PATINHARE EDORA THOLON CHUTHA Vs. PANNICHIKKOOL KUNHAMMAD KUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Exhibit B. 1 was a marupat executed by the deft on 7-1-1918, by which it was agreed that 120 seers of paddy would be paid as rent. This state of things continued till 15-2-1945 when the deft who was holding over- under the old Marupat renewed the same agreeing to pay a rent of 190 seers of paddy & 2 bunches of bananas. The present suit is for arrears of rent for two years, namely, the Malayalam years 1122 & 1123. During the pendency of the suit the deft filed an appln. for fixing the fair rent under Sections 11 & 12, Malabar Tenancy Act. It was contended on behalf of the deft that she will be liable to pay the arrears only at the rates decided as fair rent after the same is fixed under Sections 11 & 12 of the Act. The learned Dist Munsif held that this fixation cannot have retrospective effect & decreed the suit as prayed for.

(2.) The question depends upon the construction of Sections 28 & 32, Malabar Tenancy Act. Section 28 lays down:

(3.) What has happened is that the term fixed under the original marupat expired long prior to the coming into operation of the Malabar Tenancy Act & the tenant was holding over on the same terms as before under the provisions of the T. P. Act, & was paying rent according to the old agreement. But in 1945 there was a fresh agreement by which 190 seers of paddy & 2 bunches of bananas were agreed to be paid. It is contended on behalf of the tenant that she will be liable to pay only the fair rent fixed in accordance with the O. P. filed during the pendency of the suit, because Section 32 lays down that