SAJIWAN PRASAD SINGH Vs. KARAMDHARI SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant in the civil revision is the landlord of the holding, the rent of which is payable by division of the produce. He applied to the second Court of the Munsif, Gaya, under Section 121, Bihar Tenancy Act, to distrain the crops of the holding of the opposite party, Karam-dhari Singh, for realization of the arrears of rent of 1347 F.S. The Munsif, apparently, issued distraint in this and in some analogous cases but later entertained an objection on the part of the tenant that as the rent was payable in kind, it could not be recovered by distraint. Accordingly, he recalled the order for the issue of distraint.

(2.) In this civil revision it is contended that the provisions of Section 121, apply equally to rent payable in kind and rent payable in cash. The words of the section are very broad. "Where an arrear of rent is due to the landlord of a raiyat." There is nothing here to restrict the operation of the section to arrears of rent payable in cash or to make an exception in favour of arrears of rent payable by division of the produce; and when no such exception is to be found in the language of the statute, on general principles of construction we ought not to introduce such an exception. Elsewhere in the same statute, namely, in Section 69(3) there is a reference to the execution of an order passed by the Court for the distraint of the tenant's crops, which order is saved from being affected by the operation of an order of the Collector prohibiting the removal of the produce of a bhaoli holding. The words of this Sub-section would be apparently meaningless unless the produce of a bhaoli holding was capable of being distrained. It is impossible that the Court may have felt some difficulty in view of Section 122(1)(d), Bihar Tenancy Act, which requires the publication for distraint to specify the amount of the arrear. The Munsif may have been under the impression that in the case of bhaoli rent the amount of the arrear is of the nature of an unascertained sum. But it is open to the landlord to state the amount of the arrear which he claims, and that will be the amount for which distraint is taken out. The contention that for produce rent there can be no distraint appears to be a novel one; and we have not been shown any case in which it was directly raised and negatived. But Sheobarat Singh V/s. Nawarngdeo Narain Singh 28 Cal. 364, was a case in which distraint had been effected for the rent of lands held on the bhaoli system; and it was not doubted at all by the Judges who decided that case that such a distraint was maintainable. From a reading of the statute itself, we are satisfied that it permits distraint of crops for the realization of produce rents in the same manner as for the realization of cash rents.

(3.) In the result the application will be allowed with costs, the order of the Munsif re-calling the issue of distraint is set aside and he is directed to continue the distraint proceedings in accordance with law. Hearing fee in this Court, two gold mohurs. Varma, J. I agree.