C.V. Svayambu Aiyar vs The Municipal Council of Negapatam

We entertain no doubt that either a license or permission in writing from'' the Municipal Council was necessary u/s 180 before commencing ''to erect a building, except in the case of default on the part of the Municipal Council mentioned in clause 5. The contention that the omission to comply with the direction contained in Section 180 does not render the petitioner liable to the penalty prescribed by Section 263 cannot in our opinion be supported. Having regard to the definition of building in Section 3 we consider that both the wing and the tower newly erected fall within chat definition. We are unable to accede to the contention that the marginal note to Section 180 ought to be treated as part of the section. The case of In re Venours Settled Estates (1876) L.R. 2 Ch. D. 525 proceeds on the recent practice of entering the marginal notes in the Bolls of Parliament and on that ground treats them as part of the statute. The case is not applicable in this country. We think the conviction is right and must dismiss this petition.