JUDGMENT 1. This is an appeal from an order setting aside a sale of immoveable property under sec. 311, C. P. C., on the ground that the sale was vitiated by material irregularity resulting in substantial Injury to the judgment-debtor. The irregularity found is that the value of the property set forth in the application for execution is Rs. 200 whereas the real value is between eight and ten thousand rupees; and as the property sold only for Rs. 4,000 there has been substantial injury to the judgment-debtor. But in fixing the value of the property at between ten and eight thousand rupees, the learned Subordinate Judge has taken into consideration, not merely the rents realizable from the tenants, but abwabs that used to be realized from them. It is found that if these abwabs are not taken into consideration, the net income of the property would be only Rs. 213 and the maximum value of 20 years' purchase cannot be more than Rs. 4,500. Says the learned Subordinate Judge, "The actual profit from the property, as deposed to by the judgment-debtors is Rs. 500 yearly. It is no good reason to contend that because a portion of this profit consists of abwabs not legally recoverable, the profit from the property should be reduced to Rs. 213. Abwabs, though not legally recoverable, are as a matter of fact taken into consideration by the buyer and seller in assessing the market value of a property. Thus at 20 or even 15 years' purchase upon the said profit of Rs. 500 the fair value of the putni sold would be between Rs. 8,000 and 10,000." 2. We must say we read with some surprise this serious statement made by a judicial officer in his judgment that in estimating the value of property abwabs, that is illegal cesses, should be taken into account. Now, according to the law of the land, secs. 8,000 and 10,000." 2. We must say we read with some surprise this serious statement made by a judicial officer in his judgment that in estimating the value of property abwabs, that is illegal cesses, should be taken into account. Now, according to the law of the land, secs. 74 and 75 of the Bengal Tenancy Act and the earlier provisions which have been replaced by that section: "all impositions upon tenants under the denomination of abwab, mahtut, or other like appellations, in addition to the actual rent, shall be illegal and all stipulations and reservations for the payment of such shall be void" and "every tenant from whom, except under any special enactment for the time being in force, any sum of money or any portion of the produce of his land is executed by his landlord, in excess of the rent payable, may, within six months from the date of the exaction, institute a suit to recover from the landlord, in addition to the amount or value of what is so exacted, such sum by way of penalty as the Court thinks fit not exceeding two hundred rupees ; or when double the amount or value of what is so exacted exceeds two hundred rupees, not exceeding double that amount or value." Abwabs then are illegal. They are irrecoverable ; and the recovery of abwabs is made punishable, if the tenant from whom they are taken instituted a suit. Yet we are seriously told that they are to be taken into account by a Court of Justice in estimating the value of property, 3. There is another view of the matter, what the judgment-debtor has to make out is that he has sustained substantial injury. Injury means loss which is wrongful. Now, what has the judgment-debtor lost by the sale of his property for Rs. 4,000. He has sustained no loss, if we take into consideration the capitalized value of his justly recoverable income. He has lost what he might have been in the habit of wrongfully gaining. Is that substantial injury or injury of any sort or kind ? 4. We must therefore hold that the finding of the Court below that substantial injury has been sustained by the judgment-debtor is one that is utterly wrong. 5. That being so we set aside the order appealed against and affirm the sale. The appeal is decreed with costs. Is that substantial injury or injury of any sort or kind ? 4. We must therefore hold that the finding of the Court below that substantial injury has been sustained by the judgment-debtor is one that is utterly wrong. 5. That being so we set aside the order appealed against and affirm the sale. The appeal is decreed with costs. We assess the hearing fee at ten gold mohurs.