NANABHAI BAJIBHAI PATEL Vs. COLLECTOR OF KAIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent is Inamdar of the village in which, the land in dispute is situate and brought the suit out of which this appeal arises to recover enhanced rent. The appellant contested the claim on several grounds, one of which, material for the purposes of this appeal and decisive of the case, was that he was entitled to the benefit of Section 217 of the Land Revenue Code and liable to pay only the Government rate of assessment levied on the land. The lower appellate Court has disallowed that defence on the ground that the appellant is not a registered occupant of the land. But Section 217 does not restrict its application to registered occupants only. It may be and indeed the lower Court finds that the appellant holds the land as a mere tenant under the Inamdar and that the latter has also acquired the right of occupancy. But Section 217 invests "the holders of all lands" in alienated villages with the same rights and imposes upon them the same responsibilities in respect of the lands in their occupation that occupants in unalienated villages have. "Holder", as defined in Clause 11 of Section 3 of the Code, is wide enough to include even a tenant who has entered into possession under an occupant.

(2.) It was urged for the respondent that by the concluding part of Section 217 the Legislature intended it to apply "so far as may be". But those words are used of the latter part of the section only and do not, when grammatically read, operate to limit the plain language of the first part.

(3.) The decree must be reversed and the plaintiff must be given a declaration that he is entitled to recover from the defendant only the amount of assessment levied under the Land Revenue Code. As the defendant admits the amount claimed, the claim as to that is also awarded, but this award is without prejudice to the right declared by this decree. The respondent must pay the appellant's costs throughout. Heaton, J.