Cur. adv. wit.
( 327 )
It will be noted that the first two of these will be offences evenwithout injury to the road. In P. C., Trincomalee, 4,343 (S. G. M.22nd January, 189$), injury was not proved, but if it has to beproved, there may be injury otherwise than to the substance orsurface of the road—i.e., it will be sufficient offence to narrowthe breadth of the thoroughfare available for traffic between theopposite side drains.
The first offence is a very terse statement of that which is anoffence against the Municipal Councils’ Ordinance, No. 7 of 1887,section 183, any projection, encroachment, or obstruction erectedor placed against or in front of any house or building, if the sameoverhangs or juts into, or in any way projects into or encroachesupon, or is an obstruction to the safe and convenient passage alongany public street, or obstructs, or projects, or encroaches into orupon any uncovered drain in such street. But I do not know thatits simple words are less clear than the more elaborate languageof a quarter of a century later. I consider they contain allthe different kinds of encroachments which the latter moreelaborately describes.
The offence charged here is that appellant did “ attach addi-tions ” by way of tats or sunshades to the said bankshall so as to“ project over the outer edge of the side drain in breach of,” &c.The Magistrate has convicted the accused, but fined him onlysuch an amount as forbids any appeal except upon a matter oflaw, and thus for the second time, and before myself (vide 4,343,P. C., Trincomalee), the power of this Court to deal in appeal withquestions relating to the construction of this clause are curtailed.Here the only contention that has been advanced is that thetat complained of is not an “ addition to the house,” which is“ attached to ” it. The description of it is that there are not onlyshutters to the building, but there are also the tats made ofcadjans, which is “fixed to the rafters,” and each tat has twoprops which are fixed about 2 inches in the ground (but on whichside of the side drain is not stated), but can be removed withoutany effort, and woidd not remain so fixed if the tats were removed.In 4,343, P. C., the tat was made of boards, and when notpropped outwards served as a shutter, and so were not alwaysbeyond the line of the drain as those of the appellant are said to be
It appears to me that the words of the Ordinance are so wideas to include erections of fhe kind proved, and that no ground oflaw lias been established, nor, having read the careful judgmentof the Magistrate, does it appear to me that any other appeal onmatter of law is arguable against the same.
The appeal must be dismissed.
January 11and 15.