Skip to content


B. Rajarajeswara Sethupathi and anr. Vs. T.K. Kuppammal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1931Mad206
AppellantB. Rajarajeswara Sethupathi and anr.
RespondentT.K. Kuppammal
Cases ReferredRaja of Ramnad v. Mangalam
Excerpt:
- .....of the recent decision of the privy council, in raja of ramnad v. mangalam .5. as regards pada nazir, the decision of a bench of this court in a batch of s.a's. nos. 620 to 652, 654 to 663. 665 to 693 and 1163 to 1223 of 1923, given on may 1929 in respect of lands in the village in which the present suit lands also are situate is a direct authority in favour of the appellants' contention. the question relating to the zamindar's right to collect the fee called pada nazir has been fully considered in all its aspects and it has been held that pada nazir forms part of the rent which the tenants are bound to pay to the zamindar. it is needless to refer to the reasoning of the learned judges in those appeals. their conclusion was not based simply on the long-continued payment of pada.....
Judgment:

Sundaram Chetty, J.

1. These are connected appeals. The question for decision in S.A. 1252 and 1253 of 1918, is whether the tenants are liable to pay an extra charge for vanpayir or garden crop raised on dry lands by means of wells dug at their expense. It is argued for the appellants that upon the evidence these wells should be deemed to have been dug about ten years before the filing of these suits. Though the trial- Court was of that opinion the finding of the lower appellate Court is otherwise. It has discussed the evidence both oral and documentary in paras. 4 and 5 of its judgment and found that the wells must have been dug long ago and that the vanpayir rate was being levied for over a century. The zamindar's claim for vanpayir is not therefore affected by Section 13, Clause 3, Estates Land Act. The finding of fact arrived at by the lower appellate Court has to be accepted in these second appeals.

2. S.A. Nos. 1252 and 1253 of 1918, are dismissed with costs (one fee for both.)

3. Two questions arise in the other two appeals.

4. The claim for rent in respect of lands allowed to lie fallow would be unsustainable on the authority of the recent decision of the Privy Council, in Raja of Ramnad v. Mangalam .

5. As regards pada nazir, the decision of a Bench of this Court in a batch of S.A's. Nos. 620 to 652, 654 to 663. 665 to 693 and 1163 to 1223 of 1923, given on May 1929 in respect of lands in the village in which the present suit lands also are situate is a direct authority in favour of the appellants' contention. The question relating to the zamindar's right to collect the fee called pada nazir has been fully considered in all its aspects and it has been held that pada nazir forms part of the rent which the tenants are bound to pay to the zamindar. It is needless to refer to the reasoning of the learned Judges in those appeals. Their conclusion was not based simply on the long-continued payment of pada nazir but it rested on several other grounds. Following that decision I hold that the zamindar has a right to collect pada nazir as rent.

6. S.A. Nos. 1216 and 1217 of 1918, are partly allowed. In the result the decrees of the lower appellate Court in the two suits are confirmed with this modification, viz. that the clause in the pattas about the payment of pada nazir should stand. The parties will bear their own costs in these two appeals.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //