MEHTABI BEGUM Vs. HAJI HABIB DAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a civil revision. It is directed against an order passed by the learned Sub -Judge, Baramulla, on a preliminary issue whether defendants Nos. 1 to 8 are agriculturists. The learned Sub -Judge has decided the issue against the defendants on the finding, as he puts it, "that the defendants are not agriculturists but doing other substantial business by way of owning a truck and other contract business having been found in possession of a small piece of land not more than 7 kanals jointly owned with other co -sharers".

(2.) SECTION 2 (1) of the Agriculturists Relief Act, 1983 so far as it is relevant, reads: - "Agriculturist means a person who, by himself, or by his servants, or by his tenants, earns his livelihood wholly or principally by agriculture, or by horticultural or pastoral pursuits or who ordinary engages personally in agricul ­tural labour or such pursuits."

(3.) IN the legislation providing that a person shall be an agriculturist if he earns his livelihood principally by agriculture or agricultural pursuits it envisaged cases in which a person may depend for his earnings not only on agriculture or agricultural pursuits but also on other occupation or pursuit. In such a case it intended that the earnings from the two occupations or pursuits should be compared in order to determine if a person is an agriculturist. Occupation or pursuit however, implies habitual and not a casual engagement in any trade, business, craft or employment. Accordingly the mere fact that a person is casually engaged in any trade, business or employment would not justify his earnings from such casual engagement being taken into consideration in the matter. This becomes all the more clear from the explanation to section 2(1) when it inter alia says that an agriculturists who, without any intention of changing his status as such, temporarily ceases to earn his livelihood by such labour or pursuits does not thereby cease to be an agriculturist within the definition.