(1.) THE plaintiff is the malguzar and the defendant a resident of mouza Pahuni. The defendant is a tenant of Takri, an adjoining village. He holds no land in Pahuni, but keeps in that village the cattle which he uses for his cultivation in Takri. The plaintiff claims the value of the droppings of the cattle, Ho states that the defendant is a thalwa of Pahuni and bases his claim on Clause 9 of the village wajib-ul-arz which is as follows: The malguzar tikes the khat (manure) lying on the akhar (cattle stand) and the khat of the cattle belonging to thalwas. Kashtkars collect the khat of their cattle on the padit land No, 219 outside the basti and take it to their fields.
(2.) THE substance of the defendant's plea was that the plaintiff was not entitled to the khat as none of his cattle grazed on the village lands. This plea appears to have been made with advertence to Clause 6 of the wajib-ul-arz, of which the relevant part is as follows: Grazing : cattle graze without payment of any dues in the little banjar land that exists as grazing banjar. The malguzar takes without payment, in lieu of grazing, the manure of the that was, cattle.
(3.) THE question whether a thalwa as a matter of fact grazes his cattle on the banjar land or does not do so seems to be immaterial in deciding the question whether the malguzar is entitled to take the manure of the thalwa's cattle under Clause 6. That clause cannot be interpreted to mean that the malguzar is entitled to the manure only if and when the thalwa actually grazes his cattle on the banjar. Such an interpretation would be hard on the malguzar and unnatural. The fact that the thalwa has the right to graze his cattle is consideration for the malguzar's right to the manure.