BANKO BEHARY DAS Vs. KRISHNA CHANDRA BHOWMIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two questions have been raised in this appeal. The first is whether a lease of land on which a boraj or betel leaf plantations have been made is a protected interest within the meaning of Section 160 Clause (c) of the Bengal Tenancy Act, and the second whether the words date of sale in Section 167 of the Act mean the date on which the sale is held or the date on which the sale is confirmed.

(2.) With regard to the first question, it is urged that the word plantations is governed by the word permanent in Section 160 Clause (c) and that betel leaf cultivation cannot be called a plantation which implies permanency in the plant and that betel leaf does not stand on a different footing from other vegetables.

(3.) I do not think that the word "permanent" governs the word plantations in the section. If it applies to plantations, it would equally apply to the words which follow viz.,"tanks, canals, places of worship or burning or burying grounds". But it seems that the word permanent is not used with reference to them because they in themselves imply some sort of permanency.