https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293097 A cocoanut plantation was treated as a fruit garden under Section 3(4)(f) of the Estates Land Act because cocoanut is understood in ordinary usage as fruit and cocoanut trees as fruit trees; the tenant's improvements therefore prevented the landlord from claiming enhanced rent beyond the dry rate. The earlier decision between the parties was held to operate as res judicata on the point of law actually decided, but only for the land and subject-matter previously adjudicated. It did not automatically extend to additional area brought under cocoanut cultivation after the earlier suits, so the extent of land covered had to be determined separately. en-us Fri, 08 Feb 1935 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Jan 2021 10:54:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293097 A cocoanut plantation was treated as a fruit garden under Section 3(4)(f) of the Estates Land Act because cocoanut is understood in ordinary usage as fruit and cocoanut trees as fruit trees; the tenant's improvements therefore prevented the landlord from claiming enhanced rent beyond the dry rate. The earlier decision between the parties was held to operate as res judicata on the point of law actually decided, but only for the land and subject-matter previously adjudicated. It did not automatically extend to additional area brought under cocoanut cultivation after the earlier suits, so the extent of land covered had to be determined separately. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 Feb 1935 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293097