SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Mad) 5597

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
PRABHA SRIDEVAN, B. RAJENDRAN, JJ.
J. Malliga and others - Appellants
Versus
Union Bank of India and another - Respondents
Writ Petition (M.D.) Nos. 12280, 12733, 12734 and 12550 to 12553 of 2009 and connected M.Ps.
Decided On : 25-02-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : B. Saravanan.
For the Respondent: G. Govindasamy.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'agricultural lands' in the context of the SRFAESI Act, 2002, and the application of principles of interpretation in fiscal statutes to determine the nature of the lands given as collateral security.

Headnote:

agricultural lands - construction of the words 'agricultural lands' in Section 31(f) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SRFAESI), 2002 - Tamil Nadu Agricultural income tax Act, Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, Wet Land (Act 28 of 2008) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land - Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Officer-in-charge (Court of Wards), Paigah, (1976) 3 SCC 864, Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, Calcutta Vs. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy, AIR 1957 SC 768 - C.E.D. Kerala v. V. Venugopala (supra) - D. Ravichandran Vs. The Manager, Indian Overseas Bank, Idigarai Branch and The Authorised Officer, Indian Overseas Bank, Idigarai Branch, (2006) 132 CompCas 803, Model Financial Corporation and Another Vs. Indian Bank, ARMB and Another, (2008) 3 BC 526

Fact of the Case:

The court addressed the legal question of the construction of the words 'agricultural lands' in Section 31(f) of the SRFAESI Act, 2002, in relation to lands given as collateral security for a loan.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the lands, described as cardamom plantations, were agricultural lands based on the activities involved in cardamom cultivation and the principles of interpretation in fiscal statutes.

Issues: The main issue was the interpretation of the term 'agricultural lands' in the context of the SRFAESI Act, 2002, and whether the lands in question qualified as agricultural lands.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on various legal provisions and judgments to establish that the activities involved in cardamom cultivation constituted agricultural activities, and therefore, the lands were considered agricultural lands.

Final Decision: The court held that the impugned notice was without jurisdiction, and the Respondent-Bank could not proceed against the properties of the Petitioners under the SRFAESI Act, 2002. The writ petitions were allowed, and the connected miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

JUDGMENT :

Prabha Sridevan, J.

1. The only question that arises in these writ petitions is a legal question as to the construction of the words "agricultural lands" found in Section 31(f) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SRFAESI), 2002.

2. According to the Petitioners, the lands, which were given as collateral security to the Respondents, are cardamom plantations and the impugned notice issued by the Respondent No. 1 clearly refers to the word "cardamom plantation", and therefore, without any further investigation, it would be logical to conclude that they are agricultural lands, and hence, they are immune from attachment.

3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, however, referred to the definition of the word in the Tamil Nadu Agricultural income tax Act and the definition of the words "paddy land" in Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and also the Wet Land (Act 28 of 2008) of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and also the definition of land in Section 2(nnn) of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural income tax Act and referred to Controller of Estate Duty, Kerala Vs. V. Venugopala Varma Rajah, (1976) 4 SCC 3, wherein the Supreme Court held that the of the Kerala High Court that "all forest lands in this State are agricultural lands in the sense that they can be prudently and profitably exploited for agricultural purposes" is too wide. Therefore, according to the Respondents, without evidence to show that such land had been cleared and prepared or earmarked for agricultural purposes, it must be treated as prima facie non-agricultural land. The learned Counsel for the Respondents has also filed written submissions.

4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on the other hand, produced study report made by Dr. M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation to describe the activities that are done for cardamom cultivation to show that the lands, where the cardamom is cultivated, would be agricultural lands. He also relied on the Judgments of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Andhra Pradesh Vs. Officer-in-charge (Court of Wards), Paigah, (1976) 3 SCC 864 and also in Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, Calcutta Vs. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy, AIR 1957 SC 768.

5. We find from the literature relating to the cardamom cultivation that there are planting periods and there are harvesting periods depending on the time when they are planted. The cardamom cultivation does not comprise merely raising the products of the land in the narrower sense of the term like tilling of the land, sowing of the seeds, planting and irrigation and similar work done on the land, but also includes the subsequent operations set out. The above operations, which are basic as well as the subsequent activities, form one integrated activity of the agriculturist. The above activities would indicate that they are similar to what is normally described as agricultural activities, L. T. Commr. v. Benox Kumar (supra), which arose out of the income tax Act, the Supreme Court held that the terms "agriculture" and "agricultural lands" used in the definition of agricultural income in Section (2)(1) not having been defined in the income tax Act, the Court must necessarily fall back upon the general sense in which they have been understood in common parlance. The Supreme Court further observed that agriculture in its root sense means "ager a field" and "cultura-cultivation", cultivation of field which of course implies expenditure of human skill and labour upon land. The Supreme Court referred to various decisions including the English decisions and some of the observations are relevant for this case:

The expression "agricultural land" means any land used as parable, meadow, or pasture ground only, cottage gardens exceeding one-quarter of an acre, market gardens, nursery grounds, orchards, or allotments, but does not include land occupied together with a house as a park, gardens other than as aforesaid













Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top