1921 (4) TMI 2 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

The plaintiff sued for possession of a mortgaged property and a declaration that the mortgages were nominal. The issue was whether the plaintiff was an agriculturist. The Court held that since the plaintiff derived the greater part of his income from mango trees, he must be considered an agriculturist. The appeal was allowed, and the case was sent back for further proceedings under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Belief Act. Shah, J., agreed with the decision.