule 9, Order 9 of the Civil Proce-
dure Code is incompetent in view of the specific provision
of section 14 (2) of the Rangoon Insolvency Act. In this
..:onnection the decision in C. V enugopalachariar v. Chun-
nilal Sowcat and others .(r) is relevant where it was held
that,
" When an order amlUlling an adjudication has been pass-
ed under section 43 .(r) of the Provincial Insolvency Act
(V of 1920), it is not open to the Insolvency Court to set
aside the order ~er ,,the provisions of Order IX of the
Civil Procedure Code.
The insolvent .sh_ould ~~ort to the definite remedy prescrib-
ed by section 10 {2) -;,~.e Act :;and C@PPttapply under Order
IX of the Code, by ~jrtue ~f J.he provisions of section 5 of
the Act."
The above decision _pf course turns on the interpreta-
tion of section ro (2)' of .~he Provincial Insolvency Act
- : - - (i).'I~i;~R:yoi: xi..ix~ Mad, p. 935:_ -.,
c.c. which is however identical to section I4 (2) of the Rangoon

1965
Insolvency Act in its wording and the principle enunciated
lNTHB
MATTER oF therein will therefore apply with equal force to the present
CBANKAR di
Lt (a) u WI.:-l procee ng.
~~';., i~) Besides the learned author on the Law of Insolvency in
(DBBToa.) India (2)has thi!? to say,
''A'. debtor whose adjudication is annulled under the sec-
tion now under consideration cannot apply to have the order
set aside under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908. The reason is that the provisions of the Code apply
subject to the provisions of the Insolvency Acts and the
Acts provide a specific remedy for such cases, namely, that
the debtor may present a fresh petition for..adjudication with
the leave of the Court by which the adjudication was
annulled."
In the result the application fails and is accordingly

dismissed. In the circumstances of the case there will -be
no order as to costs of this application.
(z) By D.F. Mulla, znd Edition, p. 331, para 355-

KULSAM BI BI (APPELLANT) c.c.

v. -1965
Dec. z.
MAIDEEN BI BI (RESPONDENT). *
Code of Civil Procedure 0. 39, Rule 2 (J)-disobeying injunction order.
Held : Apart from the bare assei tion of the defendant-respondent, there
is so farrnothing on"'r ecord to testify about the execution of the will ; much
less to prove the appointment of Mustapha as the sole executor thereof. In
the cir cumstances Mustapha should not be allowed to take the law into his
nands and to Bout the order of the Court which to his own knowledge has
issued the injunction restraining the defendant from disposing of the estate
properties.
It is common ground that the injunction order was served on Mustapha
on 23th Febuary 1964 and that despite the same he continued to dispose of
some of the estate properties. He must therefore be held to be guilty of
disobeying the order of the Court for which action should be taken against
him in accordance with the provisions of Order XXXIX, Rule 2 (3) of the
Code of Civil Procedure.
Eusoof Ahmed Sema v, Ismail Ahmed Sema, A.I.R. (1938) Ran. 322 ;
Kuchwar Lime & Stone Co., Ltd., v. Secretary of State, A.I.R. (1937) Pat.
(j s, referred to.
U Maung Maung for the appellant.
U Tin (Syriam) for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, ].-In Civil Regular Suit No.4 of 1964

of the District Court, Hanthawaddy, the plaintiff-appellant
Kulsum Bi Bi claiming to be the second wife of the deceased
Peer Mohamed filed a suit for partition and possession of a
half share in t he esta.te of the said Peer Mohamed against
the latter's first wife Maideen Bi Bi, the defendant-
respondent. One of the defences to the suit was that
Peer Mohamed left a will by which one Mustapha, a
Civil Misc. Appeal No . .20 of 1965. against the order of the District
court of Hanthawaddy in Civil Misc. case No. 9 of 1964, dated the sth
May 196s.
-
c.c. nephew of the defendant-respondent Maideen Bi Bi, was
1965
appointed the sole executor to administer the estate of the
KuLSAMBr
BI deceased. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff
t1.
MA!DEEN
appellant applied for and obtained an ad-interim injunction
Br Bt. in Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 4 of r964 of the same
Court restraining the defendant-respondent from disposing
the properties belonging to the estate. Subsequent to the
issue of the said injunction Mustapha sold out a few more
items of moveable property belonging to the estate. 'fl:le
plaintiff-appellant thereupon filed an application praying
that action may be taken against the respondent under
Order XXXIX, Rule 2(3) of the Code of Civil Proc~dure.
The learned District Judge in his order dated the 5th May
r965 pointed out that under the Mohamedan Law the
executor is the sold administrator to the estate of a deceased
person and therefore Mustapha must be deemed to have
acted bona fide in disposing of the properties in his capacity
as an ~xecutor. It was also remarked that as the properties
were sold by Mustapha and not by Maideen Bi Bi against
whom the injunction order was made, the former cannot
be said to have committed contempt of Court. The
application was accordingly dismissed with costs. Hence
the present appeal.
No doubt under the Mohamedan Law the executor is
the sole administrator to the estate of a deceased person.
But the alleged will under which Mustapha claimed .to be
the Sole executor thereof has neither been proved nor any
probate taken out in respect of it. As a matter of fact
the question whether or not the deceased Peer Mohamed at
all left a will behind is sharply in dispute between the
parties to the suit. It is settled law that the onus probandi
lies in every case upon the party propounding a will.
Please see Eusoof Ahmed Serna v. Ismail Ahmed Sema and
others (r). In the instant case apart from the bare
(1) A,I.R. (1938) Ran. 322.
assertion of the defendant-respondent, there is so far c.c.

1965
nothing on record to testify about the execution of the
KuLSAM Bi
will ; much less to prove the appointment of Mustapha as Br
v.
the sole executor thereof. In the circumstances lVIAIDEEN
Mustapha shouid not be allowed to take the law into his Br Br.
hands and to flout the order of the Court which to his own
knowledge has issued the injunction restraining the
defendant from disposing of the estate properties.
In the case of Kuchwar Lime & Stone Co., Ltd." v.
Secretary of State (2) it was held that the persons who
. were thoroughly aware of the injunction and who by
their actions were setting at naught the order of the Court
were guilty of contempt of the authority of the Court
whether or not they. were themselves bound by the
inju.nction. It is common ground that the injunction
order was served on Mustapha on 23rd December 1964 and
that despite the same he continued to dispose of some of
the estate properties. He must therefore be held . to be
guilty of disobeying the order of the Court for which
action should be. taken against him in accordance with the
provisions of Order XXXIX, Rule 2(3) of the Code of Civil
Procedure. I would accordingly set aside the order of the
learned District Judge dated the 5th May 1965 and direct
that action be taken against the said Mustapha according to
law.
Advocate's fee fixed as two gold mohurs.
(z) A.I.R. (1937) Pat. .65.

CIVIL REGULAR
Before U Thet Pe, J.
MESSRS. LIKHMICHAND HIRALAL (PLAINTIFF)
v.
H.E. JAMAL AND SEVENTEEN OTHERS (DEFENDANTS).*.
Suit for damages on account of breach of covenant of lease-ouster of the tenants

from the tenement without recourse to a Court of law-breach of covencmt ~;f
the lease governed by Article I 15 of the Limitation Act-dispossession of
a tenant in 'breach of covenant-liability of landlord to pay damages.
Held : The plaintiffs are the lessees of the defendants whose ouster of
their tenants from the tenement without recourse to a Court of law during
the subsistence of the lease is tantamount to a misfeasance arising out of the
contract of lease. Under s. ro8 (c) of the Transfer of Property Act, the
aessors are under a statutory obligation to allow the lessees to hold the leased
property without interruptio~ and the wrongful dispossession caused by the
:lessors is undoubtedly a breach of covenant of the lease, which, comes within
-the purview of Article rrs of the Limitation Act.
The plaintiffs were dispossessed on the 2oth October 1963 but restored
>to possession on 8th September 1961. The limitation under Article 115
will therefore commence only on the latter date and the suit which was
~nstituted on 3oth November 1963 must be held to be w~thin time.
Jaganath Malwari v. Kalidas Raha, A.I.R. (1929) Pat. 245 ; Raja Balu v
.Krishna Rao Ramchandra, 2 Born. 273 at 293 referred to
Lal Singh v. Hira Singh, A.I.R. (1921) Lah. 242 ; Ki1' Mohamed Khan v
.Mt. Janath, A.I.R. (1940) Lah. 359; Radha Krishna v. Radha Ramana Swami,
.A.I.R. (1941) Orissa 1, distinguished.
Held further : The landlord is under a statutory obligation to allow his
ttenants to quiet enjoyment of the leased property under s. xo8 (c) of the
'Transfe of Property Act and if he 'dispo~sesses a tenant in breach of such a
covenant, otherwise than in due course of law, he will be liable in damages.
Sayed Muktar Ahmed v. Rani Sunder Koa, 17 C.W.N. 96o; Nao Rang
.Singh v. A.J. Maik, A.I.R. (1923) Mad. 41 ; Gajadhar Ramchandra Jatia v .
.Rambhau Vishwa Nath, A.I.R. (1938) Nag. 439 ; Karchanlal v. Hari Prasad
.Dadu Khadak Singh, A.I.R. (1959) Nag. 379, referred to .
.Mr. G. N. Banerji for the plaintiff.

V Ba Than (3) for the defendants No.3 to IS.
Defendants No. I and 2 in person.
* Civil Regular Suit No. 59 of 1963.
U THET PE, ].-Plaintiffs Messrs. Likhmichand Hiralal C.C

196s
sued the defendants H. E. Jamal and 17 otheJ:4s, joint M2sRs. Lr-
ovvners of Roxy Cinema for recovery of K 62,856.42 due KHMICHAND
HlRALAL
as damages on account of the breach of covenant of lease. v.
H E. JAMAL
It is the case of the plaintiffs that by an agreement dated AND
the roth November 1950 the cinema hall known as" Roxy s~;'i,~. EN
Cinema " situated at No. 246...:_256, Phayre Street.
Rangoon, was leased o:ut to Messrs. Kapurchand (Burma)
Limited for a period of ro years renewable from year to
year at a monthly rental of K 1,200; that subsequently a
supplementary agreement dated the 19th April 1954 wa,
executed by which the lessors agreed to extend the lease
for 6 years at the expiry of the first lease on the same
terms and conditions; that on the 2nd September 1957
Messrs. Kapurchand (Burma) Limited made an outright
transfer of the lease in favour of the plaintiffs, who there-
after became the lessees and had been in possession of the
dnema hall; that on the night of the 19th October 1960
after the last show was over, the defendant No. 2 along
with others forcibly ousted the watchman and other em-
ployees of the plaintiffs and locked up the main gate of
the cinema hall thereby wrongfully dispossessing the plain-
~iffs of the leased property; that on the 2oth October 1960
the police took action under section 145 of the Criminal
Procedure Code and the cinema hall was attached by the
Western Subdivisional Magistrate in his Criminal Miscel-
ianeous Case No. 231 of 1960 where the defendants No. r
and 2 had disclosed in their evidence that they took
possession of the cinema hall after consulting the other co-
-owners; that on the nth November 1960 defendant No. r
instituted a suit for partition of the leased property in
Civil Regular Suit No. 138 of 1960 of this Court impleading
unnecessarily the plaintiffs as party defendants with a view
to mislead the Court and thus obtained an order for
.appointment of a receiver, in pursuance of which the
c. c. Official Receiver took possession of the leased property and

1965
locked up the premises, although the attachment of th~
MESSRS. Lr-
&HMICHANv
.
Cnmmal -
Court un der section } proce dure
145, Cnmma
H~AL Code w<:~..s still subsisting; that possession of the premises.
K E_J~MAL was restored to the plaintiffs only on the 8th September
sEVENusN 196r after thi~ Court had upheld the plea of the plaintiff5c
OTHBRS.
that their possession as lessees could not be interfered with,
in its Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 5 of 196I ; that the
defendants No. I to I5 had, by the wrongful acts, Jis.:
possessed the plaintiffs of the leased property from the
2oth October I96o to the 8th September 196I, for whid~
they were liable to pay K 62,856.42 in damages; and that
the defendants No. 16, I7 and 18 being residents of India
were simply added as pro forma defendants. The defen-:
'dants No. I and 2 filed separate written statements where~
as the defendants No. 3 to I5 submitted a joint written
statement. The defendants admitted that they were co.
owners of the Roxy Cinema Hall. They did not deny
that the cinema hall was originally leased out to Messrs.,.
Kapurchand (Burma) Limited who had later assigned it tQ
the plaintiffs. Defendant No. I contended that the plain-
tiffs were made party defendants in Civil Regular Suit No.
138 of 1960 of this Court as they were necessary parties
to the proceedings, while the 2nd defendant pleaded that
the dispute arose on account of the failure of the plaintiffs
to pay rents and their interference with the co-owners'
rights. Defendants No. 3 to I5, on the other hand, sub:
mitted that they held only a minor interest in the cinema
hall and they were in fact sleeping co-owners not taking
any active part in its affairs and that they had not given
their consent and approval to defendants No. I and 2 to
oust the plaintiffs nor were they consulted by defendants.
No. I and 2 before the plaintiffs were dispossessed. The
defendants further pleaded that the plaintiffs had no cause:
of action against them and that the claim for damages was c.c.
xg6s
barred by time. MESSRS. LI
On these pleadings my learned predecessor joined the K~~a~~:n

following issues : - H. E.v.JAMAL
AND
I. Is there cause of action for the suit against SEVBNTEBN
OTHERS.
Defendants I to I5 ?
2. Is the claim of the Plaintiffs barred by limitation?
3 Are Plaintiffs entitled to the sum of K 62,856.42
claimed as loss and/or damages ?
4 To what relief is the Plaintiffs entitled ?
It has been agreed by the parties before my predecessor as

well as before me that the question of quantum of
damages, if ever the plaintiffs are found to be so entitled,
should be investigated and threshed out before the Official
Referee. The issue No. 3 does not therefore arise for con-
sideration at this juncture.
Issue No.2
Being an issue of law it will b~ taken up first. It has
been argued on behalf of the defendants that the suit
having been filed only on 30th November I963 although.
the dispossession has taken place on 2oth September I960
was barred under Article 36 of the Limitation Act which
prescribe a period of 2 years. Article 36 applies to tor-
tious act independent of contract. It has no application to
a suit for damages for malfeasance or misfeasance or non-
feasance based upon a liability ex contractu. The same
view has been taken in ]aganath Malwari v. Kalidas Raha
:(r) where it was held that a suit for compensation for any
malfeasance or misfeasance ex delicto, and not otherwise
provided for, is governed by Article 36 whereas a suit for
damages for malfeasance or misfeasance or for negligence
(x) A.I.R. (1929) Pat. 245
c.c. ex contractu is covered by Article ns. In the instant
196s
case the plaintiffs are the lessees of the defendants whose
MessRs.Lt-
KHMicHAD ouster of their tenants from the tenement without recourse
Hr~~L to a Court of law during the subsistence of the lease is
H. E. 1AMAL tantamount to a misfeasance arising out of the contract of
AND
seVENTEEN lease. Under section I08 (c) of the Transfer of Property
OTHERS.
Act, the lessors are under a statutory obligation to allow
the lessees to hold the leased property without interrup-
tion and the wrongful dispossession caused by the lessors
is undoubtedly a breach of covenant of the lease, which,
in my opinion . comes within the purview of Article IIS
of the Limita~ion Act.
A breach of covenant for quiet possession by the
lessees is a continuing breach within the meaning of section
23 of the Limitation Act vide Raja Balu v. Krishna Rao.
Ramchandra (2). In the present case the plaintiffs were
dispossessed on the 2oth October I 963 but restored to
possession on 8th September 1961. TI1e limitation under
Article I r 5 will therefore commence only on the latter
date and the suit which was instituted on 30th .November
I963 must be held to be within time. The decisions in
Lal SiPgh v. Hira Singh (3), Kir Mohamed T(han v . Mt.
Janath (4; and Radha Krishna v. Radha Ramana Swami (5}
relied upon by the defendants are distinguishable inasmuch
as what they laid down was that an act of trespass a.lnount-
ing to complete ouster was not a continuing wrong within
the meaning of section 23 of the Limitation Act. If a
trespasser completely ousts the owner the injury is com-
plete at the date of ouster and in such a case section 23
of the Limitation Act will have no applicat.ion. There can
be n o quarrel over this proposition of law. But in the
present case the parties are landlords and tenants. The
landlords are under a statutory obligation to put the
(2) 2 Born. 273 at 293 (4) A.I.R. (t94o) Lah. 359
(3) A.I.R. (1921) Lah. 242. (s) A.I.R. (1941) Orissa x.
BURMA LAW REPORTS 103!
tenants in uninterrupted possession of the demised pro- C. C

196s
perty and if they commit a breach of such convenant, their - L
MESSRS. t-
act will surely amount to continuing breach unlil they KHMICHAND
.
restore possessiOn of t he tenement to t he tenants. 'fhe HIRALAL
v.
answer to the issue w.ill therefore be in the negative. H. E~J;MAL.
SBVNTEEN
OTHERS.
Issue No. 1
The solution to this issue turns on the question whether
the defendants had wrongfully dispossessed the plaintiffs
of the leased property. The landlord is under a statutory
obligation to allow his tenants to quiet enjoyment of the
leased property under section ro8 (c) of the Transfer of
Property Act and if he dispossesses a tenant in breach of
such a covenant, otherwise than in due course of law, he
will be liable in damages. If any authority is required on
this subject the decisions in Sayed Muktar Ahmed v. Rani
Sunder Koa (6), Nao Rang Singh v. A.]. Maik (7), Gajadhar
Ramchandra ]atia v. Rambhau Vishwa Nath (8) and Kar
chanlal v. Hari Prasad Dadu I<:hadak Singh (9) may be
referred to.
So far as the defendants No. r and 2 are concerned,
there is enough evidence to hold that they were responsi
ble for the ~'Tongful dispossession of the plaintiffs from
the Roxy Cinema Hall. Vayapuri (PvV r), the night
watchman of the cinema hall had testified that the first
defendm~t with some others assaulted him when he attemp-
ted to resist the defendant No. 2 from locking up the main
gate of the cinema hall after the last show was over on
the night of the 19th October 1960. Both of them were
admittedly convicted in Criminal Regular Trial No. 2 12 of
1961 of t~1e Court of the Western Subd.ivisional Magistra te
under section 341 of the Perial Code for wrongful restraint
by locking up the cinema hall. They had admitted in that
(6) I7 C.W.N. 960. (8) A.I.R. (1938) Nag. 439
(7) A.I.R. (1923) Mad. 41. (9) A.I.R. (1959) Nag. 379
i032 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. proceeding as well as in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.

235 of 1960 of the. Court o f th e western subdiVIs10na
1965
- . . 1
MESSRS. Lt
KBM!CHAND
M ag1strate
. w IC was a procee ng opene y e po11ce
h. h di d b th .
~ unde:r: section I45 of the Criminal Procedure Code that
H. E. JAMAL they had in fact taken physical possession of the cinema
A~
tEVENTBEN hall after the last show. The action of the defendants
OTHBRS. No. I and 2 led to the police setting the criminal law in
motion precipitating in the attachment of the cinema hall
by the Criminal Court. The defendant No. 1 further tried
to dislodge the plaintiffs.from the tenement by civil process
and his attempt would have met with complete success .
had it not been for the appellate order of this Court ruling
that the co-owners of the property had no present right
to dispossess their tenants. The chain of events clearly
implicates the defendants No. I and 2 as the real culprits
responsible for the wrongful dispossession of the plaintiffs
from the leased property. Besides, both the defendants
No. I and 2 had not ch9sen to go jnto the witness-box to
deny and challenge the plaintiffs' case and the presumption
under section I 14 of the Evidence Act is therefore irresisti-
ble against them. It has been said by the defendant No.2
at the time of argument that the dispute had arisen as a
result of the plaintiffs' failure to pay rents and the inter
ference of the co-owners' right. But it must not be forgot-
ten that the defendants are not entitled to take the law
into their own hands. If there is any grievance against
their tenants they should bring the matter before a court
of law.
On the other hand, the defendants No. 3 to IS stand
on different footing. They hold only niinor interest in
the cinema hall. They have not personally taken part in
ousting the plaintiffs from the premises and they have
<:orne forward and testified that they did not consent or
connive at the action of defendants No. r and 2. It has
been sctid on behalf of the plaintiffs that since defendants
No. I and 2 had admitted in criminal proceedings that a C. C.

