THE STATE OF BOMBAY versus VIRKUMAR GULABCHAND SHAH

Citation: [1952] 1 S.C.R. 877 · Decided: 27-05-1952 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SIR SYED FAZL ALI

Judgment (excerpt)

I -' 
:S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
877 
11. That this defendant has nothing to do with 
·the eight annas interest in the properties given in 
· schedule under than C and D relating to jagir and 
kasht lands, which rightfully belonged to Nandkishore 
. Das and has no concern with the properties noted in 
those schedules." 
Paragraph 11 is rather ambiguously worded, but it 
was conceded before us by the counsel for defendant 
· No. 5 that the latter had no claim to any interest in 
the properties set out in schedules other than schedules 
· C and D. 
Such being the purport of paragraphs 8 
. and 
11, the decree should provide that defendant 
-No. 5 will be entided only to a share in the properties 
set out in schedules C and D and will have no 
. share in the properties set out in the other schedules. 
· Subject to this 
modification, the decree 
of the High 
·Court is affirmed, and this appeal is dismissed. There 
·:will be no order as to costs. 
Appeal. dismissed. 
Agent for the appellants: Naunit Lal. 
Agent for the legal representative of 4th respondent: 
_ R. N. Sachthey. 
THE STATE OF BOMBAY 
ti. 
VIRKUMAR GULABCHAND SHAH 
[SAIYID FAzL Au and VIVIAN BosE JJ.] 
Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act (XX/V of 1946), 
. ss. 2(a), 17(2)-Spices (Forward Contracts Prohibition) Order, 1946, 
· els. 2, 3-Turmeric, whether "foodstuff"-Meaning of "foodstuff". 
~ 
The term "foodstuff" is 
ambiguous. 
In one sense it has a 
narrow meaning and is limited to articles which are eaten as 
food 
for 
purposes 
of nutrition and 
nourishment and so would 
• excl?de 
condiments and 
spices 
such 
as yeast, salt, 
pepper, 
bakmg powder and turmeric. In a wider sense it includes every-
. thing that goes into the preparation of food proper 
(as under-
~ · stood in the narrow sense) to make it more 
palatable 
and 
· digestible. 
Whether the term is used in a particular statute in 
i its wider or narrower sense cannot be answered in the abstract 
1952 
Gur Narain Das 
and Anothd-
v. 
Gur Tahal Das 
and Others. 
Fazl Ali/. 
1952. 
May, 27. 
·1952 
'The Stat< of 
'Bom'bay 
v. 
'Virkumar 
·Gulabchaml 
Shah. 
878 
SUW'REME COURT XE.PORTS 
[1952] 
but must .be answered with due r<;garil to the .backgromnd and 
context. 
'';furmeric :is a "food-stuff" within the meaning of·cl. (3) .of the 
Spices tForward ·Contract P.rohibition) ·Order of 1944, .read with 
s. 2 (a) ·of .the Essential Supplies 
(Temporary Powers) 
Act 
(XXIV of 1946). The said order of 1944 falls within the pur-
view of s. 5 of Ordinance No. XVIII of 1946, which was later 
re-enacted as Act 
XXIV ·of 1946, and it is equally saved 
by 
s. 17(2) of ·the Act. 
James v. Jones [1894] I Q. B. 304, Hinde v. Allmond (87 L.J. 
K.B. 893), Sainsbury v, Saunders (88 L.J.K.B. 441) roferred to. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JuRiso1cr10N : 
Criminal 
Appeal No. 26 of 1950. 
On appeal by special leave from the judgment and' 
order dated the 13th November, 1950, of .the High 
Court 
of 
Judicature 
at 
Bonibay 
(Bavdeknr 
and' 
Dixit JJ.) in Criminal Appeal No. 712 of 1950, arising 
out of judgment dated the 14th August, 1950, of the 
Court of the 
Sessions Judge, · South Satara, Sangli, in 
Criminal Appeal 
No. 35 of 1950 
and Criminal Case 
No. 614 of 1950. 
·C. K. 
Daphtary, 
Solicitor-General of 
India 
( G~ 
N. Joshi, with him) for the appeHant. 
B. 
Somayya 
(B. K. V. Naidu, with him) for the· 
respondent. 
1952. May 27. Faz! Ali and Bose JJ. 
delivered' 
Judgment as follows : 
FAzL ALI J.-I agree that the acquittal of the res-
pondent should 
not be 
disturbed, and I also agree· 
generally .with the ·reasoning of 
my brQl:her, 
Bose. 
The question whether 'turmeric is 'foodstrtff' is not en-
tirely free from 
difficulty. 
fo one 
sense, 
everything 
which .emer.s into ·the composition of llood so .as to 
make ·it :palatable may 'be described as 'foodstuff', but 
.that word is .commonly used with reference only to 
those .articles which .are eaten for .their nutritive value 
·and which :form .the principal ,ingredients of cooked or 
·uncooketl •meal, ·such as 
wheat, 'rice, meat, fish, ·milk,. 
.,.._ 
'bread, 'butter, etc. 
It .seems 
to ·me desirable that the· 
Act should be 
amended so 
as 
to expressly irrClu&: 
-
\ 
\ 
~-) 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
879 
within the definition of the somewhat elastic expres-
sion "foodstuff'', turmeric and such other condiments 
as the Legislature intends to be treated as such for 
achieving the objects in its: view. 
BosE J.-The question in this 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.