Agricultural land valuation based on tenancy facts was a finding of fact, not a referable question of law.

Valuation of agricultural land had to be assessed by reference to the circumstances existing on the date of death, and the Tribunal relied on the tenant's long possession, failed eviction attempts, rent, and tenancy protection laws to reject a speculative house-site basis. The resulting fair market value was therefore drawn from proved facts and surrounding circumstances, making the Tribunal's inference a factual determination. On that basis, no referable question of law arose from the valuation finding, and refusal to direct a reference was justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's valuation of agricultural land, made on the basis of the tenant's long possession, failed eviction attempts, and tenancy protection laws, gave rise to any referable question of law for the High Court.

Analysis: The market value was required to be determined with reference to the circumstances prevailing on the date of death of the deceased. The land was in the cultivating tenant's possession for decades, attempts to evict the tenant had failed, and the Tribunal treated it as unrealistic to value the land on a speculative house-site basis. The Tribunal's view was founded on the evidence relating to possession, rent, tenancy protection, and the effect of the tenancy legislation, and the conclusion as to fair market value was drawn from those proved facts. Such an inference from the evidence was a factual determination.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's finding on valuation, and the refusal to direct a reference was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: An inference on market value drawn from proved facts and surrounding circumstances, including tenancy protection and failed eviction efforts, is a finding of fact and does not by itself give rise to a referable question of law.

---