JUDGMENT

Madeley, J - This is a civil revision arising out of an application under Section 5, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act. The learned Special Judge who tried the case came to the conclusion that because the judgment debtor sold timber and has zemindari in Nepal, he was an agriculturist within the meaning of the Act. He held him to be a servant of the village community in Rupaidih where he resides while his father has zemindari just over the border. He therefore made an order converting the decree into one for instalments. Section 2(2), Agriculturists' Relief Act, read as a whole, seems, however, to indicate that the land held must be in the United Provinces. There seems to be no authoritative decision on this point so far, but the section mentions specifically different parts of the United Provinces. Sub-section (a) relates to districts not subject to the Benares Permanent Settlement, (b) to districts subject to the Benares Permanent Settlement, (c) to persons paying a local rate under Section 109, District Boards Act, a local Act, (d) to Oudh, (e) to thekadars paying land revenue of a certain amount. This clause in itself would not necessarily be confined to the United Provinces, but it would, in my opinion, certainly exclude foreign countries where the system of taxation may be different, (f) relates to Oudh, (g) does not specifically mention any locality, but does not apply in any case to the judgment-debtor in the present case, (h) relates to persons living outside the limits of a municipality. This term would certainly not include towns in Nepal. I do not therefore consider that this section relates to other provinces much less to foreign countries. As to the finding that he is also a servant of the village community, this is covered by Taqi Hussain v. Hafiz-ullah, AIR1941All92 an Allahabad decision, in which it was held:

A 'servant of the village community' within the (meaning of Schedule 1, Agriculturists' Relief Act, is a person who is not paid separately for the individual work he does, but receives periodical remuneration from the community whether at the time of harvest or otherwise. A tailor, who does not find a place in the list of persons enumerated in that schedule, cannot come under the category of 'other servants of the village community' and be regarded as an agriculturist unless he can show that he is not paid by the job, but is recompensed by some customary" mode of periodical payment.

2. The judgment-debtor is not a man of the class defined in this decision and is therefore not a servant of the village community. Under Section 8, Agriculturists' Relief Act, it must be proved that the judgment-debtor was an agriculturist both at the time when he took the loan and at the date of the suit. There seems to be no evidence or finding on this point. No one has appeared on behalf of the judgment-debtor opposite party. The judgment-debtor does not come within the definition of an agriculturist or of a servant of the village community, and the provisions of Section 8 are not proved to have been fulfilled. I therefore allow this application, set aside the decree as amended by the learned Special Judge and restore the unamended decree. The representatives of the applicant will get costs of this Court according to the rules, and of the lower Court.