1965
meeting of co-owners was held on the afternoon of 1:he -
MBSSRS. Lr-
f ateful day where the co-owners agreed to the reentry of KHM1CHAND
the leased property by defendants No. I and 2 the other Hm:_LAL

defendants should also be held equally liable. , The admis- H. E.JAMAL
AND
sion of defendants No. I and 2 in criminal proceedings SEVENnmN
OTHERS.
cannot, in my opinion, bind the other defendants inasmuch
as they did not represent the interest of the latter in those
proceedings. Thus it has been held in K.ishan Singh v.
Lachmandas (Io) that under section I8 of the Evidence Act
co-defendants are not bound by the admission of another
co-defendant if they are not represented by him and have
independent rights of their own.
It has further been urged that the conduct of
defendants No. 3 to IS in not protesting against the action
of defendants No. I and 2 when they forcibly took over
the cinema hall as well as the attempt of defendant No. r
to dispossess the plaintiffs by appointment o~ a receiver
through civil process is tantamount to acquiescence. It
must however be borne in mind that when defendants No.
3 to 15 came to know of the wrongful dispossession of the
-cinema hall by defendants No. I and 2, the act of ouster
was already complete and their silence or non-protes.t
cannot therefore be regarded as admission or acquiescence.
Furthermore, the fact that they have not contested the
application of defendant No. I for appointment of receiver
in the partition suit does not necessarily mean that they,
have impliedly aided defendant No. r in his attempt to
oust the plaintiffs from the leased property. It is true that
defendant No. 7 Azlm S. Jamal had testified in one of the
criminal cases that he was present when the eeting of
<:a-owners decided on the re-entry. In this Court,
however, he has not admitted that there was a meeting of
<:o-owners on the day when the dispossession took place.
71
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. . The testimony of defendant No. 2 in the criminal proceed;

1965
- -
mgs to the effect that he h ad to go round and get the
=~~~- consent of the co-owners in their respective houses
..
HIRALAL between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on that day lends support to
IL E. JAMAL Azim's denial that any meeting of the co-owners was held
sE=EBN on the fateful day. There will be no necessity for
oTHERs. defendant No. 2 to go round and get the consent of the
co-owners in their respective houses if the meeting of co-
o.wners had in fact taken place. I am therefore of opinion
that it is rather doubtful on the evidence on record that
defendants No. 3 to 15 had expressly or impliedly abetted
defendants No. I and 2 to commit the breach of covenant
of the lease.
Under these circumstances the answer to the issue will
be that the plaintiffs have causes of action against
defendant No. I and 2 and that they have no causes of
action against defendants No. 3 to 15.
In the . result there will be a preliminary decree with
costs against defendants No. I and 2 with the direction
that the Official Referee will under issue No. 3 investigate
and go .into .the question of quantum of damages to which
the plaintiffs ~ay be found entitled for their wrongful
di$p<?~sessi9n - of the tenement from 2oth October I 960 to
8th S~p~~m~r ~;9.6 I. . The suit against the other defend
:ants is ~~rp.issed,: . "Under :i he circumstances obtaining iii
the Case )10 ?r<;ler as. tO COSts is m~d~ :iJi th~IT .fiwour.
BURMA,LAW REPORTS 1()35

Bejo1e U S~n Thirm, :J.
SWEYADA R.t\.HMAN (a) MAUNG THA TUN c.c.

1965
(APPELLANT)
19 Nw.
v.
MA NOOR NAHUR AND TWO OTHERS (RESPONDENT).*
Guartfians And Wards Act, S. ?- Principles governing the appointment of gordian-

personal law of minor tal~en into consideration.
Held : The principle governin.g the appointment of a guardian has been
well settled in that when the custody of the minor child comes before the Court
the paramount consideration must be the weJ!are of the minor as a whole than
that the Court is not so much concerned with the feelings of parents and natural
guardian as with the proper welfare of the minor.
Govindaswamyandanotherv.N. ChinaTamhi, (1952) B.L.R.p.8 (H.C.);
U Maung Maung v. Ma Aye Bu, (1952) B.L.R. p. 406 (H.C.), referred to.
Held further : In preferring the mother to the father for appointme.qt as
the guardian, it has been considered whether it is consistent with the law t<>
which the oiinor is subject, namely, the Mahomedan Law, and the fact that the
mother had re-married and had children by the subsequent marriage.
Mt. Samiunnissa v. Mt. Saida Khatun, A.I.R. (1944), AU. 202, referred t()
and followed.
U Tun Sein for the appellant.
Mr. M. A. Subhan for the respondents.
u SEIN THINN, ].-The essential facts of this case

which lie withip a narrow compass were as follows :
The appellant Sweya4a Rahman (a) MaungTha Tun
married the .first respondent M~ Noor Nahur in the year
1955 according to Moslem rites, both parties being
Mahomedans.. Ab.out <l year of t.heir coverture there waS-
a divorce wh~n ~~ Noor Nahur was -already four months
advanced in ,pregnancy~ After their separ~tion .Ma Noor
Nah~r went. and stayed in the house o( he;r .father Usman.
* Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2z of 1965, against the decree of the District
Court of Akyab in Civil Misc. Case No. 3 of'I965, dated, 3rd April 1965.
1036 BURMA LAW .REPORTS
c.c. Ali, the 2nd respondent, where the third respondent Noor
I96S
Jehan was born. Both of them re-married and have
~;'~!:(a) children by :their subsequent marriages. When Noor
MAUNo THA Jehan wa.s about one year old Ma Noor Nahur applied
T:_N and obtained an order under section 488 of the Code of

~~!u~~~o Criminal Procedure by which the appellant was directed
Lz oTHERs. to pay a monthly allowance of K 20 for the maintenance
of his _minor daughter.
On rst February 1965 the appellant filed an applica-
tion under section 7 of the Guardians and Wards Act in
Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 3 of 1965 of the District
Court of Akyab seeking to be appointed guardian of the
person of his minor daughter. The grounds advanced by
:the appellant in support of his application were that the
minor was not properly looked after by :the mother and
her step-father who have children by :their present
marriage and that he being ):he natural father of the
minor was entitled :to be appointed the guardian. The
application was contested by .the respondents alleging that
it was a mere subterfuge on the part of the appellant to
avoid payment of maintenance which had fallen into
arrears for nearly two years. The lower Court after a
careful scrutiny of the evidence adduced by the par.ties
came to the finding that the appellant was not a suitable
person .to be appointed the guardian and accordingly dis-
missed the application with costs. Hence ):his appeal.
Although the parties were at variance regarding the
actual age of the minor it was common ground that she
has not attained the age of puberty. It was also in
evidence that she has, since her birth, lived together with
her mother and also as a protege of her maternal' grand-
father Usman Ali who was no o:ther :than a .person res-
ponsible .for the education of llie appellant himself. The
lower Cour.t has also gone to the extent of examining
the minor with a view to find out her wishes.. In he~
BURMA LAW REJ:i>OR.ts 1037
examination it was made out that her attitude tmvards c.c.

x9.6s
her father was that of a stranger. It must naturally be S~A
so for there is nothing on the record to indicate the "!MHMAN .!a)
.
eXlstence of c1ose -
nes between th
. e mmor d augh ter and MAUNO
TuNTaA
her father since his divorce with her mother. The MA Nooa
learned trial Judge has also pointed out that the appellant NAHUR ~ND
who was working as a teacher in a village some ~istance z oTHERs.
away from home could stay at home only duilng :the
week-ends. In the circumstances I find it hard to hold
that it would be for the welfare of the minor if the
appellant be appointed the guardian.
The law regarding the appointment of .a guardian is
laid down in section 17 of the G_uardians and Wards Act,.
the relevant portion of which reads as foUows ;
" In appointing or declaring the guardian of a minor. the
ourt shall, subject to the provisions of this section, be
guided by what, conSistently with the law to which tire
niirror is subject, appears in the circwnstances to be for the
welfare o_f the minor. In considering what will be for the
welfare of the minor, the Court shall have regard to the age.
sex and religion of the minor, the character and capacity of
the proposed guardian and his nearness of kin to the minor;
the wishes, if any, of a deceased parent, and any existing or
previous relations of the proposed guardian with the minor
or his property.''
In accordance with the aforesaid provisions of law the

principle governing the appointment of a ~dian has
been well settled in that when the custody of~the'--rninor
child comes before the Court the paramount consideration
must be the welfare_of the minor as a whole arrd>thaf the
Court is not so much concerned with the feelings of
parents and natural guardi~n as with the proper -wel~e
of the minor. Please .see Govindaswamy and another v.
N. China Tambi (1). This principle also finds favour with
(1) (I9SZ) B.L.R. p. 8 (H.C:).

BYRMArLAW REPORTS
. : : .. .. . .. i. ~ . ; , .. ~ "' . ......... ~ .
c~965.
.c. ~he . l~arned Jwlges,_ of ... tlJ,e High. Court- who decided ...the
' .. . - . .. ' . ' . .
--:-'
S\\'EYADA
case,of.IJ.Maung
' . . '.. .. .. .'
Maung
...
.v. Ma
.. .. . . .
Aye
.
Bu (2) .. where the
. .
RAlftiAN '' (-a) foJ}o'yv:jng head~notes . appear :
~Au~:o' T.k~ ' ' .. . . .. . . ... . . .
... "f-uN '" :.. : ": E eld::.Ici:s tile interest :and weW::it:e.:of the minor which
. A. oN
M .. OOR :.. : . shq~l_d . h~ve .. . par~niount con's ideration. 'the .rights of
~A~ .. AN~ . ,. - guard,ian.ship under the law to which -the minor is subject or
Z Ol'HERS ... . " " . . . . .
:. ' ; , . " 9.1:1. \b.~ groUJld. of.., prop1pqmty must . be assigned .to .a .sub-
>,..:of.?,i~<< '~~rw>n..;). :. :: .. ... .. . . .:. .
~-;'. fJ1-Js/its~~in~ tie~r ~&. ine thai :~he o~der of -~h~ 16wer
t~urt in' dismi~sing t~~: app_~i~a,?<)~. ?f the ~ppli~~~t. ~~~
quite justified. As pointed out above there is .over.:
whr~lming :evide:o.ce ~on the ..record to ;prove . that' the ~ res-
po:P:de:P.:trMa ~ Noor . Nahui who . is the:. natural :mother of
the minor: amKwith. whom the rriinor has _ been staying
~tn,c~)1er. bj,rth ~s a fit and ,prope:r pers.o n in whose.custody
!4e J!li~~~ -~o~i~--.b~. : i--tne appel~an~ Sweyada Ra~ma~ (a)
M?upiTh<\:. :f-un :. :o~ :1;lur _othe~ hand...h~s. now a new family
o.f:his'{aW'rrcand.jn::v.ie.w 'of: the:fact ~at he: was awaY: from
ltdirrt( fG>r mbSt of. the .rune, could hdt be' considered a fi~
. peis~n.: to ~e~the
. '" .
gri~dia~
: . , , . .
o{
.
tlie.. r'ni1rior . und~r. .co~sidera-
..
tibn:.. 'I .have .also considered whether 'in .preferring the
roJthbi: t~ (th~ :ratb.~r: .for . appointn~ent as 'the: guardia~. it
iS,.corisistent with the.law to which the minor. is -subject,
n~ili~ly; the Mahomedan Law. . In this connection many
rulings have been cited _a t the Bar in which a mother was
prefen~d to the father or other dose relatives but the
ruling which is directly in . point is the case of
Mt. Samiunnissa v, Mt. Saida Khatun .(3) where the
appointment of a mother as a guardian in preference to
other close relatives by the District Judge was approved
by the High Court. In that case the mother had
re-married an~ had children by the subsequent marriage.
. In conclusion, I. would like. to point out tha.t as a
Court''of appeal I am not in a position to interfere with
(z) (x9'.5z) B.L.R. p. 496 (H,C.); :(3) ~.I.R. (1944) All. zoz.
BURMA,. ,LAW ~REPORTS
' I, t
JO~?
. . ..
\,
the findj~g of 1;he tdai-.C.o urt which was based qnevidence ~9~5
which has been correctly appreciated by it. The learned
Counsel. for the appe,l lant has .net been able to point out R~=~~(o)
anything which does not warrant the conclusion arrived. MAu~THA
at by the trial Judge. As pointed out in the case of ~N
. . MA r OOR
Ma Than Ym v. Ma Than May and others (4): "what the NAHUR AND
appellate Court has to do is to see whether the principles z OTHERS.
of law. ?pplicabl~ to the. ea.se .yver~ appreciated and
correctly applied, whether there was evidence upon which
the Court of first instance could :find _the facts--as it did,
v\rhetJ:l~r any mistak~ of fact o.r : .Qf .: irif~reri'~e: ' or, -. any
m.a~eriaT o.vet:sight h~s. qccurr~d .~ny .OP~of whkp_:_'might
reasonably affect the result, whether the weight ,of- the
evidence shows that the trial Court came :fo a.l'ight con-
dusiop..- pearjn~(in' mind -that the Jtidge\vho. saw and
a-
~eard 't h.e :wrtnesses 'is' in much beh~r:: :Po.sitio~ to for~
an .estimate- of the .worth of the testimony: than the
~ppellate:_ .Cour:t .. w}lich . ha~ ..:-.rj9~ ..t.li~r .. "adv~~tage:;~
Applyirig these pnndples to thi,.present case before- i me
fin~ that there is no groun5f .whatso~ver to)nterfere . wit4
tli~'. judgment and: oi-dhl- or the .
iower . court. In the
circumstances- I h~~e no altemati:ve but to dismiss ,this
appeal-which is hereby ciisn.1~5:5ed With costs.: 'Advocate:s
fee.'fi:x:e'd as .2 (tv:vo) Gol~ M<?hurs: . ..
- ' .
- . _ ..-: ~: _;..: (4H~94P) '!l.~.R..p .1:68. : '. ! .
i040 BuRMA LAW REPORTS
CIVIL MiSCELLANEOUS APPLICATION
Before U [{yaw Zan U, U Chit and U Sein Thinn, J .J.
c.c. U OHN TIN .(APPLICANT)

1965
19 Nov. v.
DAW TIN MYA AND ONE :{REsPoNDENTs).*
Union Judiciary Act, s.6-distinction between a suitfor partitmn and an administra-

tion suit-nature of administration ~it explained--o.z, R. 2 (r)a11d 0.23, l?tde
1 (x) C.P.C. for relinquishment or aba11Mrtment of part of claims whether
the relinquishment of the paddy lands out of the deceased's esiate alters the
nature of the administration suit.
Held : It is not seen how the suit has turned intc;~ a suit for partition simply
because the properties barring those waived by the 1st respondent remain in
possession of the applicant. The suit is styled as a suit for administration.
praying ~or a decree for (i) declaration of the shares o'f the parties in the estate,.
(ii) .ascertainment of the extent of the. estate 6f the d eceased, (iii) accounts and
(iv) administration. The properties should no doubt be ultimately partitioned,
but that does not make the suit a partition suit. The partition may be an
incident but it is not a necessary incident of the administration of the de.;
ceased's estate. A suit for partition is not an administration suit though' the
latter involv~ the fonner. . Order 20, Rule 13 or' the Code of Civil Proce"dure-
provides that ail persons with claims may come in under the preliminary decree
and establish their rights. If the applicant claims that some of the properties
in his possession are his own it is open to him to establi:sh his rights. There
is no reason why a Court should not decide as between the parties whether
the assets belong to the deceased or not. In an administration suit a complete
inquiry necessarily implies determination of title to properties and the court is.
bound to decide questions as to ownership of such properties as an incident of
the administration of the estate. Administration means management of the
deceased's estate by the Court on request and consists of ascertainment and:
presentation of the estate, collection of assets, payment of debts and legacies~
acts in respect of adverse claims to assets and finally distribution among the
heirs. The 1st respondent in her plaint stated that the properties are in.
possession of the applicant and he is managing them with the approval of the
parties and therefore the applicant cannot be said to be in wronglful or illegal
possession. If he was in wrongful or illegal possession a suit for administratio11:
may not be proper. The present suit being for collection of assets, amongst
others, in the hands of the applicant who is properly joined as a defendant being:
an heir, it is not outside the scope of an administration :suit. This case is not
only in form but also in substance a suit for ~drninistration.
Civil Misc. application No. 134 of 1964, against the order of t!lls Court
Rangoon in Civil First Appe:i!No. 127 of 1963, date z8th November, 1964--
Mt. Amir Bi v. Abdul Rahim and others, A.I.R. (1928), Mad. p. 760; C.C.
A.S.P.S.K.R. Karuppan Chettyar and one, v. A. Chokkalingan Chettyar, (1949) 1965
B.L.R p. 46 (S.C.), referred to. U OBN TIN
Held further : Order 2, Rule 2(1) and Order 23, Rule 1(1) of the Code of "
Civil Procedure provide for relinquishment or abandonment of part of the claim DAW TlN
and in exercising such a right no application for an amendment of the plaint but MYA Am>
an intimation to the 'court is necessary and the Court has only to note it and ON'B.
there ends the matter.
Duggempudi RamakriShna Reddi v. Duggempudi Veerareddi and another ;
U Thi11t and one v. Daw Chit Pu, (1962) B.L.R. 329 (C. C.), referred to.
U Aye Maung for the applicant.
U Ze Ya for the respondent No. I.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-This is an application under

section 6 of the Union Judiciary Act for leave to appeal
against the judgment and decree of the learned single
Judge of this Court (U Maung ~aung, j.) in Civil First
Appeal No. 127 of 1963.
In Civil Regular Suit No. 2 of 1958 of the Distrid
Court of Maubin, the respondent No. r Daw Tin Mya
sued :the applicant and the respondent No. 2 who are her
younger brother and elder sister for administration of
the estate of their deceased father shown in schedules.
A, B, C, D and E at.tached to the plaint. The parties are
Burmese Buddhists. It was alleged that the entire estate
is in possession and under the control of the applicant,.
who was living under the parental roof until the death
of the fati:J,er, and as now managing the same with the
consent and approval of the parties.
The applicant denied the gold and diamond jewelleries
shown in schedules B and C formed a part of the estate.
He admitted that only five boats shown as item 13 in
schedule A and :the paddy lands being items r, 2 and 3
in schedule D belong to .the estate and stated the remain-
ing items in schedules A and D are his self-acquired pro-
perties. Schedule E shows the mesne profits derivable
c.:c.- from fouY rice inills-sho"v.n in schedule A as items-I to 4
~ 'The-- respcni.dent . No. 2 supported the brother (the appli-
P.-.o~. Tx'N ~ant) almC?_?t Verbatim at -literatim.
D.~W.- TIN.: .
lY.lvA ANti .When the 2nd r~sponden in her rejoinder pressed the
ON!'!.
Court to call upon the 1st respondent (the plaintiff) to
furnish cerpfied ~opies of :maps_and ll).story of holdings
bf ali t_he~ 1arid~ th_e 1st _respondent informe~ the Court- in
writing through her learned Advocate that no m:1ps were
actually needed at that ~t:age- since- she had given the
boundaries and numbers as requrred by Order 7 Rule 3
of the Code of Civil Pt-oeedufe for identification. under~
taking at the same time to file them later when needed
a.sshe was-then in straitened circtim.Sta:rices, but the Court
oii!".:2.4th' ]Ulyj 1'963-- r-efused under. pain of dismissal of tae
suit," .:so: mi. -28th.~. AugU.st "I963 she verbally vvaived o"r
reliriqliished ;alf. the -paddy 1ands -s110wn as . item r 4. m
schedule A which are also shown-in sehedule D measUring
about: soo.- ~cres -il1 alL:.-- The Cour:t,- however, directed her
to . file a signed statement ~0 on. 2_ISt August I963 her
idirne4 pl~ader filed . a staterne~t in .writing . abandoning
th~' .
.aforesaid
. .
.lands. There was no objecti.o:q. On .
z8th
SepteiJ.lber ~963 the ..Court framed . three jssues and ~he
first. and second issues dealt with properties leavjng aside
those paddy lands relinquished by the zst respondent.
These issues specifically referred to t4e properties other
.. 0 c- c- c- c-
0an- those relinquished ( m'P:cq ~m .~t~mGo:>? oou:>
<olJ"=>:':f:Do _). -Again there was no objection to the issues
framed by the Court. When no objection as to the main-
tainability of the suit was r?-ised promptly in the trial
Court i~ is deemed to have been waived.
There is no dispute that each is entitled to one-third
of the. estate in the. suit. . The Court passed a preliminary
decr~e to that effect dlrect~g as usual to take accounts
of t~e : li~~ili~e~ ~~ assets_l_eaving ~aside the pa~lc:~y lands
~elinq~i:S.h~_d>-; _.<"~.?-~ cf:~ {: ~pp~in:t -~'__CqmJ.ll!ssioner . ~nd . ~
BURMA
.. ..
LAW
\ .'.
.REPORTS
.
10.43
~ec~iyer if .the .par9es approved. Against this decree the c.c.

