1. The provision in Section 3, Clause (z) of Act XVII of 1879 is not limited to an agriculturist who is himself the original mortgagor, Section 12 again contemplates suits and accounts, according to the method of the Act, between persons who are representatives only of those who were parties to the original transactions. It may be, as Mr. Ghanasham contends, that certain inconveniences will arise from the construction of the enactments we are considering according to their literal sense, but that is not a reason for our amending the work of the Legislature according to our notions of fitness. 'The intention of the Legislature is to be ascertained from the grammatical sense as applied to the object in view'-- see Eastern Counties Railway Companies v. Marriage per Blackburn J. 9H.L.. 36 'and' considerations of policy are to be excluded where the words, are clear', ( per Lord Coleridge, C.J., in Ditcham v. Worran L.R. 5 0. D. 419. Here the words are perfectly clear; and as the plaintiff, though an assignee, is an agriculturist, he is entitled to the benefit of Sections 12, 13 and 14 of the Act.
2. We answer the reference accordingly.