AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 178 wordsWe are of opinion that a bicycle is a vehicle with springs within the meaning of the Madras Act I of 1884. The word "" vehicle "" is not defined in
the Act: The term is used by itself and not qualified by a reference to any particular kinds of vehicle. Clearly, as appears from the language of
Schedule B, the term is not confined to carriages drawn by horses or other beasts of burden. A perambulator used for children is within the
operation, though it may be exempted under the proviso to Section 153.
The case of Williams v. Ellis (1880) L.R. Q.B.D. 175 is distinguishable for the reason that, in the statute there under consideration, various
special kinds of carriages were mentioned and therefore the rule of ejusdem generis applied. As it cannot be doubted that a bicycle is a vehicle in
the general acceptation of the word, so we think there is no doubt that this particular bicycle is a vehicle with springs.
We must therefore answer the question in the affirmative.