1965
applicant went up on appeal being. Civil First Appeal No.
U Orui TIN
127 qf '.r963 of. this Court on the ground that by waiving tl.
DAWTIN
.or r~imquishing the paddy lands the suit has turned ~nto MvA AND
.a suit fo~ p;rrtition of the properties in possession of the ON.
appell.arit' and as sucli it is not maintainable, the parties

peing Btirinese Buddhists but hewas not successful.
Ben<;~ ~his application for leave to appeal again.
. .. . . . .
We :do not see how the suit has turned into a suit
for ;partition .simply. because the properties barring those
waived by.the rst respondentr:emain in possession of the
~ppljc~~t. The suit is st)l'led as a suit for administration
pr~y\ng : for ~ decree for '(i) declaration of shares of the
parti~s in :the estate, .(ii) 'ascertainment of the extent of
the. estate .bf the ..deceased, (iii) accounts and (iv) admini-
.str:ation. , Th:e properties should no doubt he ultimately
partitioned:hut that ..does not make the suit a partition
sujt.', See Mt. A.inir Bi' v. . Abdul Rahim . Sahib and
otl,.e:rs .(r'l. The partition may.. be an incident but it is
not a necessary in.ci.dent .ef.. the administration .of the
~ec~ase..d's estate: A ~uit for partition is not a suit for
~9'min.istr?tion though the latter 'involves the former.
Order 20, Rule r 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure prov:idcs
~hat all p~rson!) with claims may c~me in. under the pre-
~iminary decree. anq. establish their rights. If the
~ppli~t .claims. :that some .o f the properties in his posses-
sion .?fe his o.~ it is open to him. to estab~ish his rights.
TI1ere. is rio reason why a Court should not decide as
between the parties whether the assets belong to the
deceased 9r not. -In ~n administration suit a complete
inquiry necessarily. implies determination of title to
properties and the Court is bound to decide questions as
to _own~rs~p of ~uch properties as an..incident. of the
.administration
f ' :.
of . the
.
estate..
;, '
Administration

. . means
I
(1) F.I.:R. (1928J Mad.
'! \ ~ '
p. 760.
o ' - ' o ' o
. ..
'
J -. : 0 ..
BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c . management of the deceased's estate by the Court on
x~6s
u OHN TIN
request and consists of ascertainment and preservation of
the estate, collection of assets, payment of debts and
"
DAWTIN
MYA AND legacies, ;:tcts in respect of adverse claims to assets and
ONB.
finally distribution among :the heirs. The rst respondent
in her plaint stated that the properties are in possession
of the applicant and he is managing them with ~he
approval of the parties and therefore the applicant cannot
be said to be in wrongful or illegal possession. If he was
in wrongful or illegal possession a suit for administration
may not be proper. The present suit being for collection
of assets, amongst others, in .the hands of the applicant
who is properly joined as a defendant being an heir. it is
not outside the scope of an administration suit. In our
view the instant case is not only in form but also in
substance a sui.t for administration. It is a trite saying
that a party should be allowed to win or lose on a case
set out in his pleading and it is not the function of the
appellate Court to make out a case different from :the cne
set out in pleading. A.S.P.SX.R. Karuppan Chettyar and
one v. A. Chokkalingam Chettiar (2). This is not a suit
for partial administration of the estate nor a suit for
partition either.
The learned Advocate for the applicant was unable to
show that an heir cannot waive or relinquish any of his
.claims to the estate. There is no prohibition in law that
one cannot claim less than what is actually due. Order ~.
Rule 2 (I) and Order 23, Rule r (I) of the Code of Civil
Procedure provide for relinquishment or abandonment of
part of the claim and in exercising such a right rio appli-
cation for an amendment of the plaint but an intimation
to the Court is necessary and the Court has only to note
it and there ends the matter. Duggempudi Ramakrishna
Reddj v. Duggempudi Veerareddi and another (3). In
(z) (1949) B.L.R. p. 46 (S.C.) (3) (1949) B.L.R. p. 46 (S.C.)
this connection we may refer to U Thint and one v . c.c.
1965
Daw Chit Pu (4). It was a suit for administration and
one of the points raised was there had already been a u OHN v.
'I'IN
partition amongst the heirs al)d that in any event the MYA DAWTIN
ANI)
plaintiff had no.t brought in all the properties in the estate ONit.
of the deceased. It was held by the Bench that any party

to the administration suit could allege that some of the
properties belonging to the estate had been left out in the
schedules but the plaintiff could not be non-suited on
that account alone. By waiver a legal right is lost so far
as the properties waived are concerned but the suit sti.ll
remains alive. The submission of the learned Advocate
for the applicant that the relinql,lishment of the paddy
lands out of the deceased's estate alters the nature of the
administration suit to a suit for partition and that a suiti
for partition is not maintainable amongst the Burmese
.Buddhists is a preposterous proposition of law on the
facts and circumstances of the suit cutting off 'the rights
and remedies of the plaintiff (respondent No. r) and must
be rejected.
There is no substance in this application and it is
therefore dismissed with costs. Advocate's fee s (five).
gold mohurs.
(4) (1962) B.L.R. 329 (C.C;)

CIVIL REVISION
Before U l{yaw Zan U, j.
c. c.
I96S
u-
THEIN KYI AND ONE
- - - - - - - (APPLICANT)
u THEIN KYI AND ONE
Nov. 19.
v.
) *
U KYIN HOKE (RESPONDENT.

U KYIN HOKE
Suit for possession of premises as the tenant-cross suit for dedaration. claiming
the same reliej-Revisional power of the Chief Court ttnder s. 25 of the
Rangoon City Civil Court Act.
Held : The deduction made by the Trial Court from the evidence is quite
correct and there is no substantial injustice due to an erroneous decision on
facts and the Court of Revision cannot interfere under s. 25 of the Rangoon
City Civil Court Act.
Siva Dass Dey v. Ashabi and one, I.L.R. 3 Ran.' 471 ; S.S. Mohameti
Hanifa v. K.O. Mohamed Kasim., (1950) B.L.R. 26 (H.C.); Sultan Ahmed v.
Nasarajaman, (1950) B.L.R. 369 (H.C.) ; Ram Krishna Shukla and others v.
Thakur Sri Ramjanki, I.L.R. 35 Pat. 986, referred to.
U Than Aung for the applicant.

U Maung Maung for the :r;.espondent.
U KYAW ZAN U, J.-Civil Regular Suit No. 9II of 1963

and Civil Regular Suit No. 32 of 1964 of the qty Civil
Court, Rangoon, are connected as they are cross-suits.
The former out of which Civil Revision No. 10 arises was
instituted by U Kyin Hoke (respondent) on 7th September
1963 against U Thein Kyi and Daw Thein Oo who are
husband and wife (applicants) for possession of the mit
premises 'k nown as Room No. 4A in house No. 19, Yor;k
Road, Rangoon, claiming that he is the tenant and that the
applicants being his close and intimate friends were
permitted to stay in the said premises without any charge.
0
Civil

Revision. No ...!.
ll
of r965
.
against
.
the decree of the 4th Judge>
City Civil Court of Rangoon io~ Civil Regular suit No. 9II/63 and No. 32/64.
BURMA LAW REPORTS.
In the course of the hearing of the suit the applicants filed c.c.
1965
the cross suit being Civil Regular Suit No. 32 of 1964
against him out of which .
Civil Revision No. r I arose for a KYI
u AND
TaEIN .
oN
declaration that they and not he are the tenants of the u TaBIN
premises. By consent of the parties evidence was taken Kvx A:_n oNJi
in the first suit .for both the suits. and the trial Court held UHoKBKYIN
that the respondent U Kyin Hoke is the tenant and gave UKYIN
him a decree for possession with costs dismissing the HoKB.
applicants' suit for declaration with costs. These two
applications were by consent taken up and heard together
and accordingly this judgment is written for both these
revision applications.
The main point for determination in these two applica-
tions is which party is the tenant of the suit premises.
The applicants alleged that the respondent U Kyin Hoke
merely acted as their agent and later renounced the agency
to set up title in himself as the tenant.while U Kyin Hoke
alleged that the applicants are mere licensees occupying
the premises at his pleasure, and tJ:lat he is the real tenant~
In all the exhibits relit receipts U Kyin Hoke is shown ~
tenant. . The deposit receipt (Exhibit u ) of the Rtgoon
Electric S~pply Board for.the suit premises also shows him
as the depositor. The electricitY bills and receipts
(Exhibits e; series) are also iri his name. He stated .that .
he took the applicants in at his firsf residence in Zafarsha
Road
. when their
. .house in A.F.P.F.L.
'.
Quarter. was burnt.
down and when he .shifted to No. i33, Y:edash;:ty (old)
Street, B~h.~n. _he again gave them accommodatiqn. Ko
Maung Han ana Ko .Khin Maup.g (PWs 2 and 3).supported
him. The parties w~re so in~at~ and friendly tqa~ the
r~spondent .(U Ky1n Ho).C~) regarded the applicants as. his
own parents and h~ a<;Imitte:d tpat he ~ven gave t;4eir
names in his national registration certificate as his parents~
He.trustedthem so much that heeven entrusted his money
with them. Even in his lif~ insurance policy (Exhibit No. r)
. 1048 BURMA LAW REPORTS
c.c. he made the assignment to their son as his younger

I96S
brother. The applicant U Thein Kyi did not enter the box
u THEIN but his wife Daw Thein Oo admitted that she and her
u THEIN family were accommodated by U Kym
KY! AND ON . I:.roke at h'IS house
KYI .AND oN in Zafarsha Road when their house was burnt down in
k.. \ v.
u KYm A.F.P.F.L. Quarter. She deposed that as regards the house
uH;~N in Yedashay (old) street at Bahan U Kyin Hoke hired it on
HoKB. their behalf from U Po Chein (deceased) and she paid
K 200 as deposit for four months at K so per month as
rent but there is no reliable proof to support her evidence.
She said they lived there for over two years. She admitted
that she never contacted the landlord of the suit premises
and though she had paid rents for over four years and the
electricity bills she could not produce them as they had
been stolen by U Kyin Hoke. She could not however
substantiate her statement. She did not deny the Exhibit
" ~ " series. In her cross-examination she admitted that
the house in Yedashay (old) street .a nd the suit premise~
were rented in U Kyin Hoke's name, the rents receipts
.were all in his name, and that she never took steps to
change the name. Though she stated that U Kyin Hoke
acted as agent she admitted that she never gave him any:
authority in writing. Her nephew Maung Mya Thein
(DW 1) who lives with her merely said that the deposit and
the house rents were actually paid by his aunt though the
receipts were given in U Kyin Hoke's name. His evidence
shows the parties trusted one another so much that each
looked after another in business and money transactions.
Ko Maung Maung (DW 2) was not present when the house
in Yedashay (old) street was hired and that he only learnt
from Daw Thein Oo that she paid the deposit and rent.
Maung Thein Tun {DW 3) was an employee of the
applicants and he regarded Daw Thein Oo as his adopted
. mother. He too wasnot present when the suit premises
were r~nted but he said he was present when a total Sl:lm
of K 9,000 was given to U Kyin Hoke by Daw Thein Oo c.c.

I!
to be paid as " salami " on two different occasions and
there was no one else. Hence there was no other witness K~ ::=r:NB
to corroborate this very interested witness on the point. u THam
KYI ANDoQ
Reading the evidence adduced by both sides I must u KYIN
agree with the trial Court that the applic~ts have failed HoKE
to prove their case. The most important witness in the uHKYIN
OKJ!.
suits was the landlord's agent (PW 1) and his evidence
clearly shows that he recognizes only U Kyin Hoke as his
tenant and there ends the matter. There is no proof that
he acted for the applicants. The deduction made by the
trial Court from the evidence is quite correct and there is
no substantial injustice due to an erroneous decision on
facts and accordingly this Court sitting as a Court of
Revision caimot interfere under section 25 of the Rangoon
City Civil Court Act. Siva Dass Dey v. Ashabi and one (L~
S. S. Mohamed Hanifa v. K. 0. Mohamed Kasim (2) and
Sultan Ahmed v. Nasara ]aman (3). See also Ram Krishna
Shukla and others v. Thakur Sri Ramjanki (4).
In the result both the applications are dismissed with
costs. Advocate's fee five Gold Mohurs in each case.
(1) I.L.R. 3.Ran. m. (3) (1950, B.L.R.367"(H.C.). !.

(2) (1950) B.L.R.~~ @.<;.). (4) ~1:-~ 3'5 Pat. 986. - --
' .. \ .
72
CIVIL REGULAR SUIT

Before U Thet Pe, J.
c.c. U TIN MYINT (PLAINTIFF)

I96s
NO'O. 25.
u KHIN MYINT
. v.
AND ONE (RESPONDENTS).*
Suit for specific perfqrmance of contract of sale- amendment of plaint to

add claim for damages-o.2, Rule 2, sub-rule (3) C.P.C. applies to subsequent
proceedir1gs-whether claim j()T possession be made in additim to specific
performance of contract.
Held: The words "shall not afterwards sue, in o.u, Ru1e 2 sub-ru1e (3)
clearly connote that the restriction imposed by this rule applies only to subsequ
ent proceedings. The bar of the rule will operate only where a decree has been
passed in a previous suit in which the plaintiff has omitted a portion of the claim
It has no applieation to cases similar to the present one where the amendment
of plaint is sought for addition of the claim which has been omitted in the original
plaint.
Upendra NarainRqyv.JanakiNathRoy and others, A.I.R. (1919), Cal. 904;
Fateh Khan v. Muhammad Isa, A.I.R. (1919) Lah. 198; R.T.S. Khomdoo v.
Hussein Buksh, I.L.R. 3 Cal. 785 ; Jagat Singh v. Sangat Singh, A.I.R.
(1940) P.C. 70, referred to and followed.
Held further : The question that poses for determination is whether a
claim for possession can be made in addition to that of the specific performance
of contract'. The answer to that question is to be found in s. 19 of the
Specific Relief Act which clearly says that such a claim is competent.
U Aye Mal:lnB for the plain~iff.
U Tun Tin for the defendants.
U THET PE, J.-The plaintiff U Tin Myint sued the

defendants U Khin Myint and his wife Tan Shu Lim for
specific performance of contract of sale in respect of a
two-storeyed pucca building known .as No. 109, Winder-
mere Road, Rangoon, together with its site and outhouses.
Before the defendants could file the written statement the
plainriff made the present application for amendment o.f the
plaint. By his proposed amended plaint the plaintiff now
.. Civil Regular Suit No. x6 of 1965.
. .
seeks not only the specific performance of contract of sale c.c.
zs
but also claims K 19,ooo as damages for the delay in
UTIN
performing the said contract by the defendants. The pro MYINT
posed amendment is, of course, .stoutly re9isted by the U
v.
KHIN
defendants. MYINT
AND ONB.
It has been submitted on behalf of the defendants that
the proposed amendment is barred under Rule 2, Order
II of the Code of Civil Procedure inasmuch as the plaintiff
in asking for the sole relief of specific performance in his
original plaint, although he had demanded damages
amounting to K I9,ooo in his notices sent to them before
the institution of the suit, must be deemed to have waived
the claim of damages. This submission is, in my opinion.
misconceived. ~Sub-rule {3) to Rule 2, Order II of the Code
Qf Civil Procedure reads :
~ {3) A person entitled to more than one relief in respect
of the same cause of action may sue for all or any of such
reliefs ; but if he omits, except with the leave of the Court,
to sue for all such reliefs, he shall not afterwards sue for
any relief so omitted."
The words " shall not afterwards sue " therein clearly con-
note that the restriction imposed by this rule applies only
to subsequent proceedings. The bar of the ..rule wiU.
operate only where a decree has been passed i~jpfevious
suit in which the plaintiff has omitted a per.-n1'i0f the
claim. It has no application to cases similar.~e pre
sent one where the amendment of plaint is.'~0ught for
addition of the claim which has been omittedjn gi
nal plaint. I am fortified in this view by.th~ion in
Upendra Narain Roy v. ]anaki Nath Roy andifethers (1)
where it.was held that:
Order 2, Rule 2, refers to a case where there has. been
a suit in which there has been an omission to sue in respect
{I) A.I.R. (1919) Cal. 904.
c.c. of a portion of a claim, and a decree has been made in that
1965 suit. In such case a second suit in respect of the portion
UTIN so omitted is . barred. But the rule does not apply to the
MYJN'l' amendment of a plaint by the addition of a claim which
v.
has been omitted in the plaint as originally filed."
.
UKHIN
MYlNT
AND ONJ!. .
It has also been ruled in Fateh Khan v . Muhammad Isa (2}
that :
" Order 2, Rule 2, merely bars a second suit for relief
which should have been included in an earlier suit, aUd does
not apply to the case of an amendment of a plaint."
See also R. T. S. Khoondoo v. Hussein Buksh (3) and ]aga't

Singh v_. Sangat Singh (4).
Another argument advanced on behalf of the defen:-
dants is that since the contract of sale does not, of. itself,
create any interest in or charge on the suit property under
section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, the claim o~
the plaintiff f.or damages on the strength of the suit con~
tra~ of sale is not tenable in law and should .not therefore
be permitted to be added to the original claim of specific
performance. That, in my .opinion, is a matter which
can orily be decided on merits of the whole case. At this
juncture the question that poses for determination is
whether a claim for possession can be made in addition
to that of the specific performance of contract. The
answer to that question is to be found in section I9 o:li
the Specific ReHef Act which dearly says that such a clai.111
is competent.
The principles under which the amendm~nt of a plaint
should or shmrld not be allowed.are well ?ettled. Amend-
ment will be refused only when it wo1,1ld .intro'duce a new.
and inconsistent case or when jt would take away- a valu~
able rig~t accrue~ to a: party by loss of time .or when lt
, ,. _: ..(~__h.J..~, .(~9~.9)_Lah. .~98. . . . . . . (3) ..I.L.R. 3. Ca).. 785.
(4) A.I.~. (~9fO) P.Q: . 7o;
would place the opposite party in a position which could c.c.

1965
not be compensated by costs or when its application is not
UTJN
made in good faith. (Vide Gaw Shan Soot v. E. C. Madha MYINT
Brothers (5), Lal Behari ]ado v. Rabidutt Panday (6) and v.
UKHIN
A. S. Hutton v. I. N. Madha (7). In the instant case it has MTtNT
AND ON!!.
not been shown that the proposed amendment comes
under any of the categories of the abovementioned
mischiefs.
In the result the application of the plaintiff for the
amendment of the p.laint is allowed. He shall however,
pay costs of the application to the defendants. Advocates
fee K 17.
(s) (x9zz) B.L.R. 136 (H.C.). (6) (1955) B.L.R. Sx (H.C.).

(7) (1947) B.L.R. -484 (H.C.). . .
CRIMINAL REVISION
c.c.
1965
u wAY LIN (APPLICANT)
Nov. 17. v.
F. MOHAMED (RESPONDENT).*
Penal Code, s. 420-p'roof offalsity of the statement--proof ndicating the dishonest
intention.
Held : The gravamen of the prosecution case was that the applicant
falsely stated that he had with him 300 tons of timber for sale. Unless this is ..
proved there cannot be any offence under s. 420 of the Penal Code.
The applicant was a timber merchant of many years standing and at the time
of the offence he was actively engaged in the business of selling timber. There
fore, in the absence of any proof indicating the dishonest intention on his part
at the time of accepting the advance, it could not be said that he had no
intention of performing his promise to supply timber to the respondent.
Maung Po Lu v. The State, 1 Ran. p. 397, referred to .
.U Hla Maung (1) for the applicant.

U Than Aung for the respondent.
U SEIN THINN, J.-ln Criminal Regular Trial No. 143

of 1964 of the 6th Additional Magistrate, Toungoo, the
applicant U Way Lin was prosecuted under section 420
of the Penal Code on a complaint filed by F. Mohamed, the
respondent. It was the case of the complainant that on
8th January 1963 he paid an advance of K Io,ooo to the
app_licant on the representation made by the latter that
he ~~d with him 300 tons of " Pyinkado " ready for sale
and that although the applicant undertook to deliver the
timber within 15 days he had neither delivered the timber
nor paid him back the advance of K ro,ooo .i n spite or
repeated demands. The trial Court after examining s~v.en
* Criminal Revision No. 133 (B) of 1965. Review of the order of the
Sessions Judge of Toungoo, dated the 14th day of July 1965, passed in Ct:iminaE
Revisi<;>n No. s6 of I96s.
witnesses for the prosecution held that at the time when ?9~5
the applicant U Way Lin accepted the sum of K ro,ooo u -
he did not have the dishonest intention to cheat the res- ~w":. Lf
pendent inasmuch as he was at that time in a position to F.MoHAMm>
supply the required timber in accordance with the stipula-
tion between him and the respondent. The trial Court
accordingly discharged the applicant under the provisions
of section 253 (r) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On
revisions to the Sessions Court, Toungoo, the learneq
Sessions Judge in his Criminal Revision Case No. 56 of
1965 remarked that as the applicant without having in his
possession 300 tons of Pyinkado ready for sale had falsely
represented to the contrary there was sufficient ground
to frame the charge against the applicant under section
420 of the Penal Code. He accordingly set aside the order
of discharge and directed further inquiry under section 437
of the Code ofCriminal Procedure. It is against this order
that the present application for revision is filed.
The crux of the whole case turns on the question
whether the applicant at the time of accepting the advance
of K 1o,ooo had falsely represented that he was in posses-
sion of 300 tons of Pyinkado ready for sale. The learned
trial Judge after a careful scrutiny of the evidence adduced
by the prosecution had come to a finding that on 8th
January 1963 which was the date of the contract for sale
between the parties, the applicant U Way Lin was iri a
position to fulfill the terms of the contract ; for as early
as 19th June 1962 he had been permitted by the Forest
Department to extract Pyinkado timber. It was also in
evidence that the applicant had also .paid ~royalty to che
extent of K 13,709 on 16th July 1963. It was~erefore
quite apparent that on 8th January 1963 U Way Lin was
well established in his timber extracting business as to be
ln a position .to supply or at least had reasonable prospect
o~ supplying 300 tons of Pyinkado to the respondent. I
c~. have gone through the evidence obtaining on the record

