111-NLR-NLR-V-19-KRETSER-v.-FERNANDO.pdf
( 440 )
1917.
Present : Ennis J.KKETSER D. FERNANDO.
344—P.G. Kurunegala,. 87,681.
Sale of arrack—Arrack supplied on chits drawn against deposit of money-.—Cash sale.
Where a tavern-keeper supplied arrack on obits againstof money-
deposits
Held, that the sale was not a credit sale, and that he was notguilty of a breach of Condition No. 16 of Notification No. 29(Gazette of March 13, 1914), which prohibited the sale of liquor intaverns “ except for cadi."
T
HE facts appear from the judgment.
» ' ■
I
Elliott (with him B. F. de Silva), for accused, appellant.
Dias, C.C., for the Crown.
May 14, 1917. Ennis J.—
In this case the accused has been convicted of selling arrack inbreach of general Condition No. 15 of the Notification No. 29,published in the Gazette of March 13, 1914. The charge does notmake it clear what breach is complained of, but it appears from theevidence and the argument to have been a breach of conditionNo. 15: “no liquor shall be sold in taverns except for cash ”. Itappears that certain chits were found in the tavern by the ExciseInspector. These chits were orders to the tavern-keeper to supplyarrack against deposits. One of them is endorsed on .the backpencil, showing the amount remaining in the hands of the tavern-keeper on a balance. The tavern-keeper has given evidence thatin this case the arrack was supplied against the deposit of moneyalready received. There is no reason that I can see to disbelievehis evidence. The term “ cash ** found in the general conditionsseems to have been used as opposed to credit. It is certain thatthis sale by this method is not a credit sale, and I am unable to saythat it is not a cash sale, inasmuch as the renter had the cash in hispossession at the time of the sale. In the circumstances there wouldbe no breach of the condition. I set aside the conviction.
Set aside.