SliNnSTETAMRY, J.—Perumnl v. Jtnruiivake
1960Present :Sinnetamby, J.PERUMAL, Appellant, and BANAWAKE (Food and Price
Control Inspector), Respondent
S. O. 1030—M. G. Matale, 5578
Control of Prices—Chillies—Maximum price fixed for a pound—Price chargeablefor a lesser quantity.
The accused was charged with selling half a pound of dry chillies for 50cents when the maximum price fixed by the Price Control order was 87 centsper pound—
Held, that the sale of any quantity of chillies at a price proportionately mor»than at the rate of 87 cents per pound was an offenoe.
Appeal from a judgment of the Magistrate’s Court, Matale.
S. Sharvananda, with M. T. M. Sivardeen, for accused-appellant.
S. Sivarasa, Crown Counsel, for Attorney-General.
February 25,1960. Sinnetamby, J.—
The facts of this case are not disputed. The Price Control orderstipulates that dry chillies shall not bo sold at more than 87 cents perpound. In this case, half a pound was sold at 50 cents and onthe authority of the cases reported in 44 N. L. JR. 545 and 46
N.JL. R. 493, learned counsel contends that in as much as themaximum price of one pound was fixed at 87 cents, the accused com-mitted no offence in selling half a pound at more than half the price.The answer to that is to be found in the case reported in 30 C. JL. W. 110where Justice Wijeyewardene, himself, who decided the earlier case, drewthe distinction in the earlier case of tablets. When there is a bottle of25 tablets and a bottle of 100 tablets, for which the maximum prices fixedare not proportionate, it will not be possible to ascertain the maximumprice of one tablet. What was regulated in this case was chillies, notany particular quantity of chillies, the maximum price being 87cents per pound. If the Price Control order had read “ono poundof chillies” as the substance for which the maximum price wasfixed at 87 cents, then there might have been some substance inthe argument; but the goods for which the price was fixed was -not onepound, but merely chillies, and the maximum price was 87 cents perpound. It, therefore, follows that a person who sells any quantityof chillies at a price proportionately more than at the rate of S7 cents perpound will be guilty of the offence.
I accordingly affirm the conviction and dismiss the appeal.
PERUMAL, Appellant, and RANAWAKE (Food and Price Control Inspector ), Respondent