~ of the lower Court and I find nothing to indicate any false
u WAY
v. LIN representatiOn

on t he part of the app1'1cant. In his com-
F.Mo&MBI>. plaint the respondent had stated that it was only on 8th
January 1963 that the applicant approached him in con-
nection with the contract for sale of 300 tons of Pyinkado.
However, in his examination before the Court he aeposed
that it was during the month of December 1962 that che
. applicant came forward with his repr esentation regarding
possession of 300 tons of timber ready for sale. Thus
even on his own showing it was not clear as to when the
applicant did actually state that he had with him 300 tons
of timber ready for sale. As stated above, the gravamen
of the prosecution case was that the applicant falsely
stated that he had with him 300 tons of timber for sale.
Unless this is proved there cannot be any offence under
section 420 of the Penal Code. None of the witnesses
cited by the prosecution knew anything about the stipula-
tion between the parties on or before 8th January 1963
when the contract for sale was made between the appli-
cant and the respondent. Their evidence was only as re-
gards the e:v:ents subsequent to the execution of the said
contract for sale. In the circumstances I find it hard to
hold that any useful purpose will be served by ordering
further inquiry in the case.
In the case of Maung Po Lu v. The State (r), which was
a case somewhat similar to the present case before me, it
was held that if the facts did not warrant the inference
that the accused at the time of obtaining the advance had
no intention of performing his promise and that in the
absence of the proof of ahy representation at the time on
the par t of the accused, which he knew or had reason to
believe to be false, no offenee of cheating could be said to
have been committed. In the insta.nt case .the applicant
(x) I Ran. P 397
was a timber merchant of many years standing and at the ?J:

time of the offence he was actively engaged in the business-"
of selling timber. Therefore, in the absence of any proof u w~ LIN
indicating the dishonest intention on his part at the time F.MoHAMm
of accepting the advance, I do not see any reason how it
could be said that he had no intention of performing his
promise to supply timber to the respondent. The prin-
ciple regarding the direction of further inquiry under
section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been
explained in the case of the Union of Burma v. Maung Soe
Aung and three others (2) to the effect that where the
order of discharge is one which cannot be said to be either
perverse or prima facie incorrect and there is no suggestion
that any further evidence is forthcoming no further
inquiry should be directed under section 437 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure. The same principle was followed
by this Court in the case of Mr. C. R. Manikum v.
Karamchand and two others (3).
Applying this principle to the present case before me,
1 :find that as the trial Court had valued and weighed the
evidence 'before it, and had come to a 'finding based on that
,evidence his order should not have been interferred with
unless the revising Court had found that the same was
_perverse or manifestly contrary to the evidence. The
learned Sessions judge in a cryptic statement which seems
to be the basis of his order had said that the applicant
U Way Lin did state tha~ he was in possession of 300 tons
of Pyinkado ready for sale although it was a fact that he
did not have the same in his possession at the time when
he accepted the advance. This is however, not in the
least warranted by the evidence obtaining on the record of
the lower Court. As pointed out above, apart from the
dubious statements of the complainant himself, none of
the prosecution witnesses could testify about it. The
(z) (xg6z) B.L.R. p. 430. (3) (x963) B.L.R. p. 796.
finding of the lower Court on the other hand was based on

the evidence as well as on the facts and circumstances.
u v. LJN
WAY
obta1mng
. . on t h e record of the 1ower court. Thus 1t.
F.MoHAMEn. seems clear to me that the learned Sessions judge's order-
in directing further inquiry into the case was not at an
justified.
U Than Aung, learned counsel for the respondent, has.
drawn my attention to the ruling in the case of Ram Pratab
Singh v. Suraj Pal Singh (4) w?ere it was observed that in
. setting aside an order of discharge under section 436 the
powe!s of a Sessions Judge are very wide. If once he has,
after . considering the evidence on record, come to the
conclusion that the order of discharge should be set aside
and further inquiry should be made, the High Court would
be loath to interfere with such an order unless there are
compelling reasons for so doing. The mere fact that
another Judge could have taken a different view would by
itself be no ground for setting aside the order of the
Sessions Judge under section 436 of the Code of Criminal'
Procedure. I have no doubt that it is a sound proposition
of law but in the instant case the learned Sessions Judge's
order could not be said to have been based on the evidence
obtaining on the record of the lower Court. It is not that
another Judge could have taken a different view but the
view taken by the l~arned Sessions Judge was patently
wrong inasmuch as there was no evidence to warrant such ~
a conclusion.
For all these reasons, I would set aside the order of the
learned Session Judge passed in Criminal Revision Case.:
No. 56 of 1965 of the Sessions Court.
a (4) A.I.R. (1954) AU. p. x8s.

u~e~

h>~eec c:!=;;l&:cbco
O.)O ;,LI o\;ruQ>:b fl5o 1~co9
;J.)
1 oM~w6 0f
bJJ0JL\.) 1
:rog[?..L~~~~ I Jfb C~vc c.cc~so~re ~'&J of O~ecl!i:~~ I J.;e bstlc +

II f.\rc .)co~~e~
~
coo.o>cb I .)(l>~e Cs:.tlc
.) :1
*
. .
nco~eie:d: ccd!ow
~
ll~fl
0
:ot:loo:lrruec
.):::1.:>
'ec:o6wreco~@b
o .) .) .> .>
~:~(e)
::f (c) f flGO
.J
c~o2ruec
..>
(c:oc.co)
o
~o~cehl
.l e.> ..>~
IO~:b~ecru~=
J..; .) .)
oc.!=;;l~C.CC~Gr.:J
..) ~ .)j
c.cc: .>::I\
oQe:oc.co~orco
.) .)
r ;~..L100(11 ;,.olb:>~c.ooeco
.)
OC.<D~
.)
'flco
.)
wohlb
.) \ 0
eo:cbcoelbec

:c.Q>ec~flb:o~coeo
~"" ..).
: .)oc.o(!ahl cc&fl :c.~:c.0:ecec
.;) :1 \. 0
h>zc.Pfl
0
OC.CO~IflCO
.;J .:J
(!acce~b
.> \o o
'Cc:dfl:c.ccb' &~~oW (.0~ I .1<DCofliOt:lere:
o.) .>o s- .J .)::::1, .:>ocb~ :c.ec:2c.o&
e
~
0
oeoc.ce~o1xxo~ruro
.;) .) .) 0 ..) .)
tooc.co~
0 .:>
cr
c oc.co~:aco&?cc0hl:oreecn
..) .) .) .>:J .) ururecohl:k
.) .) :J
L 11
:::>l:'W8
.)
. {)SOl SDIOdtru M V1 VW'tl.OH

. !901 S.DIOdffil M.V1 VV\T'dfl9:
1062 BURMA LAW. REPORTS (1965
r,:c- C' 0 C' C' 0 r,: C' \ r.:::: C' 0 C' C' C' <:' 0<:' <:'
=>eli~ t:Jf Xl~~~'Jf G~ ~YJGDt Xf>~Ge.:(>C:<J.t O;>Ql::x>2 ~YJ Grop~f ill'J: ;s
C' C' C'
Go:>'JCOO?<.Da>20):Q~:
C
GC
C' 0
000 O)I(.)ClQG
tJ -, JJ
<:' 0
?C:m
~(" 0
1:1 c:oo II
0 <:'
::OG::O?
6
~:ig
IL b L L l
0
o
OOGCG-:> YYGrn?md 0GOO: em

00 <:' C' <:' C'
oooo::m,>I?:~Gmi:Groc:oo-:>:::o.:::noocom
C'
L ll J e $ G tJ 6J ~l- l:.j, A
J
r,:c- C' r.:'C" '1 C' <:' 0 C' 0 (' 0 C' 0 C' <:' C'
L. " "
.l::leGoo?c~ t:JfOO:.>GOJ'JG~j~l)(.)IOJ201 ~:1)""9.::D211 OOL~:U~QlJffi'"'i_ GOO?ffi~'Jf 0)0)
~C"
.ofW"iccu
OC"
f.":' . <:' C' <:' C' C' 0 C' 0 9 c-r::::c- 0 r.:::: C'
G::Dt:J~G::Dv~e?:J ClC!OJ:UGOJQlQlJffi<r.l.'f? Y20?L'jj Q9:Gc;pm0 c: ~Gt:_~j:lC!
C'
G9;?')0J2? II
c- o c- c-oc- c- c- c- c- c c
O)()f OO~Qlcoq>:C\:( GY?CGffiJ'5Jfffi ffiJG:ro90 f~<XJ?Oilll u:>~:Go:>"J~
<:" \ C' C' o C' <:' C' OA;
GCOJ~Gf::D~ 'JO:>?:Gp:oo-:>: )lffi9Cffi! ClC:CO~C U)(J:Gco-:>qGp:~SJ
C' (" C' C' C' C' C' (" ~
o:>GCO?Co:>IC
lJ
GCA j ffil(.)~.s:~~ mCl(,l~J
U Jl T J ~ ii -1 C.:..
GCO?Go:>:>OOu:> GC6 000 ffil(.)a>C\
U L:'l
0<:" C' (" (" 9 C'(" C' 0 0 C'
Y:roc:o:>IC ())Q;GCO:>CGI?:ro-:>u:>lci;l O)I.S())(J!GCO:>C ~:J?:GI?UD GCOo:>
L :U o U tLO UT 9 l U L
\ r;;: C' C' r,: 9 00 0 C' C' . C' 0 C' \
OJ~COI.J eJ.<D~CJf::!~ Gt:J-:>19: GCJ8n: otmro:>CJf"l')O)~rootc:l q::o'J:<:>p:m
C' C' C' <:' C' 0 C' C' C'A;
illG:GOJ?~~~m ~U:OJ~ G~ 000 ffiJUnt Gf?roG~ f')>ffi ~OO?CSJ
<:'\ C' 0 0 C' Q C' C' ~ C' C'
:J?OXlmc:o:>roroo:>:>:lcl;l
I.-- J oL l b 0
SOX\COO?:
U.. - -.
GC6 000 miUGU!~
. -u
())(J:GCO'JCo 0010
~
o c-c- co O\ J:: r;;:c- \r.:;::c
0[::0?{9: O)Jfill~!Go:>:>~~:G~GJ:>:~ 90:>?:Gp:en roa>?'t tj<J.X.l(GU:~Gt~:j?C:
C' O::o[9C' C'OC' C' 0 C' C' (" 0
comoo
6 L
c 1 r;;mi?C!Sm 9ro9c:nr;;u:x:n r;;c
ll JIT ll L ~ A
ooo ffiiOO"J oooo.:::nx:
1J J C l
("
:.SQX>GCG<Do:>G :>C:I;\CI
C'
9ffi'JCO)
C'
. ())(J:GCO")CQI');O)
C'
cc:oo?:GQu:c
C' C' C' C' 0 C' 1
T l fL olJ l I J 0
0 C'
A
C' 0 C' C' C' ') C' 0 C' C' _<:
rom::n.:::noo.:::n.:::nG?ro.:::n: GY.sutm oomoo::n c0 smC~ce; GQIUQln:x:;l:> ro:o
C'
JO

L C. L C.J C. JT L 0 L ll l U U J L
r:::: r,:c- . 0
:8JG09d~IOGSjGe:J?C: OOc~p:GfGUOJ~ II
r.:::: C' C' C'
C' C' C' C' 0 ~~ C' C' C'

~a>::r.l:-DG::D'J ::D:-DGOJQQIO)(JI?:m l~ a>IOG:n:G::D'JI illOlOO(JCOC OOillQ
J U U L L JL 0 ll
0 C' C' C' C' C' <:' c-r;;: C' C' c 0
roc;p:9 )l0)9C::D~ cou9c:'t ~o:>GU:OJ~ COUti~())(J:Gco:>~GJ:>:~
C' C' C' \ c r::::c- r,: \ C' C'
o:>?OtOO'J G~J~f~:Gf::D~ 9::0-:>:(Jp:oo?: ~o:>Gu:0c:GDi.::J.ll U)(J:Go:>'J~
c- c- c- o c- \ o or,: C' c- 0
~o:>?~cq)C j ffiJU'J1l't::D? ~():~I ~~Di.cq<>'p3 Sd<.\[Oloxp:9
C' C' OC' ') C' Q C' <:' r.:::: C' C' C' C'
'GGXGmp~m UIOC~2 ~mGOO?CGU:Ge:l-:>c: COC5j:>:GfGU::D~ II Sd:J)())
C' 0 C' C' C'OC' C' C' C' 0 0 :>C:ro C' 0
G
6c- c- ")~OOG::O:>l
l.
o
GG"JCGO)I')Q.SO) ())(J:Go:>:>CQI:>::J:)o:>ffi OOOJGC())G
<:. o o c-
0 JIT
c- r,: or:::: c-
tJ
r,:
0.
r.:;:: c- r;;: c-
L L 6 IL
c
L
o:>09c:~:o.1 (,l~~J qccof:Gt:J?~t:lc: QLJ'LG::O:>Ge:l'J~ (ja>GUO)~IJ

0 C'
o:>G::D:> ())QOO(Jo:>C
C' 0 C' C' C" C'
9dGroa>2:a>?:9.SCOLOO(.)OJ~9dQIO)Q')f
co 9dYG
<:'
:>c:ro

L L A o. T 1:..!.. U J Jl -L
C' C' f.": 0\ C' OC' <:' C 0 \[;;: C' r::::c-
GJ?:::D2 OOOO:T.>:-Dt:J~~::D~OO<JtC:I u:>G:Go:>"J~GJ?!nt 000l~(jelGU: 0c:
r,: \ c C' C' \ r.:::: C' (" r;;:c- 0 I::::: C'
QDi.:J?I o:>Go:>:>~COJC G~ j O)JU~~Gt:ec: ooc~p:Gf::D[j~l ~SJGe,j?C:
o .C f.": C' C' C "'' f.": C' o c-
~p:~ OO~:~J?:Cll t:Jtf[OlJ~? rom;;~:GUJ [jV9COOCjC~
(
. ())")())
0) ooroeoos~SQ
C' C'
j (
0
) (
Ol
) C'
~:o.i 9dffiJl:OCoC: ~
0 c-r,::c- 0
~()C
0
r,;:c- C' r.:::: C' 0 0 C' C' r;;:c- C' C' C'
tjOOU::D~II 9dGe:l'JC:~~Go:>:> 9dOlJC:tja>::D~ OO~:Go:>?C: 0 Jj Go:>?~o{
'1965] BURMA LAW REPORTS . 1063
C' C' OC'
-ro:J.>s:n:n:;G~?:;Q:;
C' C' 0
oc.::n
9
O)::):o:>G<.n?~3d?: Gmc:QIQ
C' C' '" c:~:~mo:il
C
rom.sm
C C'
oeti:1
T L 0 0 "'jl lL c T IJ , t. T
OC' C'O ' 0 ' C 0' C' C' C' 0 0
q:::~~1\::l[? 9:D?l~:~p:~ 9~om 9'il~:x>~md:Gro:>~~:~p:q m~:
' X> J) :::;:n C' C' C' C' 0 C' C' ~tro
~?:.S?~~(.))
1 IL
: ...,!, L
J)~(,l:QIJO) ::D~?:
-1 (.!,
I n;)O):;JO);o:;:o
IL -1: l
0) (l)IJ:Gro?Co
<'
:r..e
ro:;::m~9JC
c c
0GUI
'T' r,;:c
G~Odti~G~ j
c c '!::::"
o:>JUGro?c:~tic:::n?ti~G:::D?Gt::J?~t10GC\)
r,;:c r;:::: cr,;:c
J
e~co-:>8~
C'~ o
c:c oc.
C' C' C' C' C' C' OC'"' C C' C' 0 c:Jfi.I~CC II
::n~n qc:Od:;,Jronuo:>:x>:n;jj Odl:J.:9rr.l~~ cqmuiGOO?c~m::n~ o2?~
C' (' C' ~ C' 'T' C' C' c r,:::c- c::::
C\):"'JGCO?~G~GtQJlu~;o:> <.Dts:li[~C GUI ~C::D~O'dG~?c:13c:'PI:IJ?:
0 (' ('(' 'T'~C'C'QC'( Q) ('
S':l91 Od'ft.:;J:'PL'{::D~ C\):"1J;'(J)JdG9:GUI tj~800!XJC~ <.D?(.l) mmeOG8
~c:;cccc c cc c co c C'
'\:119~~:DO>J:T.>f.9C::x>Go:>?::D~G'Pm:::D~ <.nd:GCJ)')~I:IJ?:~ O'dG~C:OdO<.D
~ cr.::c r,;:c C:::: c C' c r.::c o r;:::: c o c ~
l)t~;.>ti:;:ttt>Gt:P::: <.1(~9f COC1j?:tic: 1:11JG~?c:~ Of~~ Od~Q
o c co c r,:. c c c e c oor;: c c
ro;p:::q~:~p:::n~ ro?Of~:::D~ tj~::l[?.OfCOd: roe:O'dGHS I:II:IDLC\{091J~
o c q~c ~ ' c G c c r,:::c
o;g::p:~ G;;D?C~fnt~f:G~~I Go:>'f:ro?o:>X>?~90[l:J:'f ~:'OO~?CGu: 13c:
r,;: c C:::: <' o r,:: c o o c c r,:_c
bDG~?:::: G~'j::Dffil cr:lt';(Q ro:;p:O{GJ?:~ o:>Jil:~f:::D~ tj~~';??
('~ C' c 0 Q c C' c:::: c ~ 0 c
'PC'O)~~:t(8G :::>1~:) o.1_::D? OOGOOJ?O'do:>Jl :OCGfG~?C: tj~GU:::D211
or,: o c
(D:O;;Qc;>lo:>:J? G.S(J).SO):"'"l())
c c C' c c c ?COOG:x>?
c o c
LD L tJ JT T G L
C\)~(;);IGUG:-11
-J c II !JJ~:DG
I.
!JJ(.l)~
IL
OXO::x>:x>::n
0 C
J
llO::D:X>
0 C C
Wd:Go:>?CGI?:o:>
C 0
3d ?:com.so:>:-ncGOO?CQC
C C OC'
0
C' C'
(:)Q
0
-( L C.::, l Jl L!t o U L T L 6 o Jl
o c c o c c ' c c c r::::: c r,;:c
Oj{'JJ?~~~ X>~~ G'P:::Q>?::qo:> G'Pc:QJ9f QlX>~:~:~~~:~~o:>G:x>?Gb?S ttiD
c
~(;\)0)~11
~ C 0 0 C' ~ C ' [7C C C C C~ C C C

l:!JJGr'P5 Cl{:l;tttn~:~Gt1:>c:ro m19DGo:9;;~suro:x>m;:v oooC:l~~:10:>:9;;
0 C C
<UroO:x>O)~?
o 0
oo<.nO>O)ro:rooo?: C'
onC:lG C '~ C' C G C "'
:>c:ro C 0
Q>8tnD9cu1o:> 9c:rom?:
L C.:.J IL -[ L L . L
c c r-c r,;:c oc o c c~:.c c o c
m~~:; y~y?j3C:tll:>G~~C:::D:x>?::;q::n~ OOQJ(J)t!Q>GO:::D~II ro~:9ro~o:>
OC'') C C C 0 C C C 0 CCC ('
otro:.>IGOO?C~W::D~ U~?1j::O:"'GCO?(J) G~Gf'O>JlOro'[ Cl{O'dOlJo:>~~UO):x>o:>
~
C\
: 1
SddG
Jt 6 C' 0
?C:m~l?:ro
U I. -r
&1~6
"'
l; I.-.!.
c
::DG::D'JI (' c
08C:lG
L
C' ' C'
?C!CDCOCO)Q):>:

O'd<.DOl
iL

0 C C' C 0 CC' C
m::p:~C:lp:ro GQJU9G~'<f? lX>d:Gro?~GJ?:~ O)G0)?~9JC G~ j o:>JU
Q(.l)O)
' c
:x>O):;:coo:>~U:Cl.s C?.SQilUC:l
c
GU:Q::D:TIO'do:>C:I
c
GC:lO)GO'O?CClo:>
C' c . ' c oc 00 0 c c
IL ~ L ll cl T U J o \3 l o\. 4)1
'l:::c rc C:::: c cr,:c G c c o ' o c o ~
~t1:::19,t>G~?c: Gc;>J09G~tiQ>I9:t oo~~cro~: cqo;o.;_uc oogrooo?:~
c ~ ' 9 r,;:c ~ o 'T' c ~ c ' c
~QJU:x>:TIG:::D;}J:>:tj:x>~[9:t:IQ>~I OO~O>o:>q:>:cqGJ?:O'dGUI <l900tj?c:roG:x>?
f~ C C 0 C r.;:c r,;:c OC' C OC' C
t:J?:m~;( G~:l?~~ f'Q>f'?e!C:t!Q>GIO~C:x>~~ <.1(00~C9f OOG~'JC:G~OI~
r,:;: C o"'
c c -~ c 0 c
0
.~GXJ::l:>O)II :DC:lO)C OO(.l)Qrom:roGI?:~
L C Jt. A ll T
0
L 1J
GOliUQI(J)O) O)C.IJI O~'XI
U \1 L ~JL! U.
0
C:. - Jt
c
<O:UGCO?:"'
c oc c cg o
~CCGO)?GClG.SQilU
' o c o c c o
:
OO:x>o:>:::D cc:roo:> (.l)<J:Go:>?CGI?:o:>
L ~ T tJ L 0 ol. I OL o lJ L
c ~ c C' c ' 0 I: C' c 'J;:C'
'G~ J o:>J :>~ :!J U)d:GO)?~GOOJ~Gf::l:>~ 9::D?:GJ?:o.;_ !j~roc:c;;u:~EJC:
c ...~ 0
4:)())JJl OO~l ~ :1.1:::00::0~
0 c c '
9::0'J:CJp:ro'J:
r;;:
c c Q ...~ 0
t:l~mc:G0:(9:1 fld~l~ G~J:~
1:
L
oes::>
0 c-r,::c- J;:C" 'l C" (' .h '~,r.: (' C" 0 "r C" h ('
cqm
0c:o:>?CjQ)UIO)~ G~JUo:>O:>GO)~t10)~""1::j~ I 9C:OJ::DGUI <l8~Gt1?C:
'~ he- o hC' C"Q C' cr,._ c o c
o c-
c ro:. t1~GC?~ t1q>smD9cG:xnt::l:>:ro~:t rn~~o:x;p:cqgp:~~tq)t?9f
~ 8;lG
C"
?C:
C'O 0
g:n:ngrga<;;o OC'
II COG 0 C" C'
JC rnm:xncn:ro 3CDCIC:"l1.:"D <D~~gooc
C"
&~ ~ l :U-Jl ~ tl---T l IL I ~C.:. '- Jl A
(' J t:
C'~ C' _C C' o C' C"OC" C'~
~'X:~ 'f'C'O)O')ei:<lsg ~o ~9c: 1 rnq~:cq <.;g-:>c_GCDJ?~i"f? 'f'C'O)O')ei;
t;:c OC'
Cf~~C II ('
<lsg
c
~0
Iooe S'X)CjC:
(' tjq>~CDJil:~fO)~ G~~:tJOX)G00211
hC'o r,;: (' (' he (' ('
t1Q)3~~
(' C'
(' ('..s. 0 C' C' 0 C' ' 0 J;:C' Q

ooo:n~' rn~~oxp:cqgp:~:> t?<J~m:>c:9~~ 9~gp:(jq>l9:.
'l
oo@.3~oo~r
C'
~:>:me:
J 6-
C' C'
c :~o:xn
A
C'
l
C' 0
cc:oorn:>:
t.
m~mgmoom
1. Jl. A
C'
rnroo
1.
C'C'
g:~c
C'
J o
C' C' C'Q (' (' C' ('
GCO?C8(8) j ~q>q>O)?Ci.:ijOOQ)'JCDJC cqGro:>m oxp::"j!O?:l:>2CJ?~Ol:XD2:?11
G()Tu1 rnG:>g:gp:4:>~ f~!Musgrn~::oo'P:ot0=~:1 oef39 ~~~~
C'~ C' C' 0 C' 'r' C' C' 'r'
'PC'O)O)t:j:~~~o:> jO ~I ::D~~o:>'P:cq Y._CD')COOGUI C\X)')fCD::DG'j:GUI
hC' C'Q (' ( Q) C"
t1Q)8C'8?D'JC~ O:>?<D rnmeUG8'{8g j
C' ( ) ( )
0
f,'7C"
Q ::D'J tjq>~G<?t~Sf o..s, GCO?C.C'
C' C' C' r,:c- C'Q C" C' 0 C' C'..s. C' ('
Sea? j ~Q)CDJQG~~2_?CJ1 t1Q)8C'8?D'JCOO?::n2~ 0<l)()JCD9JI Y._CD'JC:l:>~
<:~ c- c h<: c-..s, or;:<: c- c-r;:::;:::c- <:
'P":nooe:1:<ls~ o~:S::> ~'J:x>? t1a:>~CDJil=~tSJ CX{t.:J0~rn~m rncqo~~=,~
C' C' C' C' h C' C' OC' C" 0 C" C"
Goo:>csm j ~0mJoo09g201 t1coocmg~~J~rocqm:n2u ; ..
ucob
.)
c
coccco~
l 0
co
g,c
J
Q 0 0
;:>:mm~ro;
._. L L
o1 jlt
" oC' c
~<JCrrdQC
lll ts
<' <'
..;,)0~CG X>~O):;:,J~
A Jl
c- o , "'' c- <'C
())4QIC:02K.qC GQ::::O'): OO::DGOG:::O')G
l t:J. o
c-
-1 L
c- 6 c- _
')C I , c.:r;;o;nro
o .lJ1!
o c- o
l O@~j
'nrc-r "'' c- 'l" <' c- c- oo ~
0::0'!!~:Fi)'L'f mJUI:::o~q G81 sqyQCQCGro:ro ::D~1Jei!ll
'Y' ~ c c
C' 0 (' (' (' (' (' (' (' (' GSI O<(fQCQC
G :up:))co'): Q9~0J'):ml <i):Go:>?~c 00Goo:G:::o')m1t3 ocG'Pro OE(J)(.9m Go:>;
.$, r,: C' <' r <' r;::c- C' 'l rr C' <' <' ~
:Jj gJ~Js;;l80J G0::::02l:l?G<fj9S G9::::o'):t':!c: ~orcnolll G81 QCQCGCOg sq.y ;q
ro;
0
C' OC'
~:>em~:: ::DGQ: ~QG m')c:~c
ll L A " -1 Jl ~J
C' 0 6 C' C' C' C' ~
0UO)t::):~
tJC
G
2:Gmi')GOOo:>
1J 6
C' o
o:Go:>'):::O
1J oL
C' 0 ~:c&&ro:
t: L L
c c c c-
J
c o cr;::c- rrr r;::c c- .$. ol j ll
GQJOQJ;o o:>C~C:'PI 'i):GO)':>!:f ('.)(J)Q~'/.rot':!c: {90o:l~~:Jj:::0') GGI j900'):
:;: C' C' CC'

D:XYlq:; C' 0
I a:Go:>'):X> ~OJ;,)
G'\C'~
C al ~GCOO)OIII
C' ') 0
OOSd "C m] (l)j;) GQ:.o:>'): "\ ' 0
W o U l o L~ -r ot C::J ':. o\. . . 7(
r c c o <'J: c o ~c- oc 'l c- o - C: o
IQC:61? .:Q:n~ o:>GOJ') : ~ux:n:Qc:m c :;;ou1:::o:n 11 ::D~.S~') oo :::oroc:1'15
L:J J C. '[! L L:J l l C. JTJ l . 1.
C' C' OC' C' C' C' o 0 \ .C' C'
ro~ :1..'1., :::orooo.c'P :::o:::r.>e:Groxnm GC\jj');oro.,: Q9:::lfl"l ~:::o::n ro2t~c:
o cr;:: c
0)('/)!:::J;:;:
L 0 .
B ~
C'~
I G:\>1'),1)::0'): QQO)OJO)C
JJ
C'
-1 U. ot. 6
o c r
:;D!tl0~QOim
0
c o ')
Jl ~\
OOGQI:::O::O II :::OG:::O')
L lJ C. ot
C' o C'
00 0 <: r,: o C' 0 C' C' C' OOC' C' C'

~<>:::nc:u 8d!08)1:1~') o:Go:>')m G0')0)')gCO Gffi(f):::O:Yl()) ;;Q~CCOICOJ:::D:J
oL lJL IL J 1J L T- ~[ ~ 1. LL Jl C.:.
C' . 0 ~C' C' 0 C' OC' o C' 0 C' C' C'
G::Dp:J)CO')~ Q'):::lfl~ro ~gC:QJ())~~I :::oro;;qc'P ~:Go:><<"q OfQJ GO)')C:Of
') " m] 1.>::0
Ol;:n,::OII , o O.SQIG())')C:U.SQJ:"I):I)
"
1.--.J
C' C' " o
C::..l o ot T tl T '=\1 l
o
~:
t.
BY: L
O:>Cf.lC:0')0)C " A
" C' C' rr
CX):Yl:::OC:G~I
... C2. A
o C' C' ') o C' C' rC' o ~C' C' c:
OJG:))'):D:D&I U);;;>SJQI OJ:)X:OC:0')1,}'J <X>O)GOl:::JC:<JQGO)')O) C ~OO;:Qo:>c:
l C.:. L l J L L:l Jl o o ~ 0
~~G0)')01())
L o I.
rot!U:::o'):ciil II
l.J~
0 (' (' 0 C' "!' C' C' C'
OJ:,):/.> G:\JCO'):::O:o:>uro'l GOi>QQGO)? s;;lQI())<J') G8 1SO.SQCQCGro:ro
JL L 0 L T ~ 0 () Jl-1 u J l T
0 C' C' G C' G C' 0 0 OC' C' 0 0 C' C' C'~ \ 0
1,) ;QoOC (f);,)CB')~C 2:G(l)I')G;;QOJ(f) ~()CQC QQGQ:ffi0.3tCOO):::O(f)CI I mm:0;;o
l lJ JJ tJ -l Jl - J > J ~- -[
0 C'
G$>lm:::OC
LO
C' 0
J o
C'
6 ot L IL l
H
~:
0 (' BY::::oo:>C:<O')m
A o
C'
~0C8dQC::DGQ:I
'\"
o
G81 SO.S QCQCGOJ:O)C'-l<:l

C' C' C'
:1
C' 0 ,,
A L
f L A L L u. L Q o ~I 'l.T 6 - Jf
'l c c: C' .$, 'l"r,: o C'r c:- o c c C' C'
01 G~IC:02o:>USfl G<.91 t1::1lmoC:':f') <ij:Go:>')~C 00G:;:o~GfG:::0') 001t3
C' C' C' C'J::: C: f.: C' o C' 0 G ~ C' C' C'
o:r;;'Pm 0Em<.9me~c:::D'):tlql (jJ:Go:>')cq ~roGro~<D'): DL~O'P G'Pmo:>~ot
c- o ' o 'l c- c: c.$. rrr,: r.:: c C' c- c:
~00:::0~ ll ~0?~ GQIC:020)09J G<.91 tl())'):elc:o:>~ <J':ffGOJ') ::DQJW
r.: C' C' 0 ') C' (' 0 ~ C'r,:;:: C' 0 0 0 C'
tl0::D~ II CX{_':fo:>UI: <JC::::o~ ~:~:c:11 qme~m::DG9CJt OO~O)GO)') I
o
roro:o:Go:>')c:lJ SdGOI O)C ::DOOCOO
C' ~ rr C' c: " C~'):o:>c:
c G:::O:;::D<J
OC' oc
G0~CGO)')I GCl:o:>? :
i!
QIO)
tl
T
C'C' C'
0:::0:Ylll mm:o:GO)')I O)<J())O) roro::::o
I:J ---r 1J ol L L- ."l. l l
o
1>
C' 0 C'
J 1>
0 0
:m~p:lGOO
t
l
C' C'
C Go:>::::og
-1
O C'
OC'
'G0~CGO)')J
0 C'
o:><J())OJI cc:<Dc:ll . Cl(])()).SQ:ro
C' 0 C:: C' C'O 0 OC'
~<JQIG(I)~GOJ?4'mro:G
OC' 19')C<J.S
C' C'
L ol L l L L T L L J o U ~l: - .- T o JT
GQgro
0
G&')mCI(f)~C Go:>')l
C' C'OC' 0
:::0~())0)
C'
mro::::o Co OOo:>GOG:::O')
" C' OC'
::D~.s:;:oC0?
C'
-, L J - J1 L ol L ~- -r L ~ o
C'
09<J: C' 0 0
0:::0:DO)(f) C'~ C' C' C'OC' ~ .
00())::0 CO~ G!lt')(f)Offi!itCG:::O') ~ ''::DGJ 1mG
'):;D;;QJ 0
~ ol l C:, LT Cl J }1 t: . L 11.. L
C' o C' 0 G\~ C'~J::: ~C' f.:C' C''
S'aG'}:::D::D?:o:>~l <jl:GO)')~ ~~t:ICDI.tJ-: t:J0!1?1<{>.0)~ ll
"' Any ad done or writing pubUshed which is cal-

rnlated to bring a Court or a judge into contempt, orto
lower his authority, or to interfere with the due course
oe~~ of justice or the lawful process of the Court, is a contempt

of Court "-Halsbury's Law of England, 2nd Edition,.
~s1 "vo1ume 7, pages 6-7.
'T"o<1t~~
C' C'
c _<: cr::;:: c o o 'I o c c c r,:

oxp:~:Go:>"J~I qar::eJOXDG9~ OJ<.>I:GOJ:>IO?t:~~o:> <X>'f>:Gtl"JS<y<fG9:
C' C' 0 C' C'OC' J;": 0 o o C' o-
C\JQ:0e~ G;"Jro~ro~cGOJ"J mG9:mo:>?: mGtem~m-J:cq: ~:Goo-Jrrt
GcP~2 &2:Gp:aSo:>2n
All publications which offend against :the dignity of
the Court or are calculated to prejudice the course of
justice constitute contempts-Oswald's Contempt o~
Court, 3rd Edition, page 9 r.
oc
GO?OO~f& ;qc e:ot~Gro&
a o o ( )
0
or:::;: c "l
8d1f9_eJ~OIII
C' 0 "l C' C' c C' C' C' 0

GO)I?roOO?: Q90J01"J:0)1 OOG~1c:02 C CX)OJ::DC:GOJ? o:>o:>c:ro
)J IL lJ L o 1.:..!. A 1.
C'
OJo:>C:0?~
C' C' 0 C' C' C' 0 0 0 C' ') C'C:ro0 C' OC'
c::J OO:D(\)())ffi~l
C2. t -[ZJ
cc:oo
~, oL
QOJ(\)mQUIO?
L~--1 L
OOGQI
L lJ l
CIJ())(;)Q~CGO
1.
II
C' 0 0 0 C'fs C' C' 0 C' co C' 0 C'. (' ('
cc:o:> '=lOJ<.r.J OOGo:>? ?:ro:"l.1:1 cc:mroc CD?OSQOJ:"l.:l()) &CcGo:>:> ~c
l eL L L C I oL. 6 T Jl C:. L L J o
C' C' ~ ( C' ~ t;: C'
G~?Co:>CGO:> U j j) C' OC' .. C' O
8J1f~1 G8d?roU 8d~C: SJ~:8d[j0) GU:OO"J:0)~9_
0 C'
Gg,?~90J~ rr
"Held: that the publitation of comments on a case which

is pending trial in a Court amounts to contempt of Court
j.f the comments are such as are likely to prejudice tlie
administration of justice in the case. A printer cannot escape
liability imposed on him by law by alleging a contract with
:the owner of the press that he was not to be responsible
for the contents of the publications. A journalist should
acquaint himself with his duties and liabilities. Youth and
inexperience or a subsequent apology would not be ~n excuse
as a rule."
690! SDIOdffii M.V1 VJArnf19:
o r
~Oo:>'JCO .jO
C'
'f7J11
BU~A LAVV REPORTS \ 0~1
" The. land acquiSition Court gets jurisdiction only on a

reference being made to it by the Collector and its jurisdic-
(o) Gd:>J s8r -~.,-(4) (oeJ?)' ~o~3_')S ' ~-:>oo9u
( J)
' OC"
G~l :JtCI :J:n
( C') I ( O~j) I .~009Cj:1.l0:>1
'j
0 C" C' 0':> JO~II
\,.
' c o r,;coc c
~C:O'J:::U~<J? G9,?i::)C~C::U211
"The provision for compensation in the Land Acquisition

Act applies only to land acquired under that Act. It has
no application to lands acquired under other statutes and,
therefore, the provision for compensation of the Land Acqui
sition Act cannot apply to acquisitions under the Bihar Act
and, therefore, the doctrine of occupied field can have no
application."
Malojirao v. State of Madhya Bhart 8dJl (J) qf.cot.: mco'J:O(L
G C' o [; C' C' 0 !;; CO C' C'
09c<Xi: [jCDC:O'J:::U2ot G9,?tf~CGOJ::U211
OJQ8d<,)CDS
t. JL o
GsTG8d::x>t~o.:D')gGQGS~:mGOJI~G~:J3jqd;::n
C Jl ~I T e::J U
83:83~
~ LDC.::. 1l o L
r,: (' (' (' (' r,q (' (' ' (" (' c-
t:lf(\)2c;(G<Xl'JCG9:~<? !Ft~'J020C::U'JOJ'JG9:8d~ 8dffii?,~G88d') ~ffiQJffi
c r,;: cr,: c c o c o J::: c ~ oc
9~~~ 8d9:ro[jCDIY..9JC GOJ'JCOG<J?"J 8Xp1]~ GCDJ"JG~gcr;J(,)~(p
(' (' ~ (' ('o (' (' C 0 C' 0 (' ('
':f'fOJ-fG~'JC: O'fQOO'J:::U28dGCOJ"Jffil GOJ'JCDG<J,?'J cr;J'P1]::UO)':fCD<Xl'J:
C'
::U28d<Y.(C: Gl'jroqm
OC' 17': C' C' ~
GCOJ'JG~:G~ ?j,OOO
C' C'
ffiJO~<; G~3GO
17': ;ro1l 0)8d(,)~<;
\ OC' C'
c C' r,: (' C' ')C' (' ~

mep:o~2:~p:ro:l:l G~Gt:I'JC:<;~G~ JOO mJOI ~~GOIC: GCDJ<JG~:G~
c;;;_ c c c c oc o c c
r:J,jOO OJJO[jii>::U2CJ? ::DCD'fCDcr;J(,)tQJ~ffi:D211
C' 'I' C' C' C' <: OC' 0
G9]'Jmco'J::::l?c G81 Gro:::nc::n2 Gcopmoo'):Q'j~c:ll m'P:II>9CD"'J"J:~
C' 0 C' C' C' C' 0 C' C'
ffiJQ9(,)2 II G~G-f09CD'f'J r9 ffiJO::UCD'fCD~ffi::U211
(:)) G~I a6r 9<1:>(4)') I ( o~:JJ) I ootp:~G<Xl5e>Jlc)l I!>:> Jj911

(J) G9<>1 adrsn(9)r (oej?)l 9<1~1 :;;311!>':> e'211
co~ccc.o4c.oco
.:> .:> .;,
o~c00c.ow
..> ..., ...,
:c.P~c.l'lccl'l .>@cc~~es
, o
o~c.cc:l'lre:l'lt:Jccro
, .J .) OJ.>
c.cc~Hhlcob:>
',)!j.>
:,h14~dcoo~ ol6r;:;'Jdx>'JJJ 'cd:o u@cc~Cbco&;o~oro'JJJ ~l'lc.occes~c.oescoc.c.o
--:>:1.> .> ~.l ~ o o .) o .l .Yo.> ~ o .:> .>
h.>@ccG :oQ&:oc.co~~roc.oc.Qe>
Q .) .J:::J .:> .) .) ~
c.o:~:~co
v ...,
'cd:e@cclobec.4e~
0 .> lt .)
c.o~coo<ocdo c.cc~
.) 00 .)O .) 0
ccocoocl'lccl'l
.> 0
:c.es:2:2co
e 0
't:c:hlc.o~
({j.)
u@ccMb:~:kcohlc.oro
.> O.> .) ~.)
@cc~c.ccefes
.) 0 .:>
~~e.es
~- .l 0
o~c.cc:l'lre:f'lt:J~
,;, ., .>OJ.) ofdcoee>
.:>
c.oreco\;@6
.> .J .>
~eoc.c.oe>:b~~&>c.co~
::>e.> .) .:>
oltuk@l'lero
.:> o .J .) ..,
?t,
@co~hl
.:>
bJ:c.rl'l;e.c c.cc~:hlcoo
, :.:.! o OJ" o :~~cc'JIJwreooft
5o - -.:> !,3, , w(ie.ce&Jes
, u@cco~!CI.lc.~~
, .) .>
:@roc.~@ccco~:keo ~atoc.r;:;Je>es 4be&>o~2co.u:J .l:o:dl'lks '(c(ol~ c.cce>:hlc.oo
.) ,) .> .:.J. t' o .) ~ ..., -> .> , .):..3 o o ., ~ S'J, o
be.c~l'le.G
.Jo
oec.cc:l'lre:l'lt:Jcc&
.:> .) .>OJ.) , w~e&es
, --. :,ooo.,Cb:&esu
.>
IIW.Pec.ohl:teMco
,;, .:> :J . .J
II @cccdo'JIJ:b:>ooo ~t:Jc.oPere o ~ COigeesto ohlccecuco@r;:;'Jh, eo@cc
.:> .:> o !.1 .> e o o .> o .:> ,) ll o o .) ~ .:> .:> :::::::1 .)
:c.cd:e;~
o .> qntiees
.> 1.,. o e@eswh>es
j- 6-
o.ftixore:~~@6
.:> o .> .:> .J
lmol4
L
C>ocwe>:b~*&>cc.o~
6.> .) .>
!Gwcccoo
'5' .> "
O,f;kcc:are:l'lt:J~ oo~c.a4bl lDoc.coe@hl of4col:toc.ae co~es
"coe>ke>es .>:Xo .lo
:1 .:> :> .>OJ.) .:>:.:1 .l ,) ~ .:> .> :J, '
e&>es

:lilooo.o>Cb:&eo
.>
ll@ccrcoc.reeswrees
.) .)
J@cc:r;:;J:beJes
.) &.:J w&>core:4~C2b
().) .),:) o1 oi'l
I,;
li:>G0C.We>!b~4bJC.CO~
:> &.l ;) .)
OOC.OCOIC.rft'h C.CCeJ'l~
.) .)
CJ:l:cec

