VITTAL RUKMAI DEVARA BHANDARAM Vs. MANJAPPA BANGERA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the only question for decision is whether the respondent can claim the benefit of Madras Act VI of 1954. On that question the execution court found against the respondent, but on appeal by him the lower appellate court reversed the order of the execution court and remanded the case for decision of the question afresh. In the execution court the benefit under Act V of 1954 also was claimed by the respondent and that question too was found against him by that court. The claims under both Act V and Act VI depend upon the question whether the respondent was cultivating land within the meaning of that term as defined by these Acts. The crux of the question whether he was cultivating land would in both cases depend upon whether the building in the land was appurtenant to the land or the land was appurtenant to the building. This question was found against the respondent by the execution court which held that the land was appurtenant to the building, and this finding has been confirmed in appeal by the lower appellate court when considering the case as regards Act V. In the light of this finding the remand was quite unnecessary, and appears to have been made perversely. Having regard to that concurrent finding I hold that the land was appurtenant to the building and that the respondent is not therefore entitled to claim the benefit of Act VI either. The second appeal is therefore allowed with costs throughout, the order of the lower appellate court is set aside, and that of the execution court is restored.