NATESA THEVAN Vs. DISTRICT BOARD OF TANJORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first point taken in, this second appeal is that the lower Courts had no jurisdiction to try the case as the plaint land is raiyati land and, therefore, governed by the Madras Estates Land Act. I think that the decision, of the lower Courts is correct on the point, for they find that the land was tank-bed land and is still tank-bed land. The evidence is clear on the point and the finding come to by the lower Courts is a finding of fact, which I must accept in second appeal. Nothing turns upon the definition of the words "tank-bed" in the Estates Land Act, so far as this case is concerned. That being so, the plea of no jurisdiction fails, and must be rejected.

(2.) The next question argued before me is as regards the compensation which the defendants claim for improvements made on the land. That, no doubt, depends on the application of Section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act. The District Munsif has found that the defendant did not act bona fide in making the improvements; but the Subordinate Judge has riot discussed the point at all. The Subordinate Judge has disposed of the matter by merely saying that be thinks that the learned District Munsif has dealt with the point correctly. I cannot accept that as a proper disposal of the question. I must, therefore, ask the Subordinate Judge to consider the matter on the evidence in the case and return a revised finding on the question whether the defendants are entitled to improvements and, if so, what the value of the improvements is. The finding will be on the evidence already on record, and will be returned in six weeks from this date. Objections in ten days thereafter.

(3.) The finding of the Subordinate Judge was as follows: