The dominant characteristics of a premises, including factors such as location, tenancy terms, and occupation, are crucial in determining whether it should be regarded as agricultural or non-agricultural land.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from the order of Kudoor, J. ; in WP. No. 10262 of 1976. The appellant and respondent-2 herein were respondent-2 and the petitioner res. pectively in the writ petition.

( 2 ) IN the writ petition, the petitioner had impugned the order of the Laad tribunal dismissing his application under 48a of the Karnataka Land Re. forms Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The Tribunal held that the land in respect of which he had sought for occupancy right, was not an agricultural land as defined in sub-sect. (10 of S. 2 of the Act. The learned single judge quashed the order of the Tribunal and directed it to hold a fresh enquiry into the petitioner's claim, according to law.

( 3 ) THE dispute relates to the premises consisting of 50 cents of land and a house therein situate within the municipal limits of Udupi town. In that land there is another building which was'formerly occupied by a School and is now occupied by the office of the N. C. C. In that land there are about 80 trees like coconut, areca and other fruit yielding trees. There is also a well with an electric pump, a pump house and a cement storage tank. The petitioner is a clerk in a private firm. The rent for the premises is Rs. 25 per month and the tenancy is a monthly one.

( 4 ) THE main controversy between the parties is, whether the premises should be regarded as an agricultural land with a farm house or a non-agricultural land consisting of a house with a big compound. The premises, if regarded as an agricultural land with a farm house situate therein, will undoubtedly come within the scope of the Act. On ttie other hand if the premises should be regarded as a house with a compound appurtenant to it, such premises cannot be regarded as an agricultural land even though there may be some trees and plants in that compound. While determining whether the premises should be regarded as agricultural or non-agricultural, one must look to the dominant characteristics of such premises. The mere fact that there are some plants and trees in the compound of a house, will not render the premises an agricultural one. Likewise, the mere fact that in an agricultural land there is a house used as a farm house, will not render such premises non-agricultural.

( 5 ) THE following are the salient features of the premises in question : (i) The premises are situate within the municipal limits of Udupi town, (ii) The premises are assessed to municipal tax. (iii) The tenancy of the premises is monthly and not annual and the rent fixed is also monthly. (iv) The tenant is a clerk in a firm and not an agriculturist by profession (v) The vegetation in the unbuilt portion of the land consists of fruit. bearing trees and no crops are raised by cultivation with a plough.

( 6 ) SHRI P. Shivanna, learned Counsel for the appellant, contended that having regard to the aforesaid characteristics of the premises, the Tribunal had reached the correct conclusion that the premises were non-agricultural and that the learned single Judge was not justified in interfering with the decision of the tribunal.

( 7 ) ON the oiher hand, Shri M. Gopalakrishna Shetty, learned counsel for the tenant, submitted that in the proceedings under the Rent Control Act relating to the premises, a Commissioner had been appointed for local investigation of the premises, that he had reported that in that land there were a well, a pump house and a cement tank for storage of water and that the Tribunal had not considered the report of the Commissioner, which according to Sri Gopalakrishna shetty, was very material for determining whether the premises were agricultural or non-agricultural. Sri Gopalakrishna Shetty laid particular emphasis on the circumstance that the house situate in that land was a small one while the number of trees standing in the land were as many as 85.

( 8 ) IN determining the dominant character of the premises, i. e. whether agricultural or non-agricultural, no on