The Calcutta Weekly Notes July 16 1945

We fail to see how the license in this case came to be graned or remain unrevoked even after the Plaitiff met with the injury for according to the evidence of the Corporation Surveyor there was nothing in the record to show that the Corportion had taken any steps against the owner of the cinema hall. [...] I have found that the mishap was due to the negligence of the person or persons who had caused this contrivance to 'be fastened to the frame of the sky-sign by means of ropes and I have awarded the injured man a sum of Rs. [...] It is not helpful to say as the Chief Law Officer of the Corporation who was called as a witness by the Court has said that because a sky-sign is according to its definition in the Act not a sky-sign till an advertisement is diplayed from it the licensee has the right to tie things to the frameworks and that he commits no violation of the conditions of his license uless he has neglecte [...] " Ans.—" I don't find anything in the record." Winfield cites the instance of the eighteen Jews upon whom the Tower of Siloam fell narrated in the New Testament as an illustration of a tendency to regard the catastrophe as a punishment for the sins of the injured person. [...] The Court may of course pass an order that the decree shall be drawn up in terms of the copromise in so far as it relates to the suit but it would then be for the decree-writer to see what effect the compromise had upon the suit and to draw up a formal decree accordingly.