MUHAMMED Vs. KESAVAN BHATTATHIRIPAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these two revision petitions a common question of law is raised, namely, whether in the case of a kanom transaction the 'contract rent' for the holding is the michavarom specified in the document or whether it is the figure mentioned in the document as the estimated "profits or pattom" derivable from the property with reference to which the michavarom is fixed after providing for deduction of interest on the kanarthom and the revenue, if any, stipulated to be paid by the kanomdar. IN Vasudevan Namboodiripad v Muhammed Kutty, 1975 KLT 727, a Division Bench of this court has taken the view that the contract rent in respect of a kanom transaction has to be taken as the total annual rent specified in the deed of demise without deducting from it land revenue, land cess and interest on the kanarthom. The correctness of that decision was doubted by another Division Bench before which these revision petitions originally came up for hearing and the revision petitions were, therefore, referred to a Full Bench. That is how the matter has come up before us.

(2.) THE revision petitioners who were holding certain lands on kanam right under the respondent as per a demise dated 26-6-1909 filed O. A. No. 1153 of 1972 before the Land Tribunal, Manjeri under S.72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter called the Act) for assignment in their favour of the landlord's rights over the property comprised in the kanom deed. As per the terms of the kanom deed, out of the total profits derivable from the property estimated at 90 paras of paddy only 10 paras of paddy and 25 paise was payable to the landlord as michavarom after deducting the revenue and the interest on the kanom amount. It would appear that the revision petitioners are in possession of only some of the items comprised in the kanom deed and in respect of those items the proportionate michavarom had been fixed at 4 paras of paddy and 6 paise. THE Land Tribunal held that the "contract rent" for the holding was the stipulated michavarom of 4 paras of paddy and Rs. 0.06 per year and since the petitioners had opted for fixation of the fair rent at 50% of the contract rent, the fair rent would be only 2 paras of paddy and Rs. 0.03 per year. THE purchase price payable by the tenants was accordingly fixed by the Land Tribunal at Rs. 132196 being sixteen times the fair rent calculating the price of paddy at Rs. 4.14 per para. THE respondent herein filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Trichur A. A. No. 367 of 1975. THE main contention urged in the said appeal was that the total "pattom" (profits) of 90 paras specified in the kanom deed as derivable from the property ought to have been treated as 'the contract rent' and that the Land Tribunal had acted illegally and erroneously regarding the michavarom payable under the document as the contract rent. This contention found favour with the Appellate Authority which held that the contract rent in respect of the portion of the property in the possession of the respondents was 36 paras of paddy and Rs. 2.40, being the proportionate share of the said portion out of the total "pattom" of 90 paras of paddy and Rs. 10 specified in the document. Accordingly the fair rent of the property was fixed at 18 paras of paddy and the purchase price payable for the landlord's rights in the land was fixed at Rs. 1212.62. THE legality and correctness of the said decision of the Appellate Authority are under challenge in this revision petition.

(3.) THE principal component of the purchase price is mentioned in clause (a) of sub-s.(2) of S.72D as "sixteen times the fair rent of the holding or part thereof". What is the "fair rent" in respect of a kanom holding? THE expression "fair rent" has been defined as follows in S.2(13): " 'fair rent" means the rent payable by a cultivating tenant under S.27 or S.33" S.27 is in the following terms: "27. Fair rent. (1) THE fair rent in respect of a holding shall be the rent payable by the cultivating tenant to his landlord. (2) THE fair rent shall be (a) in the case of nilams, 50 per cent of the contract rent, or 75 per cent of the fair rent determined under any law in force immediately before the 21st January, 1961, or the rent calculated at the rates specified in Schedule III applicable to the class of lands comprised in the holding, whichever is less; (b) in the case of other lands, 75 per cent of the contract rent, or the fair rent determined under any law in force immediately before the 21st January, 1961, or the rent calculated at the rates specified in Schedule III, applicable to the class of lands comprised in the holding, whichever is less. xxxx xx xx S.33 merely provides that it shall be competent for the landlord and the tenant to agree as to what shall be the fair rent payable in respect of the holding and, where such an agreement signed by the landlord and the tenant is filed with the Land Tribunal, the Land Tribunal shall pass orders determining such agreed rent as the fair rent in respect of the holding. It is stipulated in the proviso to the section that such agreed rent shall not exceed the fair rent under S.27 in respect of the holding and that where there are intermediaries or other persons having an interest in the holding all of them should also be parties to such an agreement.