GANDIKOTA KAMANNA Vs. TONDAPU SATTI REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I see no ground for revision. It is quite clear from the language of Section 3 (ii), Proviso B of Act IV of 1938 that assessment for four consecutive half years from October, 1935 to September, 1937, is not required - as if that were so, the word throughout would be found in the place of the word within . The second argument is that it is only a person who has been validly assessed who is excluded from the definition of agriculturist. I see nothing in the language of the proviso to support this view. The words are simple has been assessed and they are qualified by no adverb relating, to the correctness or validity of the assessment.

(2.) THE petition is dismissed with costs.