BOMMADEVARA NAGANNA NAIDU Vs. YELAMANCHILI PITCHAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are two questions raised by this appeal: they both lie within the narrowest compass; the second of them barely survives to come before the Board, so complete has been judicial agreement upon it in India, while the determination of the first, which now alone is serious, depends upon the construction of a few words in a single section of a statute. Yet the plaint in the suit was issued as long ago as October 18, 1912, and it is nearly seventeen years thereafter that these short questions reach the Board for final determination, and, in the result will now be settled as they were settled by the Revenue Court in India nearly fifteen years ago. In the course of the proceedings not only has the plaintiff died, but one of his legal representatives, originally appellant, has dropped out, leaving it to the plaintiff's other representative, the second appellant, by himself to bring his case to a hearing. Not the least important of their Lordships' duties in disposing of the appeal has been the task of determining how the costs thrown away as the result of well-nigh interminable proceedings in India should now be borne.

(2.) THE two appellants are the sons and legal representatives of the original plaintiff, the late Raja of North Vellore. On June 6, 1901, the Raja granted to one Ramayya Garu, father of the respondents, for a term of ten years, expiring Fasli, 1320, a lease of some 1363 acres of land in the village of Narayanapuram. Prior to this lease in his favour, Ramayya Garu had, as it is now agreed, no occupancy or other rights in the holding, which, but for the passing of the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908, would in ordinary course have reverted to the zamindar on the expiry of the lease.

(3.) THE main, if not the only real, question now at issue between the parties is as to their respective rights in what the District Judge, at one stage of the case, described as an immense belt upon the holding of paying trees--comprising at least 8000 palmyras and date palms fit for tapping, yielding a substantial revenue, and estimated by a succeeding District Judge to be of a capital value of roughly Rs. 34,000. By the lease the Raja or zamindar reserved to himself full rights in regard to all these trees. The lessee was " not in the least to be entitled to them "; as the cist of all the trees standing on the lands was not included in the rent reserved, the lessee was not to raise any objection whatever to the zamindar dealing with the same. And, as a matter of fact, these trees during the term continued to be let by the zamindar to other persons for tapping at rents yielding for him a substantial revenue. It was not contested before the Board that in these circumstances, the possession of and all rights over the trees remained during the pendency of the lease in the zamindar, and that no payment whatever in respect of them was included in the cess thereby reserved.