AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Somasundaram, J.—The main contention of Mr. Krishnamurthi on behalf of the petnr is that, the dispute in this case really relates to a mill,
which is situated in the premises mentioned in. the preliminary order & that the definition of ""land"" mentioned in Clause 2 to Section 145 does not,
include mills & therefore this cannot be the subject of proceedings u/s 145, Cr. P. C. It is no doubt true that the definition of the land mentioned in
Clause (2) of the section does not mention mills as being included in the definition. Land or water has been defined to include buildings, markets,
fisheries, crops or other produce of the land. The definition does not say that the land means buildings, markets etc. It says it includes also
buildings, markets etc. The definition is not exhaustive. It is only illustrative. The crops or other produce, i.e., things that could be cut & carried
away fall under the definition of the term land. It has been held in Rev. A. Rampus and Others Vs. Alumuri Subba Reddi and Another, following
Gaya Prasad and Others Vs. Emperor, that trees cut & lying in the land came within, the definition of land. As observed by Malik J. in Gaya
Prasad and Others Vs. Emperor, , Section 145 being a preventive section a liberal interpretation should be given. He has further observed that it
must include movable property attached to earth. The chapter in which Section 145 occurs is headed ''Disputes as to immovable properties''. This
shows that land in Section 145 is used as synonymous with immovable property which includes things attached to earth. Mill therefore which is
attached to the earth will fall within the scope of immovable property or land. It is in this view that the dispute though it may be to the mill really
includes the dispute to the land in which it is situate & Section 145 will apply.
On the merits, I am satisfied that the lower Ct was justified in coming to the conclusion that the Mill was in the possession of the resp here. In
the result the petn is dismissed.