A L A R RM ARUNACHALLAM CHETTIAR (THROUGH HIS AUTHORIZED AGENT M SUBRAMANIA AYYAR), ET AL Vs. MANGALAM ET AL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant is the appellant. The questions raised in these appeals relate to the propriety of the terms of the patta as settled by the Special Deputy Collector and varied in appeal by the District Judge.

(2.) The first question relates to the kanganam fee which the defendant wants to levy. Kanganam is, in effect, a contribution paid by the tenant to reimburse the landlord for the cost of the supervision of harvest out of which melvaram has to be delivered to the landlord. The Special Deputy Collector found that this was an item included in the total jama of the Ramnad taluk at the time of the Permanent Settlement and formed one of the items of assets in fixing the peshkash, that it was not an illegal cess so as to bring it under Section 143 of the Estates Land Act and that it was being paid for a series of years. He, however, was of opinion that it could not be levied after the Estates Land Act came into force, as it was a charge for supervision not allowed by the Act which removes all restraints on harvesting by the tenant on the part of the landholder. The District Judge on appeal confirmed the judgment of the Special Deputy Collector, on the ground that the service for which the fee was paid was no longer required. We are of opinion that on the facts found by the Special Deputy Collector, kanganam fee falls under Section 3(ii), Clause (a) of the Estates Land Act as being a sum payable by a ryot as such in addition to the rent due by him in respect of the land held by him. As the landlord is entitled to a share of the produce, the necessity for supervision is obvious. It is difficult to see how there can be any restraint on the harvest, simply because the landlord employs a person to watch his interests.

(3.) Section 73, Clause (2); provides that though the tenant may be in exclusive possession of the produce until it is divided, he must not remove it from the threshing-floor, so as to prevent the due division thereof at the proper time and Clause (3) provides that he should, before commencing to cut or gather the crops, give reasonable intimation to the landholder or his authorized agent of his intention to do so.