HANUMAN PANDE Vs. KESHO DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This was a suit under Section 158 of the Tenancy Act for a declaration that the plaintiffs had acquired under-proprietary rights under that section on the ground that the lands in suit had been held rent-free for over 50 years and by two successors of the original grantee. The suit has been decreed by both the courts below. The land is admittedly covered by a grove and the contention of the appellant is that Chapter X of the Agra Tenancy Act, in which Section 158 occurs, does not apply to groves.

(2.) The land in suit is said to have been granted to the predecessor of the plaintiffs under a written "danpatra" about 100 years ago. Both the courts have found that the grant is genuine. The terms of the grant are reproduced in paragraph 1 of the plaint. They give the grantee the right either to use the land for cultivation or to plant it with a grove. The grantee did in fact plant a grove on it. Both in the plaint and the written statement the land is described as grove, and the finding of the court below is that the land is admittedly grove land and has been held as such from the time of the last revision of records, which was between 30 and 40 years ago.

(3.) Land as defined in Section 4 of the Tenancy Act is limited to land which is let or held for agricultural purposes, and it has been held in several decisions of this Court that this definition does not include areas occupied by groves. It is unnecessary to refer to the earlier decisions, as the question has been finally set at rest by the Full Bench decision in Kesho Prasad Singh V/s. Sheo Pargash Ojha (1921) I.L.R. 44 All. 19.