AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Exhibit A provides for the planting of four kinds of fruit trees for which compensation at the ordinary rate is to be paid on the surrender of the
paramba. There is no special contract such as is contemplated in Section 7, Madras Act I of 1887, which would exempt the agreement from the
operation of the Act. The stipulation is apparently for the benefit of the landlord. Nothing is said about other improvements, but the right of the
tenant to make customary improvements is not excluded.
The landlord is, therefore, bound to pay compensation for improvements at the ordinary rate, and the only question is whether that rate is to be
the rate prevailing at the time compensation has to be paid or that prevailing at some former date.
We have no doubt that the landlord is bound to pay the rate prevailing at the date the compensation is paid.
That rate is now governed by Madras Act I of 1887 and we answer the question referred to the Full Bench in the affirmative. The compensation
must, of course, be limited to improvements recognized as such in Section 3 of the Act.
The appeal again came on for final hearing before Sir Arthur Collins, C.J., and Parker, J., who delivered the following.
The Vakil for the appellants admits that as the opinion of the Full Bench is against him, the appeal must be dismissed. But as the Full Bench
overruled some previous decisions, we shall direct that each party bear his own costs in this appeal.