Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said laws like the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 were created to shield small farmers from forcible evictions and must be interpreted in their favour.

Cultivating Tenants Cannot Be Evicted Without Proof of Land Damage: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India protects Tamil Nadu’s cultivating tenants from unfair eviction by their landlords
Court said that the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955, must be read to safeguard farmers from being evicted at the landlords’ will
The Supreme Court has come to the rescue of cultivating tenants in Tamil Nadu, making it clear that they cannot be easily thrown out of their lands at the behest of landlords.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said laws like the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 were created to shield small farmers from forcible evictions and must be interpreted in their favour.

Court said, “The provisions of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1955 should be interpreted in such a manner that the tenants are ultimately protected and are not thrown out at the instance of the landlords who are always interested to see that the tenants leave…Courts should not allow themselves to become tools for defeating clearly expressed statutory intentions”.

Also Read – SC Acquits Policeman’s Wife, Relatives in 2006 Murder of Colleague Over Loan Dispute
The present case reached the top court after the Madras High Court and a revenue court ordered eviction against the tenants. Those courts had relied on a commissioner’s report that accused the tenants of cutting trees, digging pits, and putting up huts on the land, acts which, if proven, could amount to damaging the property under Section 3(2)(b) of the Act. That section allows eviction if a tenant harms the land or abandons cultivation.

Also Read – No Proof Of RSS Link: SC Restores Bail In Shan Murder Case
The apex court allowed appeals and set aside the orders passed by the Madras High Court and the revenue court. The bench directed that the respondents should not interfere with the possession of the appellants, save and except in accordance with law.

Court found that the appellants had been cultivating the disputed land since the late 1950s and had every reason to safeguard both the land and their crops.

Also Read – Important to prove foundational facts before invoking presumption under NDPS Act: SC
Court referred to beneficent construction, which involved giving the widest meaning possible to the statutes.

“When there are two or more possible ways of interpreting a section or a word, the meaning which gives relief and protects the benefits which are purported to be given by the legislation, should be chosen. A beneficial statute has to be construed in its correct perspective so as to fructify the legislative intent,” the bench said.

Also Read – ‘Clearing Training Exams Mandatory for Railway Job Confirmation’: SC Upholds Termination of Recruit
Court emphasised the 1955 Act seeks to protect cultivating tenants from unjust evictions and it is a cardinal principle of law that in case of doubt, such Acts should be interpreted to lean in favour of tenants.

In the present litigation, court was only concerned with the order of eviction passed by the Revenue Court on the strength of the decree that the Civil Court passed.

The Revenue Court relied upon the Court Commissioner’s report and gave a finding that the appellants were responsible for cutting of trees etc, thereby causing damage to the suit land. It was also alleged that the appellants dug pits and constructed huts in the suit land. This, according to the Revenue Court, was in violation of the provisions of Section 3(2)(b) of the Act 1955.

The court noted that the 1955 Act came to be enacted for the purpose of protection from eviction of the cultivating tenants in certain areas in the State of Tamil Nadu. Section 3 provides in what circumstances the lan