JANAKI NETHIYAR AMMA Vs. PICHUNNI ALIAS RAMA IYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this C. R. P. on behalf of the first defendant-petitioner, Mr. V. P. Gopalan Nambiar, his learned counsel, challenges the concurrent views of both the subordinate courts that his client namely, the jenmi of the property, is liable to the plaintiff in damages for having cut and appropriated a 'than' tree standing on the property which is in the possession of the plaintiff as verumpattom tenant.

(2.) THOUGH the plaintiff claimed a sum of Rs. 70, ultimately it is seen that the trial court has fixed the claim for damages in the sum of Rs. 40 and that is the amount that has now been decreed by both the courts.

(3.) MR. Gopalan Nambiar, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that both the courts have missed a very important aspect which has to be borne in mind in cases like this. According to the learned counsel, before a particular clause in a lease deed can be considered to effect a restriction on the tenant's right, or found to be opposed to the provisions of S. 19 of the Malabar Compensation for Tenants' Improvements Act, the essential, question that has to be considered and found by the courts is as to whether the act of cutting by the landlord in this case is an 'act of improvement' or an 'act of enjoyment'. It is the further contention of MR. Gopalan Nambiar that it is only if it is found to be an act of improvement that the question of such a provision being hit by the provisions of S. 19 arises at all.