Back
1998 Supreme(Mad) 1128
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAGADEESAN
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, rep. by its chairman, Madras and 2 others
Versus
Maheswari Fish seed Farm, rep. by its Prop. Muralidharan, Karukudi Village, Tharangambadi Taluk and others
S.A. Nos. 95,96,159 and 702 of 1998
Decided On : 25-08-1998
Mr. S. Sethuraman, Senior Counsel for Mr.S. Sounthar for Appellants in S.A.No.702 of 98 and for Respondents in S.A. No. 95,96 & 159 of 1998. Mr. V. Rangabashyam, Advocate for Appellants in S.A.No. 95,96 & 159 of 1998.
Fish farming cannot be considered as agriculture because the main activity of agriculture, tilling the land, is missing in fish farming.
Headnote:
FISH FARMING - AGRICULTURE - NOT CONSIDERED AS - ELECTRICITY ACT - DOES NOT DEFINE AGRICULTURE - INTERPRETATION OF AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS - HALSBURY LAW OF ENGLAND - FRESHWATER FISH POND CULTURE AND MANAGEMENT - FRESHWATER ACQUACULTURE - FISH AND FISHERIES OF INDIA - WORKSHOP ON FRESH WATER ACQUACULTURE IN INDIA - FISH CULTURE - BREEDING AND CULTIVATION OF FISH - INCOME TAX ACT - AGRICULTURAL INCOME - COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. BENOY KUMAR SAHAS ROY - COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SUNDARA MUDALIAR - ANANDA BEHERA V. STATE OF ORISSA - EMPEROR V. PROBHAT CHANDRA BARUA - LAW OF TAXATION - COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. SEVUGA PANDIA THEVAR - G.O.MS.NO.519 (PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT) - HELD, FISH FARMING CANNOT BE DECLARED AS AGRICULTURE.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents in S.A.Nos. 95,96 and 159 of 1998 filed the suits O.S. No. 585 of 1991, O.S. No. 276 of 1991, and O.S.No. 1143 of 1993 respectively on the file of the District Munsif Court. Myladuthurai and the appellants in S.A.No. 702 of 1998 filed the suit O.S.No. 429 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court. Mannargudi for declaration that fish farming is agriculture.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that fish farming cannot be declared as agriculture. The court observed that the main activity of agriculture, tilling the land, is missing in fish farming. The court also noted that the owners of the fish farm have mainly shifted to fish farming, leaving out the agricultural operations and in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the owners of the land are using the land for the same agricultural purpose.
Issues: Whether fish farming can be considered as agriculture.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that fish farming cannot be considered as agriculture because: * The main activity of agriculture, tilling the land, is missing in fish farming. * The owners of the fish farm have mainly shifted to fish farming, leaving out the agricultural operations and in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the owners of the land are using the land for the same agricultural purpose.
Final Decision: Second Appeal Nos. 95,96 and 159 of 1998 are allowed and the suit O.S.No. 585 of 1991, O.S.No. 276of 1991 and O.S.No. 1143 of 1993 on the file of the District Munsif, Mayiladuthurai shall stand dismissed. Second Appeal No.702 of 1998 is dismissed.
1. Since the issue involved in all these appeals is one and the same, the appeals are taken up for joint disposal.
2. In S.A.Nos. 95 and 96 of 1998 notice of motion was ordered on 298. In S.A.No. 159 of 98 notice of motion was ordered on 3. 98 and directed to be posted alongwith S.A.Nos. 95 and 96 of 1998. When S.A.No. 702 of 1998 was listed for admission on 7. 98 I was not inclined to admit the second appeal. Then the counsel for the appellants represented that there are other connected appeals in which notice of motion was ordered. Hence I directed those appeals to be posted together in order to dispose of all the appeals. In S.A.Nos. 95,96 and 159 of 1998 the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board is the appellant. The respondents are various Fish Farms. In S.A.No. 702 of 1998 the appellants are the owners of the land who are having a fish farm and the respondent is Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.
.3. The respondents in S.A.Nos.95,96 and 159 of 1998 filed the suits O.S. No. 585 of 1991, O.S. No. 276 of 1991, and O.S.No. 1143 of 1993 respectively on the file of the District Munsif Court. Myladuthurai and the appellants in S.A.No. 702 of 1998 filed the suit O.S.No. 429 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court. Mannargudi for declaration that fish farming is agriculture. The District Munsif Mayiladuthurai dismissed the suits filed by the respondents in S.A.Nos. 95,96 and 159 of 1998. The respondents preferred appeals in S.A.No. 19 of 1992, A.S.No. 18 of 1992 and A.S.No. 36 of 1997 respectively on the file of the Sub-Court, Mayiladuthurai. The learned subordinate judge; have allowed the appeals filed by the respondents and consequently decreed the suits. Hence the Electricity Board has preferred these appeals. So far as the appellants in the S.A.No.702 of 1998 is concerned, both the courts below have dismissed the suit and hence the land owners have preferred the appeal.
4. The only question involved in these appeals is whether the fish farming is agriculture.
5. Mr.S. Sethuratnam, the learned senior counsel on behalf of the owners of the land and the owners of the fish farm viz., appellants in S.A.No. 702 of 1998 and respondents in S.A.Nos. 95,96 and 159 of 1998 contended that the Indian Electricity Act do not define agriculture and hence this court has to consider the question as to whether the fish farming is agriculture or not only from the dictionary meaning and the interpretation given by the courts for the word agriculture and agricultural products in respect of the other statutes.
.6. The learned senior counsel relied upon the following extract from the Halsbury Law of England - 4th Edition - Volume 18 - Page 254:- Corporeal and incorporeal fisheries. The general principle is that fisheries are in their nature more profits of the soil over which the water flows, and that the title to a fishery arises from the right to the soil.
.7. He also relied upon the following extract from Halsbury Law of England - 4th Edition Volume I - Page 959:-1797. Definition of agricultural products. The term "agricultural products" means the products of the soil of stock farming and of fisheries and products of first stage processing directly related thereto, More specifically, the products to which the agricultural provisions of the EEC treaty apply are listed in the treaty and in the secondary legislation made under it".
8. Yet another portion relied upon by him is Halsbury Law of England - 4th Edition Volume I - Page 541:-
Wherein agriculture had been explained as follows: 1002. Agriculture. The phrase "aggregate of agricultural land" in the definition of an agricultural holding refers to the aggregate of the lands put to different uses, being uses for agriculture. The expression "agriculture"includes horticulture.fruit growing, seed growing, dairy farming and livestock breeding and keeping, the use of land as grazing land, meadow land, osier land, market gardens and nursery grounds, and the use of land for woodlands
