GADDI SEETHAYA; ASADULLA BEG Vs. SRI RAJAH VELUGOTI GOVINDA KRISHNA YACHINDRULU VARU BAHADUR ZAMINDAR, GARU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is, whether the zamindar is entitled to enforce acceptance of a pattah on which a condition has been newly inserted that "in case the dry lands mentioned in this pattah are cultivated as wet lands, ambaram (rent in kind) shall be delivered according to the village maumool"

(2.) The pattahs for the previous faslies show that the tenant was paying a fixed rent in money. The lands are classified in the pattahs as wet or dry. In the case of some lands a lump sum is fixed for rent, in the case of others the rate per acre is given.

(3.) There is nothing in the pattahs and no evidence is adduced to show that the rent varied with the crop or with the nature of the land; that it could be either increased or decreased according to the crop raised or with the conversion of land from dry to wet or vice versa. The zamindar relied upon usage in support of his claim. Both the Lower Courts have found that he has failed to prove the usage. The Judge, however, holds that under Section 11, Clause 2, of the Rent Recovery Act the defendant is bound to pay rent at the varam rate established for the village and the condition is, therefore, enforceable.