Homestead land excluded from ceiling computation where the charging section omitted it, despite the broader statutory definition.

The definition of "land" in Section 2(f) included homestead, but the ceiling provision in Section 4, as amended, omitted homestead from the land to be counted. In construing this expropriatory statute strictly, the court treated the charging section as controlling and held that a definition clause could not override a repugnant operative provision. The legislative deletion of homestead from Section 4 could not be restored by interpretation, so homestead land situated within a municipal area was excluded from ceiling computation and the impugned orders were unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether homestead land of a landholder situated within the municipal area could be included in the ceiling area for computation under the Act.

Analysis: The definition of "land" in Section 2(f) included homestead of a landholder, but Section 4 was the charging provision fixing ceiling area and, after amendment, omitted homestead from the classes of land taken into account. The legislative history showed that homestead had been expressly included in the original provision and later deleted. In the setting of an expropriatory statute, the provision had to be construed strictly, and the definition clause could not override the charging section where the context was repugnant. The omission of homestead from Section 4 could not be supplied by interpretation.

Conclusion: Homestead land could not be included for determining the ceiling area, and the impugned orders were unsustainable.

---