Chunder, J.@mdashThis is a Plaintiff''s appeal against the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Burdwan reversing that of the Munsif, 1st Court, of the same place. The Plaintiff is a raiyat. He came to Court for ejectment of under-raiyats. Both the Courts have found that the Defendants are under-raiyats and that they can be ejected under sec. 48C of the Bengal Tenancy Act provided the proviso (ii) is satisfied. It is not disputed that the Plaintiff has cultivation, he has other lands which he cultivates and it is further not denied that he could cultivate these lands either himself or by members of his family or by hired labourers. The Munsif granted him the decree in ejectment. The Subordinate Judge held that "requires" under sec. 48 of the Bengal Tenancy Act means not merely required for homestead or for cultivation by himself or members of his own family or by hired labourers or with partners but to all these there must be a further addition which is not in the section, that it is for maintenance of himself and his family, etc I do not know what justification there is for adding words which do not appear in the section and which can only be added by the legislature. There is nothing to prevent a tenant from cultivating more lands if he is able to do so, say, with the help of motor tractors, than is actually necessary for his maintenance or subsistence or even the maintenance or subsistence of the members of his family and there is no reason why he should not help others as well as help himself. The interpretation put upon the section by the learned Subordinate Judge is not correct and the Munsif was right in holding that so long as it was for the bona fide purpose of cultivation through one of the agencies mentioned in the proviso (ii) that the land was required by a raiyat even from desire for pecuniary gain, the under-raiyat, he will be entitled to eject. The Munsif rightly did not add other provisos to the section. He was right in pointing out that if this was merely a pretence for seeming the land and then letting it out to somebody else at a higher rental there was clear protection given to the tenant under sec. 48C of the Bengal Tenancy Act.
2. The decree of the Subordinate Judge is, therefore, set aside and that of the Munsif is restored with costs throughout.