Otoc:b&coc.coe>
.) .)
<X'>Igees
.) l.,; 0
W:c.rf'ICSoC
0
Sol'lccc 11 &?ccb:~;rc.o
c.coe:toe c.cc~ccC'.oewco u.)&?ccb:c.coc.oees r4beeet:l:l:e
0 .) " .,) 0 .) .,:.:~.
::::lw~es
~""':> o
oft:Jwre:~~@b
.> o - .) .> .>
Glo~ecb:l:cob
t,: .) .>
Coe>WCO
.>
~C.OC.COe><X'>I~ee.c
.) :> ~ o
'coh!esto
o .>o o .>
C\?cc
@coc.croces CcCoC~O(l C.CC~~rcoC'~ ba'i)t ofcb:be>GIO~ C.CO~o::~ u@cca,!1l;oQ
.) 0 \ 0.> .> \ ~\ .> t; .> .)O .) .>:::J .):J
ec.ccrc.o~4hlc.oro
, .,~.,
w;t>,es :>o~c.cc:l'lre
o .>o .)
:ahlcc&
.;,OJ.> uob4boc.co~
.) .> .> ecc@hl
.>
!G@c.o<=ro
.) ~ ':!.> ~
r:ob4bwc.ce~@co
.> .> .> .>
~~:CmCCe
o
C.C.O~O::>~
:> .>
@ccGOC.COe:be4roc.ro~ll
.>o .> e.;, :> ..>
uwrec.ol:::l:oo
.> ., :1
n , "'
nw1ereo~
.) 0 ~
"
.> 1,; 0
..., ...,
coloeec-cccccc<oc.<!llc.ec ,.
.)
'J ~
.>
" "
ccwce>oc-'>'AWoec.cc:ale:n
0 \ ,)0 .> .)
2<oro"
.)O .)
* (ttbegcoococFroe~b:::)(~8hl)
.::> .::> .::>
0 .):_j
8CD8CO
.::> .::>
IGe>
..J.,
r
~lg>
uc.ob
J
Cc , .)
coc.cco~
' 0 (~bcoo
we
.J
Froe~b8re:::>hl)
.::> .::> .)~
. g1J>C2hlccoc.ol
0.::> ~
Ge>
.::> \..,
SLOT s.L'cl:Odtru M V1 VW'tlflg

s.DIOdtrn M.vi vmng 9L.Ot
n@cc
~ .) .
. oo: lrwcco:ro .
:Xo~c.cc:Are:At::lco&
.:J .:> .:> .>OJ.) @cclli<Pt::l
.> .,~ .>
oltu~A:okJ:c.EO)~
o ..,~ ...._,.>o
~@A
.:>
~~a;
..,
&:ob
o ,)
ua3cc<Phlibd<P~
" ..>:3 .:>
co'&co~coW @cc:2:2c:o
.> oo .>o .J o .> e o
Abc.A~
.,
l:o~~
o .., ..,
~ , -'LJ~, 2 " ,, tr:" r,
~cc:~cc~ ~:~cc~ :ec:occc.c:o~gl'l 'S'OOCJ:;~ u~:c.cc 1:c.~co~ nc.cofl
o:k
u@cc oo:lrcoec
:Xo~c.cc:Are:..J:Jco& ol6:c.h.lotoo oo&nJJ(I;;fl u@cc...Q
~ ~ .
.> .) .> ::,'OJ.> .:> ~.bo ~:.3 o .> :l.ll
-~dG~c.o~cootocol:o
.> .> oo .>o- .J- -o-
@ccCJ:;e
.:> o
~:kcc~
:>- --
ob (:cc~h.lc.ocb~
.:> ::::::1.>
m~en :@ooc.cc~~
..5 .) .> o al'lce:c.cc
e cdool:c)
.> o o~A:@oo:flcc:c.cc
., G
.~fl:c.rc.oc.co~
o S :c.cofl
II @cc~bo:Cu Coo~c.CC:Are:flt::lco& oib.Jl3fl: .J:l:c.h.l~
.> o o .> .> .>OJ.> :J o .)"":::.1 :::::J.Jo
c.o:2:2c:o
0 e
:('l(C:c.cc
0
u@ccre~o~IW
,) 0 .).)
~@ccGh11!cdG~
.) .>:J .) .Jc.oeco~mW
00 .)0 ,)" o-
@cc:2-.2c:o
.) ee
:l'lce:c.cc
e
:C2oool6c.c:o~l;e:c.rc.oc.co~
.:> .> o S c.oCoe1:c
.J ~ o
nc.COfl
ocoa:
"" " :kcc~

,@cco~"'hl
..l !"'..l tlcd~eco~col:o @cc:2:2c:o
.) .> oo .JO ~> o .> e e
:l'lce:c.cc
o
e&:kcc~
::>- --
II~J~fl~~a;oo:; C.CC~~~ IC.CC~fl ~gt'l :~A:rJj>O[_O

o&xbc:occ&bo
.) .) oo.)
~fll:c0
uc.col"l c.cc~c:occl:oooo
.) 0.)
1 oro c.cc~c:occl:o:c.cofl
.) .) 0
:XocbJ:c u@ccGhJ~,J:J C.CC~c.otob O~C.CC:Are:flt::I~:Cu @ccl!i"'t:J

.) o .) .>::1 ~ .) o .:> "' .>OJ.> .:> !'.j
...?f6"JIJ..:..J:l:c.h.l~
:.T' ~ ~.bo
c.o&d~wecdn o~c.oroolo~:c.rc.oc.co~
..> ..> oo o .> .) t.. o S
:c.COfl 'Ccbo
o o
:c.rc.oc.co~ooo
S J
~1:-c
,) o
nc.coec:ob
::f :>
IOI6Ghl:2co
.> .:> :J e
&13oc.~~
o.>
03cc&:kcc~
.> o .)
L.LO!
bccc~o:a
oe e
(c) :~~ocel:)
j
M oo~ca4t::l
.>
~oc.ool)@.hl
.,o .>:.:1 :a .,:.:J co:M:U
.~.,
tcodro~ro.
lacccrolu
.J 0
4bk~ cor&ro
.;) 0 .;) ~ 1.. 0
to:dftob:ccoe
0 ~
:cblro
:::J
o~
~ cc
&be:6Qc4<So-
~:::J .;)
co~oo
~ oo
otocoto
~o ~ o ,
recb:lcorco
.;) ~
C'b~coro
~
to;ftro
o ~o
oeccc:ftre:fthlcoro
.;) .;) .Joh
II CCCCG~Occ waosekl ccc~c(2:
.;) ~ 0.;) .J:..3
wee
~
::ieoro~cc:coo
~o ~
:k5kl
~ :.J ~-:)'fu d e'hro
~o
11 :o~ft oeccc:ftre :ftt:Jcoro o:lu
~ ~ ~O'J~
t:Cro &S.ro:lllbJ
~
toeeco
0
~ekl&lce~d0S.
~:..3~ ~
:g:Ce
0..
:CC~o
~
::)hwro8b
~0 0
CO~ft
.;)
:CCCOCc I~CCe~d0<1- c.oero :cro:2co& O~Crft~:<1-eh ~(\;, lacc'JQ

~ o ~ .J .J oo e ~ ~o ~ .J :..3
:ol:l:c~o'!:o ~@ccbe 2oQd04 roeoo o'!:ocow&o(r)es'hrou@cce~b
~:::1 ~bo ~ ~:::1 ~ ~ oo ~o ~ o \.JO .>
Oeccc:ftre:ftt:Jcoro o:tu :cccoo~ Cft..Q hocro~@kl CCC~e
~ ~ ~ob to:to:cro
o ~o ,) :.J ~ ,) :.J ,
~to:llrro toeeco ~k) cco~cb WftOtoft rob;e> l2cc..klcoro;ftrolbro(c)e
.> o .> :..3 .> e~ o .> ~ ~ :..3~ ~o '1.
c'l-Jro IC ch:cl!:>~ftro II <2ccect:J~e>~hlcoto to;fteG oeccc:ere:fthlcoro
,)0 .)0 :s- ~o ,) , '1::::.1 ,):..3~ o ~o ~ ,) ~O'J~
&>~C:o~ro ccc~@coc.ooc.ro tcws~o2 ::*.o;~rub c coR~ 10~ d~:~2lc
~ o'l. ~ ~ &J ,) ;:~
1.JCCccGoc.w;,
e~
:be>4&::c.coe~u
~ .>
11 oc.f>l)oc.al)
.) ~
cc.owrc~
~ t,
olre:h':l&:chc.o
.) e.::J
11 ..Joco:~&:l:2
~ e
(:c.0colu)
.;, o
:2:oo~:2u
~::::.1 e
n.)w&w&be:c.ooc.oc.rcof>
~
46oceohl
.) .> .> !.:1
ll~<:cc.J.~
" .) 0
hJ
0
r ~co~r,e&escoo.;,cb
.)
I o'fe Cs:.~ct:>:>?rc.fl~l:l ~:>c.ooe@hl ot r 10 ~col:l:>c.M>
.,) .J .)0 .,) :J .,) .) ~.) ""' .) :.:1.>
11 @cc:~;:;Jb
.) :, ~.....
h.>oo
0 0
00
dcort'l.:(])
.,
ref~
.)
~~:~llc
.:J
rkS:~:c.,;:;:).u:J rcorec.@rcot>::>rod~
::=33~ ., ., .) .,M~ec.cc:flreu:loc.o~
.) ., ., OJ., &t>
~t>W II~ .Jc.o~;e&es .:> ;J
re
co=<b:'&ec ~nVCI:>:>~c.I'I41J
.>o .>::l 'l,:>c.oot)@Q
..> .) ~.)
of ,\,ccc.iG:C!
oo o
II be ~b~WCC.~
~
<:oo.zcb
~
1e Cs:.tJc
~
net>:>Gflt>
~
0~ :>:>~C.fi~IJ
~ ~o ~~ ~
~:>C.oot>@fil
~ w
S.DiOd'ml .M.V1 VW~ng 8.01

ol ~~~~ ~~~~- Cstlc (D
ad~~~~;~b ~~~ _(c)
II~:~fl~eleB
e~roccce~~g:, 1ccc~e> ~&~e>:~e>:;l50Loiocbs.<xc
td:o CO~e>Cc
I:C.COfl CCCeiCOCC to~ro I~COCCCeiCOCC
00 ~ 0 ~ 0~ ~ ~
h>:ccoe>
0
~d>tt
~ 0
11 C2cc"'hl
~ ~
~hi
~:_j
ccce~eoh:>b
~ 0
::,~ccc:e>Pe
~ ~
:e>hlcob:> o:h> C2cc~0hl l:l~tume> :~t:l:ct:"J~"to c.o&d01~
~oh o ~ ~:.J ~ ~ ~:::.~ :::bo ~
CtJ~oob:, M c.orco!Ol~ :c.~CtJCCOel :ccoe> ecb:, l:cfl-"CCOei::JC\)
~ 00 0 ~
, ,o ~
b ffs :hl2 11(r0 0
l.. 0 !)' ~
@,, ,
~co~ 1:ccoe> !f=? '5 COJ~ :e co cc~ ;c.roe~~g> ~ cccc:~cce~
11 @cck~ cnr8ees &>o~fc.o h,@cc<l!:hl :cPe>,oc.ocese~ @cc:c.Pe>

~ 0 ~ ~ l.. 0 0 ~.) .) ,:::~ L..) .)
i!d:o
0
11 ~@e>ftrooot;
.) 0 0
:C2ro~cre>&be
~
:::Jt:lc4G4c.oboo
,:::.~ 00
olcco~o
~0 .) 0
ccce~<Ob
.)
E'o
0 .) .)
1 t\ 11 @ 1r 1t 1r 11
51c.o :ewe> ~'if, cc01 e>0e~cee~ro 1~ccco 11 oe~30t;-e~ J51elfl ~es30ees
4-b&wc.c.oe~
.) ~
cn,&es
~ l. 0
!Gwcccoo
~~ .)
::,~d<Df
.) ~
wboo ~cc:cce~4e~~
~ 00 .) 0
:c~:)OO
.)
(;wee ~~a,~ &:chlo~ CoCCccbe:::J~C.!l-G~ c.oeoo ~tccoto
o, ~ o " :=:bo ~ .,..... ~ " oo ,o ~ o"
11 C2cce:oe~k ~~
.) ' 0 .)
cnr&ec
, t.. o
~~~f)!lahl
o, . . . ~ :.3 o , t.J oc.oc.es~
~ ~,
ecw
lbwcccco
~
::,-f~ew~kcc:flfe:e>hlcc&
~ .:> o ~ ~ ,O'J.:>
ewibbG
,~ ~ e
c.cc~eco(~re
'.:>
~hl~~e!Wb
5:3, ~
G ro~b1
.:>o
IG~e
~
G~Zlc
v
~~~
"
(r) 0:>~
o :~o
cl'l4bl~ocroe@hl ~~
,) ~ .) .) :.3 .) ..... .) ;,:),)
r
10 ..!>c.oblocfte (.()~ e&:w :~coo~d> :&es
' 0 0 .)
11C2cc
~
;oe~k~~ h.;co,8ero lbe>ooo 1:-vccoestl) 1ee.c ccce>c.olo5 10~ :dMcc

