Satyanarayana Rao, J.-

This batch of Second Appeals and Civil Revision Petitions raise two questions: (1) whether the village in which the lands are situated is an “estate” within the meaning of section 3(2)(d) of the Madras Estates Land Act, and (2) even if the village is an estate, whether the lands are private lands within the meaning of the definition of “private land” in section 3(10) of the Madras Estates Land Act. The trial Court held that the village is an estate, but that the lands in Nedumaram proper are private lands while the lands in the hamlets of Kallankundu, Vedavirthi, Chillanpatti and Ookulathanpatti are ryoti lands. The lower appellate Court reversed these findings. It held that the village was not an “estate” but that, even if the village was an “estate” the lands were not private lands for, according to the learned appellate Judge, the sole test to be applied to determine whether the land is an estate or private land or not is the test of direct cultivation as laid down by this Court in Jagadeesam Pillai v. Kuppammal1. There is a mass of documentary and oral evidence adduced in the case, primarily to establish whether the lands are private lands or not. The lear

Click Here to Read the rest of this document