LAWS(PVC)-1915-8-90

N V RAMA CHETTY Vs. ALARRMARUNACHALAM CHETTIAR

Decided On August 18, 1915
N V RAMA CHETTY Appellant
V/S
ALARRMARUNACHALAM CHETTIAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant is the appellant. The plaintiffs who are the landlords of the plaint land brought this suit for the following reliefs: (a) that the permanent damage to the plaint land area of 1/4 kurukkam inflicted by the defendants by their having ereoted two walls on the site and placed two stone pillars thereon be removed at the defendants expense, (b) that the defendants may be made to pay the plaintiffs their costs.

(2.) The plaint 1/4 kurukkam area is in one corner of a big tope land measuring a little over 12 kuruhhams in extent in the village of Kalakkudi. The plaintiffs complaint is that as the 12 and odd kurukkams were granted as tope lands on tope cowle (that is for cultivation of fruit trees) the defendants had no right to convert any portion of the lands into a building site and the defendants by enclosing 1/4 kurukkam by walls, by raising its level and by fixing stone pillars, have made that portion unfit for Horticulture. The suit was brought in the Revenue Court under Section 151(3) of the Madras Estates Land Act.

(3.) The second issue raised in the case was whether the suit land or any portion of it has been materially impaired in its value for agricultural purposes and, if so, when? The Suits Deputy Collector gave his finding as follows: "It is clear from the evidence that the 1/4 kurukkam in question has been rendered unfit for cultivation. I therefore find this issue in favour of plaintiffs." Now the issue was whether the suit land or any portion of it has been materially impaired in its value for agricultural purposes and the finding is that J hurukkam in question has been rendered unfit for cultivation. There is no finding that the suit land of 12 and odd kurukkams taken as a whole has been materially rendered unfit for cultivation as a tope.