DARA Vs. MATHURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I agree with the judgments prepared by my learned brothers Misra & Kidwai JJ. that these applns. should be dismissed with costs.

(2.) A mtgee. Subject to such terms as may have been agreed upon between him & the mtgor., cannot be made liable for anything more than the rent realized by him if he has let out the land to tenants at a reasonable rate. The mtgor. cannot complain that the land was let out to tenants & was not cultivated by the mtgee. himself. If the mtgee. undertakes to cultivate the land it is not merely the land but the seeds, manure etc. used by him & his labour that contribute to the profits made. I have already pointed out in the case of Surju Prasad v. Randhir Singh, 1945 O.A.H C.B. 55 that a tenant not only provides seeds & manure but also gives a lot of his time and labour in ploughing & watering the field & in sowing the crops, & he also takes the risk of the possible failure of crops. It will be most unreasonable to give the mtgor. the whole of the profits made by the mtgee. from such land, as if it was the land alone that had contributed to the making of the entire profits. The mtgor. can reasonably claim from the mtgee. the same amount which the mtgee could, with the exercise of ordinary diligence, have realised by letting out the land to tenants.

(3.) Rent payable by various classes of tenants vary. The most favourable rate of rent at which the land could be let out must be the 'fair occupation rent' at which profits must be worked out. The circle rates which are periodically prepared by the Revenue Dept. can certainly be treated as relevant evidence. What is the amount which the mtgee. would have realised if he had let out the land on the best terms available must, in each case, be a question of fact to be decided by the Ct. on the materials on the record.