0 .:> 0.) l..O ~o.) 0 .) 0 \... .) \.. ..L .)
d:xcS) ~de>1/;e.c o~~e>es:&ICB II ree>cd~fl tocccce>b f)")Q 1:.u:bJ:c.ro~cre:
.... ~ 3 o J o o;-:1 o
~W~W CCC~CfJIOeJ IOeJ I@CC:Cff)(.()rek::,~ C018ero ec(u}:o IOJc.Pcxe>ro
0 ~- L,. ~ .) .:> 0 :) .J t., 0 0 ' 0 .)
"'~cc:~ocoPc.o
, , 4w~ ,@cc~e>m
,_, ., .,o .:>~~ccc:e>Pe:flhlco&
., ,Q'J.,
11 .,C2cce:oe>
'
!Gc.o~
~.,
ib dfl:b:,ob0 ccce~owh> o~toC2cc0 (c) oohft4Q~ocoof)@@ o~
~ El 0 .) 0 .) 0 .) .)0 .)~ ~ .) :.J ~
6LO~
.....
~
~
~
o,~o,rP...,
A
-~
a., s 84)
;.~o 8
m051
,., em !e_,-(lll')rull
.-.010 ...,
I
(Oil
o
~
~
0
iS_, V g~ C)<) (J
= .e
~,.So
ru,8
~(:B, ~ .,
u e ::'). c
8 v'l fS <C
.. ~- 8o
o,
8
rlt,uS 8
~~~.\.~;
~
I[;
f)
8r-1Vos 8 8 6)
.-.- 8 g
,.co J ) .8. . rn,. 8, C11,e rnf) ~
,.Q::o C'l 8
= -en rue 1-i! ...8o ..8o [8] 8o ~
Bo . 0
,.So~>3 ~ .. 8o ~, fS [8]
8 ..u ,.Vo
So t>S G) sec
o, 8 "'oo @n f.~ 8
,8 8 6)
So.-8o~' ~ ,.~, 81) 81) ~ = 81) Q:; fS ~
a
.~\,.80 ....8o .8. .
1')
~ u , . v
Q ,.So ..8o ~ ...~, ,.Sc :oo go~ ~ ,.8oCCJ ro; cm f) 6) 8 [8] a::o !=Do :::l
~ fS ~?-
~
0
&>e 8 ,.oo ' u 8,8o l<vO 00 ()f) O O 0'1 G) c~ 8, f., 8..., Q.., R'1 r."' ~e.... 8v t:f:a1 u 8 G) cfl.rl
<.) - 8 8 , 8 ,..So,.So,. .
R 0 "' 0 "' 8
8 f)o 'l 8
~B ,.vg B 6) fS Be d l>f) _gf) ~ ...~~ .8-- 8 cr; -en ,...~ !.:.
<.)
8 e 8\..)') 1.)

~8o rnf) !:Do 1.) ~=8 .) ~"' rn . . 8 8 ~

,... 00 rj 0 00
So s,., oOI') 8 t>IV

~o.-8g.....
cg_,
.-:0~ .... c()I') CBT
<.) ,.()f) ... a:;
8 8, o 8 ?a:: ,.vc
..ao 8 I>~ 8~Fe ...So 1.) oOr; Bo G) = g()f) ;=8 @n t>8 ...8o rn . . fSl . .
. _o sf) 8 s. ., 8. ., ""' cr:
rnf) -en , "'8 , i?,., s [B,.,[B, 8 a:: fS .-~Do S rBc ~

8, R,,- :8'o ()f) G) <.) 8
..-,.8o.-en,C8J a::c 8, u, rnl 8
t>G .:.elS. "81V,o, e u = -~e,-en "' S
~f) ~ -en . <.)
-en rue CCl e..., fS c~ . COO ,.So ~ !:Qo
o;, 1-'\1
. wJ em rw,
,e
=
an ~~- ~ cf) e
~
e, 8 e .!! cr:..., o..., JJs
8.... 80 sf) 8u ~
:soJg;~
(:J
<.) t>8
8 ,., 8u . ()f) 6) ,8 <.) 86) e"' v ~,,8
(1:}
~8 L~f),_ 0 ~0 dQ
F8 fBc -en CG1 0
8u : Fs ...g, an ~ ..cc 0 a:: 6)
~
, '.IV'O>J
u
Q:;
. n,,..t>o~ 8o 1=8 8 fB, gf) ,..~o
~ rnl e, c .-8
(.')~ 8 0
n:> -
LC/f)...!:) Q:; r8
o
8 8. . 2 8
Q::..., ~vo
.-Bo'(J~ ""~
"'
8 . :B m .. 01)'"-r.
00 .-,21>0
e,,..8omo 8 [>s ~, x~ ~ I) 1l~r-B P-Q)
n> .aG~
o, o~ e, ~ 8 &>e ru ~> 8 1<8o"-----' ~ 8 S">.t8o"'~ <r: ~~, 1) 8') 8
~')!=Do s rn
C/f) ifl
~Qf). a
,..8o :. ~
.
8 8 ~:., ..So
(1:} ~ o,
8 c G) -en,~o, o,
8, 8 a:: = ...n
o..<C ~ ~; c
8, 8 B 5' c:no
Q:;..., B s6) f>o ,8 1-'\1 f')
6) .:~ ~ .~ o, 0 0 ..g Bo Vo fl}'l <.) ~Co 0'1
,8 co rnl1>8 -en S ...,CGlwJ
~ 8 8 e..., G) <C
G)
..8. 8 ,..vo
0 ..a:; lO 0'1-fll 0 ou
~R .r.;f>.ro . ~,,.(.')f) ...~f)~ I')CV.()rB ~ 8 8 =Qo
:5 ' "8 rBf) 8 ~ 8 S, = o.._2i>ef) 8 G) v ~
Q:; t>tl/ s .. ~f)
,.. rue
8 "-' oo s (So ln:>
po l Ot') Q:: _
8._;8 .:.8
.8, -a0
i=
8 - ,. 0 ~e0')
oo
;=8
~, ..Bo
Q:: u !=Do 0
~t:
........... f)
,.8 r_ 1=8 s6) u rB') 8
Uf) "-----'
= Bo
~
r
ru
L 0'>
= e~
I .
>o,
J) 8 81) -en
a:: .. o e u 8 S W J Q'l S s, '-.../ 8 V'l t>V
o01') t=
8 ru
LQl") oo
ru~ 8
:==o 0::0 ~
8 rC
8
8, ~ F8 a:: 8 ruc u o B0 ruc ,.8 8 !::=: o, e t>s . 8 6) 0 8 Qf) ~-
."V
-en .'.Ll:)
Rl
J fBI')
I')oo o01") oo [B, - C'l ()f),& ~8o 8 o..., ~ ifl S...,
8 8 ruc c ...,.. ruc
r-1
:-fB:) , <.) rnl,.So fS S ~
H
~ o ~s "' .-;:.,.,rue ~ ~
S">~, 8 So ...8 8
~ 00
8 ;:8 8 8,r8. 8 -8. . 8 8 \0
q,-en, 8, ~
.-J/Jlf) 1>8 I>
e0
.-Q ,..{),,.Oil~
So So fB:::;."> ...8 ,..~o
~
~ v ~
8, ;~ C So
\...V J
~ rv.e
00
..8 ~[B'l"'n, Sl')rB"~ .
l80[ sJ.:'tlOdmi M V1 vmmi
80[ S.UIOdffii M.V1 VJAruflH
nC2cc
.)
coro
_, o
1 ~ 1
:en::>
o .> e
6CJ> :ccrococoo~t;:o
....., 10 , II? 1rocorotece
.> o .,.,
10
o o .>
0 1
o
0 17 ()
:;~mtoero
.> .> t., o
1
o
en occecoro
0
_, o .>
.....,,m
cc
;o 1 II?
coo~tro cocccc:cooce:;~
1 ....., , o 17
mrooro
o
ccro
.....,
rororo
1 n
o~ccro t e:s~cc0
o 1 r ':"JL
.> o o .>.> ., o .> .> t., o e .> o .> o .> .> .>
BIOfl1!
II:;)CJ>::>cro~ : b~srucco~
U ~
orocccoo
1
o rol7
o~oeccc:flte
0 ~ 17 17
:fl
coo::oo~
1.-
17
OO~e.G
. .)
~e.>
17
::>CO 1
!:>O~C.~S'
o .JO
g
.>
.> .>
1
OOC005CC
.> .>
....,~
.>
o
.>
r 1
0\1;' S'Cfl
.> .>
g .> .>
v.
.>
OC.~5 Cl.)6)ffi
.> \ o
11
.>o .>
il
emro
:~COOQCJ:)
o .>
_,
:furo IICCcclw
.>
c.n~ro .>rol~ro
.
n<:dcc:I:Ol:b~ro
.> e .:..J
cororolb:M:Cdb
o _, .> .>
18101\,
t.,
II!:)
Y
!bOCW~ : 6~smcco~ 1r o 11
oocooo:Ciflfl ccc~
1~ 1
:ccro v ] _11
ocoromwcro~ m1oed:lo
6.) .) .) .) .:> 0 .) .) 1, 0
.)
tmdfl s~oa .)~flccc uC2ccb:tc~Pco

0 .) .)
ceo~:&>~ ccc~cc &>~wro
.)
ucccc
.)
b:coo coero ~b0~0hl :~C2roh>ro ~~ooroPe:~~@b 181~ ,ecb:tc~Pw

o _, .>~ e" o .> o .> .> .> 1.- .> o .>
17o
co~coro mcocco~
11 ()
m roees 1 Of. 1
cosfle.coo 'r"J '::)
cccccccocrncro 1 0
ccroG~o
2 ccc~
.) .) .) '"'0 0 .)0 0 .) .) 0 \ .
!; coProoCJ>OO 16~ !GeMd,:b~ GIO~ ceo~::>::>~ IICCCC(J)hl :oQe cccrc.o~

0 .) .) \ ~\.) 1, .) 0 .)0 .) .>::3 .) ~'\
1~ , 1 ot n :fl~ coro L 1b ~~ ~.--,
s.) coco
.)
<Osflro
0 .) 0
oeccc:flle
o 17
.) .) .)0 .)
17
:::>;>s
.) .) .)
ocoo~oo
11
ace!
.) .)
1occcoaccro
.) .)
11
t:obJ.bcocce~CC!co
.> .> _, .>
h>~:to:ccCJ>
o o .>
ti:;)CCO~::>::>~
;> .>
CdccCJ>::>cco~
.> o .> e.>
:b~Mccco~
.> .>
....., If
u.)cccccococtroe> 1':"]
coccccro o 1 11 or n1r
occ:o~ co ro :cero coocec.vccfl :cco:::,~:ctflfle.G
\..) .) I,.:> .) 0 .)0.) .)
1 r ol7 ~ I~ 1 1 1 1J 1 1 1 1 1
ce, s~ :ce~oo croO>ro::>~
.) .) .)
ccros
.) .)
o cc :sco::>co
.) .) .)0
cocc s0s
.)
coero oc.crr.co
.) 00 .)0.) 0
L ~
coc~:b
1~
coo 1oCOfleB ':"J ~l3 1 b r1
l:ccmccc~ l oocc:o~ : o :roo 0> Loo.: ro: seG~o~
l L 1
.> e.> o .:> .> 1.- .:> .:> e o .:> .:>o
obO>:Cbco .:>ooo:b:>oo~co
.:> e o.>o
:ccc.ocoC2c.o
.:> .:>
C2co
e
fbecoro
~ .>
co:HB h>~cPf):oQ:cro
~ o .>~
Sl."HOdffil MV1 YmnR t88t

S80l S~1!0dffi:{ M.V1 ymng
~!965] BU~A LAVV REPORTS 1087
' ('~(' ('
c;peoooLJcroc~
~ Q (" (' C'

ro<.p:~e:JI 21~f:OOCG~~
'~ C' ~C'

( [jC<;DC9rG9J ')(D(X)')gq(
C' OC' o ~C' C' (' (' )
:tJ 2 G(X)')C~elf~')~CC t O(!(ij
C' Q t
~c oeO)-:>o:>
J
?~ '1~11
o:>G~') ( GQI '~')
':~m
c~ C'
t1croc9rG9J')mro'):Q90j( * C' C' C' ) .
t: C' (' C' ('

~e'OOOCY.>JC:t:<{OI:I r9:> ~9 ~O''J[IOC GOC II
r.;: c c- c c c ~ r,: o <: c c
~ll:jOO~Jo:> II 114l~Gro::D~ 'f>C'OOOOO'f'l~e:J: tl~O>JCY.>I:Q')OC <0:"1j':l0)0>')0;10)
GG:Ofo:>~
o c 1::::: c
I:QG~':lCIO>JCl<.p"'J':l:ot
c o r.: c r: f.'!
I:Q\tOO'f'elq tJG4ltJU
or: o
<XItJ~O>Jroot
c o c s
4l':l1C:G9:~
c c- c c c c:_
C' c ~t: cr,: o oo c oc c o
c;c:OO?ItJ:D2~C ~frofo:>2ot ~!3Xp~<: tJf"'2tJ~~~:D~OO~:I o:lO)Go:>loiJ?ro:t
.h" c [,~ ". C' 0 \ 0 c 1::::: c 0 c ' ~
c;;g'r:lf:oocoro:tl: G01f?C'Y.l<Xj~::Q?:"'2: <XIO?~ oocoro:coe:~?c: co~9:n2u I:QOO<DOI
C' OC' C' C '1 c C 00 ~!l t::::: C'
f2:oo~: G"1j?C'Y.lO>'J~OO?! OOGOX>IGo:l?I:Q:li c;c:C'Y.lG<D?C I~? OJ~f?ICXlt::G~?CS
('\ (' (' (:- ('~ (" 0 ('O r.:c::::: h(' C
~P'!lO'!l0>JC'Y.lGJ?I1C,
OOOOJC'T.>:Jj ~:C'Y.lGGio:l21olJ?:ot G"1j?C'T.>O>'J~C'Y.l Gtl~?IOO?IEIC:f~
, c c c c-~ c r,;c o r-;: C' c o o c hC'
~:lJC'Y.l~C.OOOo.:>mSJ l:lC'Y.lJill~f'):Jj OOtJ4ll:l5JGe:J?cl GO>JUO>Jro~ot G'JI~OOOO?IEICIO)
'l" C' (" ~(" C' (' C' ('- .~ (' C"
GOI ~::GfGOo:>211 0?,tJ4l9C'Y.l?l G"1j?m0>9~o:l2 'f'eOOOo:>J<:c:q~()l:l tJ90 ~C
,;: o c- oc oo 'T' ' o c r,:::: c h e o~~ oo
tJ~OO?IOJ~~ : I:IGOOGO I ~~~(Qi OOG~?C!I:JCKf>l:lJ?:c-q -c:~'1J o:>~ f'?l
cr::: c o oo c- c ~ c .,t o c r.:::: c c c c c
<Xl2 Etc:~,~~ 1 ~G4l'Jt ro2: Of:oD<~Sl "''l~c co~?c: ~:~~o:>2~" ooc~p:coo:ne n
~ C" c ~s c cr;<?.:-
t~i:!coro?c41 l:lfl:l?~CC
OC' ('
1q GC;I?CO>CtlC (o~~i') r 'P~~-~g~~o3 oo~
0 c" c
(.,) ~ '122lt 1o:>2 11
~(' c (' c C' 0 ~ G 0 C'

r:!COOC')fGOOJ ?OOCO?I~~~OO II I! GJ:OLI'JG~~f~: e:rol:Gg:>c II
r,:c c c c c
r:!COOC'JtGOOJ '.)0000'.)1~9~~~00 II
9C'C' C'~ 0 ('

B:
C'
ooro:o:>
T IL
::nco~:ooc
l. AT
u nm~rogg')
L JL J 'T
grouc
rorom..,ro:::o()')Q)C'Oro
. "- r
ll L
C' C::: C C' C C oC'
OXP:~
L 0 :mr cc:c:ll"!
ll I 1.1 ::>a~"'
c. J
Q.!i\01
LJ
roc-o())gGJIJro
L Jl J \ A
C'
~j roc mro:Q 0:
-- T ll
* o~lij ~t~' ~oS6~~~a5 o7.li (.,) 11

t erR o c c ~ G c ( ) c <:
1:1!3f'Ct;r.l OXJ.)U)'f'= tpeOOOOO'f'lo,(e:J: e::))()Q: I:Qor.:~?OD? 0)( <1Ciel~l

~000~:~~00 tJj /cllj ~I
c:~ c: c: c c
c c 'T' ' o
~01:1 i'7,ll I:Q'}I G"1j?C'Y.lOO?:Ol9~1:QGOI ~~
r::s 0
<X>?:t:f":'q
c c (' 0('
C' (' '1 (' c
tpeoo:>~3~ \'90 I:Q'}I ~G"1j?GOJ?OOI:l~ O>J'f"G0:019f I oellj ~tO I
('
(' t 'f: (" t: (' (' C" (" (' ~("
00')000)?CXl 7. 9mco~~tlq ooc~c:Go:>? 'Peooo tlcroc~G"1j~?n
1088 .BURMA LAW REPORTS [1965
oe~:>
('. - ( 'l') 'l' (" C' 0(' (' '1 ('
Gcqj?('J)Q'J~ ~:::nG~: SdGOI o:>~GCDJ-:JGo:>?~0~QJ'jW G0:019f
GQI Gj~
c c o c ~; o c c c r,::c c
'P~ooomJ<;;Q{: ~80 ?9:::> ~9 illl'i!:~ ooc~c:o:>~m~{ji!)GCDo:>~ 11
2Gco~~
oc
G0?f::r.>G~: (GQT), Gt::l8d0:) ~G.So:>
~c
c:lf~?~cc GCDI?cf.;ooo;>
:U ~ -1 . L .AI J
.p?:01m?:
t::J <;flo
n T IL
:;,8
J
G r,:: c c o c:
roe:{j00:>~~~111 ~OO()')OI~~qc
c '1 c
G0')C:::DG~g
c ( -r)
GQI G]j~m ~15~
roc
O:.G4>? ( G~T) (' Q (' 0 .C: G C' (' C'O CG 0 C'[. C'
Cjl~U
0c:o:>0: 0QC::Dl<:li::D0:
C..::.
~O:>('J) ()l. ~0Q.SQ
J ~ J1
00')CQ :;o:::n~');j
t ll 1 0~0C
:t otT
.S<D
'l' OC' o~(' C' C' C C" r,~ C' C' OC"
O)?O')G(.)I Sd'f.C o;>er:_CGo:>?C~?~CJ :::>~~j ~~01 c;l:jro jj 9('J)G~~3crs.pg
c c OA; c-~ c c ' c\r:::c r,::c c c c
mJ~~~;;q~ 'P~o:>a:lt.::~:<f80 r7~ OO'J ~O)C~~c:{j0o:>~ II 0Q)G:;Q:o:>2(
C" ~ ~ o C C Co 0 C' lm C'
'P~OOOOO'IJ:~t.::J:
l:j;;qQJ()');J.l90C GCDp()')Q'J~ro G0:C\fo:>~SdGt:.:;ecg
~c o r;;:c ~ r,~ o~ o c o c ..!; c ~ c-
t.lc:'P0P:cq m~m'Ptl~ t:jGI!)t:J:I cxtt:j;;qQJ0>C'J:[ <D'),<;;G'J:~ <psn:t:jo:>~
ooc
C
0sroso;>::l)ill
C C' C' C'~C" C'~ 0 00 C" OC"
~0~m~c sco:::n :;oo:>oo:>::::n~mc:l
C'
o:>mGo:>01'):m
0
ll J T T C L IL -[ J o I C L Jl U L U L
(;':C' ' (' f,~ (". (' 0 ' 0 (' 1m (' 0
G0:t1fgi!)I!)G:;o:l:j; GC\jj'}()')~~~:r.n:ro~; 0!0?~ 1!)0000:G~?C:G9_?~'}
C' C '1 C" OC' C' o C '1 C
o:>~ll ~comOif~:!DOfC: Gcq)?CDQ'J~:D?: Q)0GOO:Go:>?OOQII 9c:<Y.)
(" oo (' r;:;: (' . C' c c,.!; C'\ (' ('
Gm-:>c:~:> o:>5J<f?:ro~G~:>c:m;jj 'tl:mG0:o:>2
01?:mo <: o
u t GCDI?('J)Q90)()')
:.u a. G
rc
'):CO?:IQC;~C 'IOQI()')~C()O)O)('J)~
~
c'
J .,) ll u
c- <:
J o
c c~ c-
0('J)lji:CD,SQ<:I
u;'" o. t -,.:a

~(" 0 1m c . . c 0 0 (" ~C' 'l' (' ("
Sdt:ji001JG~?C: GQJOQJ()')~<"q G'J:<rOOoo?:tJc:m G(.)l ~G<fGOO:>~ If
or;;: c- co c c c o c c ~ o
~tjiD'Jm?: Go:pm~~o:>2 c:p~ooomJ~9: <(80 c:J?,C l:j;;qco:>g 9?:::>
c oc-
:::n:::nmmc:
oo
00~GO I
-r 0roo:>:::n
\o c m~;;mG
(' c o c o o6
?c: c:m01:>:m 0:::no:>0o:>o
t:i. -1 6 l u. .:t. -r u l c.:. ot. J Jt
. C"O '0 00 . C" C ~ C",.l; OC" ~ C" C C C'
'f?:ro2~1!1 O:>~G~'JfCD~: ~:OtyL<:qO:;j0'JtCGe:1?C: 0<11.0)o:>~~?!XJC
r;;: C' (" (' C'f::: (' 0 1m (" c C'
1j?:Gfo:>tj<; mJ~9:c.r.s0 ?9:) :DmJl:cct.tc: 0~Gt2j:>e: ooc~e:Goo:>2"
' c 0 (' 0 c (' C' (" C' C' ~(' r.:
mro?:~ p:oc:~ ~G;;::n~ roc:p:Q~'? omo:>mo:>~ t:jeGco?c~t:Jf'<J";)
o C' -'\\C(" G(J?C&C
&CC
~ I:
0
J o
c
c C'e C'
'
. ('
tC~(J
Jl
c
c0 ) m0 :"1)()1'1 II 008d(J)('J)
t.
0
a-
c 0 c
0
C'lt. A
('
s.;l(J~G
Jt.
c
'JC:~ro
-l-
(' 0
6 (' 6 ('
01?:ro
u 1.
::l)li)Go:>'J
~ Jl!
moomm :;o:::n:::n~O?c: m:::>moo? ro~omm1cco:
t. l:!. t. . 1. ..:t. J -c u l
08(,)
C C o C"OC' C' () 0 C 0 C' '1
~C:::> OOC s.;l()')ll:00C&CG o:pc:m s.;JQ)gQs.;JO)('J) CD()')OIGOO?C9mo:>:::n
[
C' C C:
l . \ 7 A U L L L -, A t. Ill, [..$
0 ~ C G C'o . C
02?~G~Gf~:mro2: o:>G:::D?~2C<fQG00:>2 II
. 'l'~ '1 1m c ~ (" (" C' c 0 ('
''Gt.91 dOl 8JG~?C:0p:G~J<? m-rm~OD~ 'P~OO) o:lJ~cxr: <.(G~
c o c-r:::c o r;;:c ~; o co C" C' c ~coc-
?9:::> ~c mmJl:oct'Jc: ~x{jq 0 i'tJ=<r cdmQGOO?c~ro9;;0(9Q)~cGo:>?
G~?t
~ o
mcooSo1 (Jo3Qr0S01.;:~6 8;)(Jd;~ 0roa::"l~ ::lOGS~Q C'8m8o:>c8
J 1J tJ ~L Jl4lll. -lJ-OlC -i l. L
c c c- c ~c- 'co c-
c OC' c o c c-
f'm.romG:;o?C~~f ' t:jf~2.::~9r m~~QJ'fOOCI:(<?o:>~ 11
(o) ::>eG? ~~~ r ~~ooS8~61[s:xr~ ::1o.fi .( ~) u

.. ;,
11 .>coto"
.
cotocodb:>swGccsccaa
.) .)
@cc:oiJ~s:GIJco:C!co
00 .) .,)~ ~ 0
--c.rcoef!l
.)
Groos .)cocc:Aco:@Ga:lGCO
.) .) .)
cbe&w-~Aw
.)O
hw(c) uub aclu~~rcocoo~ch
.> .) .)
* (&be:coowciEDe>
.:>
4b:xx:::::>hl) C2R.:2
.:> .:> .J ~ .:> :=::J e
r
~~
.)
S.l~Odffii .M.V1 VW'dfl9:

SJ.}!Odffil M V1 VW'llila 060T!.
~965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 1091
Oc: e c: oc: o c: c r--c
IJ.S :~J:xn:roe: G{,)O) ')(ldQ ~?:G :))')(PG.SOOC(,)(,)(ldiO IOCP<T.lj,;:n!CI.!U
T ~ -. T L JL J ~L., "----1
oeli~
C' \
C'
C..:.J
C" "
IO:::D:"D(,)') (,)CI)())(.l):::OQGQ(,):D II
bl.Ji. -1 c::, ~~8~
u c o c c-e ~C'f;:.QC' 'T' :r..d
Gcqpmro?:Q9~m GCOJ?CPro?:~ (,)QC')8d?: 8d81Je:l(,) GQI
c: c- c-e e c o c or,;c-A; o c- o r::::;::: c c
Q e:.
e:~~n
<'
G:::D?ro~: (,)QC9C'P e:mJtqm~tJ'\'~ (,)otC'PCI1Gt?_3?C: :::DmG:::D(,)p:

c, c oo r,;: c- -c c- c- c- e C' or::;:: c- 'T' C"
8diO<DQQJ(1)8d9 ::0519::0lj~ (,)~:))~8d~C'P (:)QC9::0~ OfeJ~GQI ::0~
o r,;c- o c- r::::: c o c- c- c- c- C'9 o c- o'"
Of tJt(:)<XtCPGe:l?C:Of coe:co-:>:G0<-9;'9'\' Gropmro?:~ C:IQC9<"'f(.l)qG
C" 0 C" c-r;: (' _s (' r.:: C" ~ (' 0 "' C" 0 C"
8d<D<DQOO?::x>~ 'Jtt:JOCO'):~ ~ro:lj~ t:Jtl,IG.f~OI ~ o:;;m~ro?:QJCP
o A; c-r;;:c- c c- c-c;a c or::;:: co 9 c o c o
1\Gf::!J 9l't:JIDOO?::::D~!D~ro (:)QC')::O~ <"'fe.:121\'f' e:mJ;.qmq
r,;c OA; r c c- c 'T' c- c- , r:::::
tli'gGi'<Xt~ ISc::;o;>Ge:~?c: GUI ~cG;.Go:::n~u
8dCXXlJO)C
C' C' :;QQ:)):"l":>S"JmC:
0\ C' OC' C'9
(:);;>CQ:)):"D
C" 0[ C'
C'P CP:"l:>&C8d0)
C' C'
(:):"DO):"l:>
C'
6 l 0 G L -, G l I:.:.J 0 IL c.:, u
r::::;::: c- r::::: c r,;c- c oc- c r;;:coC' r::::: c 'T' c C'
' 8dGe:l?C:Ge:l~ tJi'(\)~Gt<XtC')f (:)t:)<D~CGt!j?C:~? GOI ~CG,.Go:>')
r~ c , '" oc '" ~ c c o f c-
:t:l ?:co~: CJ.??)CPQ1ic 'Peororo'P:~e:~:m ~@~:S9 <t'<D' ~o::n?ro J2 9roGr.m
oc- c: c c-e c c: o c- c: r.::c o
!Jd(,)~QJ'rCP'f'~C (:)QC')S'd~CP (:)2::q:((,)~ GCP')O')QJCP~'JO)?:efc: (:))IG::O')
r:::::c ce _c;: c o o oc- o r,;c c: c '1 c c- c
G~:X: (:)QC'Jc;u OCPotG0)?9CP O(Od(:)~Of r:JfC02?::J:t:::OUGO:UI')f Gcqpm
C'
~ C
-"C"
'19 C" C'
l
\ <:: OC'
OO?:'f' . ~@llj Ql C'~')OI')OJ 0~ ')CPGtO)C O)O)CPQ~C m'f:o;>tj:
7
&
~
O w. A C' t. O UC:
r
~. C' ,(
('f)
C"
qc:QJ'TmGOJ? ~@(39 'tl ~Oo:>?CO j 7 ')CPGt.ro 8d~J~::02 roGro:~IO
C" C' 0 0 C' A; C" 0 C" OC"
' GU)')CP8d~CPOf::O? <0'):<090)GU:9J {,)(.l)'):8da.?CP <D?:090)~GO:G:x>? 8d(,)~
r,;:c r,;:c c- oc o r,;c- cr,;c c- r,::::: c o oc c\ c
tl<D::oe~ mc:rogt.Of tll'(\)~tJC9-f8dGeec: (:)1!~ 8d<:I~QJ~O)~:::D2?1t
o oc- o c- r,;:c c-G> ~ c-r,<? c c ~ c;: c

0(8d(:)~Of ~GCPJ;>O:::Dtl~ <:IOC9CP tl~lfL <DCP'i!COXfl:~~:~:~ll O@I:Sj
L l
C'
QJ roeOCP8d(.l)QC:I8d<:IO) 13
ll
0
.Jl J
C" c C"
O)C
A !l
C'\
SdO)QOCQCO O:"l:>')Q Q)(l)QC mco::::n m:m
T C:. Jl
0 C'
Jl
C"
~- -t:
0
Ito
C"9 C' C 0 E C" \ C' OC" C" ~
(,)oc9::o2 O@~:S9 'tl ~o::r..oro ')CPG~ro ~?)ro~c 'Peoro ~=or.s: J7
c oc o c 'T' '19 c o c: r,;:c
QJ'10)G:::D?8d<:I~Of O@I:Sj ~I G<.9GOI 0 190J 00 ')CPGt'f 8d0ft;)OC::Dtj<?
C" C' C" C" OC' C" 'IC" C r,~
O)')O)Q)2?:CP<:I!OJO) 8dCP2UG88dlfS 0~9 8d91 9CPGOIC! ?0 GCPJ?CO?tj
r,;:c r,::::: c c c c- c o o c c
tjiDGO)')Ge.P~ cproro~G8lf8<:1 j Sd9l 8dtl[~CPOf 0?!GU:')f8'dCJ.?CP
o C'
COGOJ')CPG::O? 8dG I ')C:miOmcoQOJ:"D())
0C" o C
(:)C" C'G C
CO) C (:)QCQCll '" o 0
8d(.l)QC'P
L L-- T Jl c:. l 0 I il ;.
C' 0 (' . ('
UCOO<XtCP:::D211
C"9 0
Q:;!CQCP 0000(:).50) <:IGC'PI.SOo:>
OC' 0 C' C: 0 ].o
C"C" C' C"
C m CI!::O coeom COOC<:I G(\)1?C'PCO')
I L 10 L UT o C:.J 1! oL T ji. )J A
~ c c
CPC~c::::n2 11
r,;:c
8d~8dtJQ)8d0JCP 8dGt!j ')c:
c- r::::: c r.::c c c c: A; c : G c
0 c:'P(,)J?=1t~ ()O)o:lfP9l Gcrd?CP~!(:)J?!eliQ)')C
c c r,; c 'T'G: r,~ r,;:c c c: A; 'T'G: c o
:.QJCP<:IJ?:~c tl~~~? GOI t:Jro?:t:l:t!IO'JCP?: CX)(.;GCO?C!~ GOI r:J9t(:)otGO II
e r,:::::: c c ce o c r,:::::: c c r,;: cr,::::::r:::: c c c c
oe~:J 2:e;j2'~ '=lOC'J~? o:l'f>:OC We;jCCOC(;lill:>: t:'l4:>e;jt:jc:1t<: 00)0)('0
~ [... C' C' ~ C' C' ~ Q _c;: r,;:s:r:::: C'
~ mDc:~~m u m~?)l:mGro: j Gill?OXf?ro~: o;t~mGro:~p: t:'l"'t3c:
~~9 0 C' r. C' C' Q r-' C' C' C'Q 0 0 t::::: C'Q
Q Q C'
C"
qro~: !J.ltjC:~~ II 2:~~,~ ~X'Jo_{C1:f 2:t:J2?.2:Gro: e:CDJ-j)CD
~
0~<" c c ocr o c c c fsc c c9 o c c
e=t:~~u rom(X)()()J(,):~?:Go:arn~~~.,ro~: 9d cc:t~~<;>J n <JQC')~ro:roro
C' C' 9 t:::::-\~ 9 C' C' Q C' <:: 'T' OC' 0
0-j) 0 (\)~ e:t:~~~O)?Ofl~::IJCD!3':l'J <JOC<>}!J.l?: sc:ea!J.lG81 ~~
C' ~C' C' 0 r::::c C' r... C' C' ~ r,~
~Jm1i"r::Jc9r ~oo?:t:jc:'t?ro2: mtlc:~~mGo u m~~:mGro:~p: G'K:tl:
C' C' C 0 C'Q _c;: 'T' OC' 0 Q ~ C' C' C' f,~
~~f?CD l:s C\:mOO ~OC']c:Jis;)G31 ~~ e:~~OCCX~OXl~?:ro-:>Gftl:
C'
GOO?O)~Gf~2~J?:~2: !J.ltJO:~~ro II
C' C' C' r... c C'
CDGCD:~p:
r.:
1:s C\)8:)~0)~1
C' C'
C'Q OC' C'O 'T' OC' ~c;: C' C' o;> C' C:.OC' 'T' C'
YQC']Gf~roJCD~G~? !J.lG81 !J.l(,lc:ll Gf?IDG<.9:~c e:mJ-j)I:IIYf:Y G81 QC
C'
G!J.l:m !J.l(\)0~~?: C' C' C'e C' 0 C'
::lC GU)?CD~C C\)'JGOOCD : 3dG:"l)'Jo:lCD~ C <:IQCQ~C
" CQ C'
.. r 1 J . -r a a. rJ.
'T' c o cr,.: cr,:;: c c c c~ c r c c
CSI QCC!J.lSq( IT>ffi?WJ?:'JrtJ>l:j0)2~S UOJ~mSJro2: *T.lJSC:(:)~(Y.) II
0 ..,\,._ ~ C'O ~ C 9 t::::: C C' CQ OC' 0 o
9G:lCD'):<:IJ?l~Q:"'~'tiD:~J Gf"~C:O~.JC e:t:~2~2:'; <:I::IC']Gf<:Xf'f'~ QC\)';l

c c C'
0
C'Q C' C' C' C' C'

(;)G'{JffiGO:>~O) ~~C'JOO~mG~719C:I mGro: j
'
Gill?mm~mG~?sc:
c t:::::
GOO?m~Gt:j:~p:
r:::: c C' C' C' c
YGO:t~JC'i3ro2:
"l ern 3d
fs C:Y~mll ffiGC\):(,lp:s;)~IC\)2tJ:
"l C' C' C' C' C' Q t::::: C Co;> C'
G::O?SdQI -j)?~2"0: mc~;;:moiDem
e:e12m ~OC'J8d?: G~ ?CO ffiJO
rc c 'T' c c 9 r,:::::: c oc:;, g c o c c
G0:19c:'t? s;)1f~GOI ~c::o211 e:e;j~ m YQC']::r.l:.: e:mJyr::t?_m~
c c ~c c oc c ~ "l ce 'T' c c cr,.: ;:o
sc:,grr.>o;? c:Jfro2GfCXf')f Gtl?G~?W;;>I (:)QC9CD G81 QCGs;)~S 'JftJID
r~ c o o c c ~C' c oc c r,;:c o o c c ~c c
OO?:~ss sc:q{~~ tlfro~f~'Jf yq~tjs 9_r:t?_ffi<:fJ.C tlf(\)2
T
oc c
G.S<X>CO.S
" IT
fs(' 08
c:ro :Y? (,l(\)!J:lQO)O)C GOI 'T' ('
t
C'
COC~::D II
J :l Jl 6
\ ('
6 6 C.
C' 'T' C' 0 ~ ~ C'O C'
(.).)~!>.)~~ GOI ~CGfG~? rr.GrotJ:lXl.j>JeJ: j :;;J~::0211 OSY
~ C'Q ~ C'f,<? C' (' ~ c c 'T' ')Q
tl::ro;n:p ~QC']ffi c:J21f. G:liD5jcoxp:~t:j:~:~c oel:sj ~I G<.9G<.91 019ro
C \ C' OC C' ~ C OC' 0 C'
00 'J:'UG~m ~O).")')'Q~C'f>OOO:> OO'{J:~t:j:QJ'ro:>G~? ~~cq YGffiJfO
~
C'
.:: ::r.lillQOCC:O-r: O:'l1?CIG:l('nCI(':
ll
C' g 0 C
mro:::o :rn:;oo:>::n:Dmc: m?C\)il)~:ro~
C::. Jl - Jl- -- -L- n.
C
JL ~
(o OC'
L
C'
C.:,
C'
C' c C' c "l C' C' C' r.'? c c r,~

~.T.l:T.>20G*l't8~ Oj9 !r.)'J"J:'DGOIC: \)0 GmJ?~fCD?tJI I:}GffiJ?~fro?tl
r,;: C' C'
t:'IG)~211
0 ~ CQ C' Q t::::: C' C' G C' 0 C' C' ~C' C:
qO)(.).)tJ:l:Df"~? ~OC']::O~ e:e~~<; e:mJf~(")')~C 8Jqm~ tlfro2
~ oc c r,;:cc \ c r,:::::: c o o r,;:c "
~ G'f9_C']f Y[jG:l c:':I'J Y=-9.~G~'JC~?G~?n:IGe;j~C: 11 Y5j t:'l10~211
C ~ 0 ~ G () 0 C'C'
G:opmoo?:~<;~~ 02?~G~Gft:j: 2:CXiG<.9 j m 0~?5j G:lffi~C
c c o
c c erg"
~::x>:'l1
c9 ~c;: c
mc::o:x
-~ T IL c:.::;
Y;;>~CI<;~t
I
!J:lU)QXl?m
IL .A L
OO?o:>G):i"l:my:::oo:>
c:.::;
GO?.I?:'J.S
Ll T
())L 0 "
0 (' 0 "C' C' (' "l (' \ C'

ill;;o:-n?
11.
mrnO):-n
ll L
o~<J:om c:~:'l1 :'X)GSSJ']
L c:.::; c.- <:}?:rnc:ol:x>~ 11 oo~ro
J L1 c:.::; 6
oc c ~ r.: c o r c c G C' c
Q~C 'f>C'OO)oxp:O(t:j:m oe~:sg 't~G:ll ~00)?(\) J7 'JffiGt~C G:l'fQJ~
!l965] BURMA LAW REPORTS 1093
A\
G9::n?:9J
OC'
tl'd~t~J~o:>~G:D?CO~:
c, C' C'
roGro: j G00?(1)8d9())
C' C'
GOO?m~G~:G~
C' o ~
oeG~
C'
O)GU)'X'I) C'G o C'
ro:u 00 ())IOI!>QCO(I)G
u ' (.
C' C' o
. ?C::x>?C.UICtl'dOO:Sd
u
C' ~ C'G
ror;o:~ ~;;,cqroO?ro
~
C' 6 ("0
L I ~~C'f
C' 0 C' C' r.:: C' '"l 0 '"l C'Q .<:: C' C'
<:>~~8 Gro?m;;>Jm;;>JC0?:0 c: <:>OI1)0III <:>01c9c:u GC\j]?mco?:01Jm8d9 ;,8 J
C ')G C' C'Q C' C'o ~ 0 C' Q r,::;:: c
O@~:J ~~ C'~?019CO 0@ 9roG~~ C:l~C9:D~ GOO?())~Ge1:G~ '=>'jCX(ro e:t:.:je?"
~ C' 0 t,: C' 0 C' 0 '"l [;"'.. C'G C' 0 J;"; C'
-G~?c: o:>mJt~P'):x>?:G:x>"J Sd;.l~'=>91)0I:x>t:to <:>0c9ro~m ro:r.>Jr:JO?:x>?:
OC' C' C' C ') G C' A\ C' C' o 0
G:D? ro~~OlJ~O):D~ O@~j ~I C'~?0190J 0@ 9roG~'}Q:>9J Q:>())~C'J:q{
o C' C' C 'l''"IG C' o C' C' '"IC'
tl'dq[OJO)C:D~G~ O@~jl G<.9G01 Ol'jCO 00 9mGi~9JC 9roGOIC: ?0
c c r,:c c c c c C''"l c c
~GroJ?~tG:n::x>t~=?.' ro?OJ>~:m<:>::nro:P9c: mJG<;pmot:D~tJ? GOjj?~
, <:: c r,:c o r,: c c c A; c c c ' "
ro~"J:c:u 11 9c:tlc qrooo~:~::n:>f?1S oro:nm91 romromGropmx'P <:>01c9
C' G ~ C' C' G C' 0 C'C' OC' C' f,;C'OC' ') G C' .<::OC'
0)~ e:eJ~~q Sd~ e:mJf'otm3 G;'CX(C 9t'f? '=>t:~0~COIII e:roJfel!C:lf:Y
'1' c c c o c c c A\ ~c ~c c c cr,;:c r,;:c
GSI ~CGro:~q rr.lGt3!'Jro~~qoro:x>m9J tiC:tJC: COfo::>f 'Wt:!l!lCO?:::DtJ'?
'1' C'
GSI OlCG8d:Q0J G:D?OJ()):D
1
0 C' 0
1. ol
C'
T
C'
~ T
OC' C'
.SOXDG.SCOCQ.S
l. -IT
YOoC'
o
C:<:>"JI
J
e:6
G

::D~C
C'
C..:.J o
C: 0 0 C'
C00)())0?C
t. L 0
C:
~c c oc 'lC' c r.;:c r,;:coc o c ce~ r;::;:: c ~ C'

t:JtCO~GfCX(CGOIC::nc: 0c: '=>t:~l!l~CG::O?~iJ <:lOlC9e!! tl'dG~?C:ti~Jm
C: r C' C'G C' G ~ C' C: OC' C'f~ C' G ~ C: o
9Gro:;m::o1~N <:>01c9::0~ e:~~,S,~~ '=>Gf~CG::O"Jtl"J:m~: 2:~~co~
c: ~ o o c '"l c cr,: c
GCO?ro~G~:ot 9Uf())01::02tJ? roctl~"J:::O~ II
c o <:: o. r,::,.e e c: oc ~ cr,<? c c
G9)?\DCO?:Ol9~el! 02?1JG~Gfe.:J: e:oC:CijlC(I) t121!l'L Q:>~Cro'[J:
o C: C:G C' o C' C' . C' C' C'
B:Q:o:>e <:>OCQ rocro-:>:G::o?
o:>IL .U?C:l? ro?rol!l;::o:m<:>:::oro Gml?ro.s moo~
0Qm?: mc.x>OlOJ?ro l!l())QCrom:::og :m oroorom

-~ 6 -, IL .6 J ~ U ~T
c;.slr\
"'C' o o
c:<:>? <:>.sros C' C' C' C'C' C' C'
TlJ -1 ~[
., c
ot::o::n(}) roc p:co1c romG
C.:.. L
6 cC"'
()O)::O(I)?jQ J.
1l
"
.A
Yoooo?rooooo: o
l
!..
?c~c
J o
Jl
C' c
IL
" c~ G~fq)l
o
A
L
c
J
4l
c "'
JT
~c
J
T
c
C' ( ) C' '1' C' OC' '1' C: 0 '1')

mosqQo
o lL Jl
S3Y
JL
o
~c
J o
Got S3s:o.s
L-1
.!il.CC: GOt
I J .
~c:ro
J
(
GOll C' 0 0
o:>?()G>o:>o:> ~lol
JL
o o cr,: c
( j ) Ofs.O':l ~fti~"J:::O~II
~ o ~ c c c c ~ r,;:c
m,ro~ot illi~:SdGf~S GOO;>::l.f.:::OO<;pOc.x> 0 S'=>tl:XO'f?t:!10G::0') ())?(\)
c c c c cr.;: c c c C'A\ o c ' C' o C' c
co2:rog:::oro Grop~ 0c:~qoro::oro91 GQ.?~9o:>~c-oro
ll'P:~~:en O@I:S~ ~~cot
~ <:: c C' 0
iOO??CO
i c: C' 0 C' 'f.:"
C' C'
j~ 9roG~~t:!q ~J~O:>G::O? l!l9C01Jm::O~
C' C: .o C' C ~ t,: C' C' C: 0 C' Gf~ C' 0 0 C'
'f'C'oromJ<;Uf:t{S'=> ?~I( en tl5?op:01Jrogp:~~O':lm~~c: '=>1ji.J1 G9;?~9::n2n
C'C' C' cA\ c,c ce . C' oc c
roGro: J Gm:>m~soro::om91 11>?:109ro oo WJOQ:>G0:9f ro<.t~01J<fO::CO?:
C' c: C'Q C' C' C'!;.. 0 C' 0 C' C' 0 C' C' 0 C' 0
G::O?::D2: C:lOlC91qom::om9JI!l?:l!l'Jro 'JCX{ffi::O~ G'JCX(CD::O~O':l~;~Ool'=>~
'1'~ r.:: C' 0 0 ~ C' 00 C: C' C' C'G C' 0
~<.91
tjro?:t:Jc: (,)G9?5)'JGO II ~G~?~ Uf<D'JCOlJro::02 g~c,1 mqro O)CDJ
~ C' A\ t,: C' o 0 C' C' C' C'G "\ C: OC' C'
tlO):))?~SJ l<i'ltG:D? Q:>'jCOlJ())(,)tJ?'X'GO II <:>oc9ro 90?:-J)Q~C'f>C:OO)
c < r;:cc r;: cc o c-

( 0 ) O~I:S:J ~t~ I r;,f ~-:>C;je; ~'}C~:blf>!l ~') J<;<; II
(J) o~Go ~7~' f~-:>eft'la~wpu ~') JG<;u
SL~Od3.1f M.V1 VW"llilg t60l
BURMA LAW REPORTS 10~
~~~ce>4Q~~cco~C2h1
0.)0 .)~.) .) ~
5~
.;)
(~:cbco~~e.s) 6esow5Ce>~
S.UIOtlffil M Vl Vrnmg
uc.o&roe:chco
;>
el!ow

.l 60l S.DIOdffii M V1 VV\rnOH

S.l1!0da~ M.v1 vmng 860t
n.:>C2cc~:chles:cPftes
o :.3 :to:)bO>
o .:> e
::::ch'J~~~~::;IJ:re~w:2(]),
.:> ::::1 o.:> .:

Burma Law Reports 1965

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Burma Law Reports 1965

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

BURMA LAW REPORTS

Index prepared by-U PE TIIAN, B.A., B.L., Adv~~ate.

Published under the authorlty of the ltevolutionacy Government of

[All rights reserved:]-

Index prepared by-U PE tHAN, B.A., B.L., Advo~te.

Published lQider the authority o! th_e Revolutionary Government of

[~I rights reserved.]

ou oxp:~@3:Q)Jl&G91oSro') co~:~-,6G~n81 B.L. (Rang.), J.S.D. (Yale),

(Rang.), J.S.D. (Yale), LL.D. (Utrecht), of Lincoln's Inn,

Ot: C" t: Q 01.'

Law Otficer to the States

Assistant Government Advocates

Assistant Legal Draftsmen

.Legal Research Officer

Abdul jalil Khan v. Muntaz Khan and one 219

Daw Nwai v. Maw1g M~l:lllg Ohn Shein and eleven

Mes5rs. Likhmuchand Hiralal v. H . E. Jamal and

U San Kyaw v. Maung Maung Kywe 92

U Tin Myint v. U Khin Myint and one 1050

GS;r~CQ(UI - j ~~ 2:8~'f:GG?C()I J ....

A. c Akhoon -and one v. Habib, .(1952) B.L.R., 236

Chhotan Hasmat Ali v. Emperor, (1935) I.L.R. Vol. LIX

Fateh Khan v. Muhamniad Isa, A.I.R. (1919) Lah. 198,

Khaw Taw. and one v. The Union of Burma, (1948)

Maung Hmat v. Maung Htay, I Ran., p. 258, referred to 226

Munnu Chamar v. Hari Narain, I.L.R. (1946) All.

:Pun Za Cin (a) P. Khup Za Cin v. The Financial Com-

Srimati Raj Lakshmi Dasi and others v. Banamali Sen

The Commissioner of Income-tax, Burma v. Suratee

U Thint and one v. Daw Chit Pu, (1962} B.L.T. 329

C') "t r ::- 0 OC' (C') C' C'

mxxx G3~I::> S3SV::> .!10 ~SI'J

Q)') ee 92~r=x2 .... .... @O?

}... o:>t:; (3?(5

0@?01 92:;~y:::D~- ~0~

CDCJC<l?:l I!)') J99 9~~y:OJ~.... ~0()~

(' ~ ') ('

0 . (C' .t-lJ '"c --Tl( .TJJ c C'

03.Ll:::> S3"SV:) .!10 .LSI'l

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT.

ACT OF lNSOLVENCY-WHI>l~ IT 11'1 DEEMED TO llll COMMITTED UNPER

ADMINISTRATioN sun-Court should not embark 011 en.7uiry as to the

ADMINSTRA'riON SuiT-ITS NATORE--HOW IT DIPPERS FROM PARTITII>N

ADOPTION-by ailing aunt before death-whether obtained by undue

DAW MYA MAY v. DAW liLA YIN AND OTHERS 237

AGREI!Ml!NT IN WRITING--ITS CONSTRUCTION-CARDINAL PIUNCIPLE-

Ml!NDMENT OF PLAINT AT HEARING OF APPEAL-WHBN TO DB ALLOWIU>

AMENDMENT OF PLAINT--<>N WHAT PRINCIPLES TO DB ALLOWllD OR

APPRAL AGAINST TKS ORDER OP ACQUlTTAL-<lOnviction under 8. 380/

APPOINTMENT OF 'RCBJVJ!R-apprehension t/wt the IIIQkj prope1 ty to

activities of the applicant in other connected cases that after

ISMAIL EBRAHIM I SMAIL (DECEASED) BY HlS L/R MR.

APPOINTI\fllNT OF RECEIVER-CoURT WILL NOT INTERFERE BY APPOINT-

ARBITRA'fiON ACT, s. 33-Applicati011 challenging validity of t he award--

U A"\'E.MAUNG v. DAw AYE KmN AND 10 OTHERS

ATI'ACHMENT OF A CARDEN LAND-WHEN IT IS PERMISSlJlLll 590

"/.. llllf>J)HtST 'NoMEN's Srr:ctAL MARRI:\Gll AND SuccESSION Ac:r, 1954, s.

BuRMA INCOME-TA.X Acr, s. 66 (t)-refermce -whether interest an

and the m:mufactur.: of umb1clla componen1: pRrts. Th<:

'f. CAUSES OF ACTJON-l)1FFERNT SuiTS 1'0 Dl! UROUCII'f FOR DIFFERENT

CIVIL Pnocnouru; Conn OnoEn I, RUI.H to on s. xsx-application by a

Chettyar v. MoJuzmed l:a,n and two others, (1954) B.L.R. 86

CtTI2ENSHlP--p1'0Setllli;;m muler s. 5 (a) of the U11ion Citizenship Act

CIVIL PROCEDURE Coon-ORDER 2 RuLE 2 (!), aND ORDER 23, RuLE 1