JUDGMENT : Richards, J. In this case the Magistrate has made an order supposed to be under the provisions of section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Certain parties were disputing about their rights to a mahua crop which at the date of the order of the Magistrate had been collected, saved, and also removed from the place where it grew. He has come to the best conclusion he could as to the possession of this crop and has made an order for the distribution of the crop between the parties in proportion to their respective shares. The section 145 is the first section of the chapter in the Code of Criminal Procedure which deals with disputes as to immovable property. Sub-section provides:— “For the purposes of this section the expression ‘land or water’ includes buildings, markets, fisheries, crops or other produce of land, and the rents or profits of any such property.” 2. It is contended by the applicant that the mahua crop which had fallen from the trees on which it grew and which had been collected and actually removed from the laud could not properly be a crop or produce of land within the meaning of the section, and in support of the contention the case of Ramzan All v. Janardhan Singh, (I.L.R., 30 Cal., 110) has been cited, in which it was held that the crops or produce of land must mean crops or produce attached to land; in other words, growing crops or produce. In my opinion the section is a very beneficial one, and I should always be desirous of giving its provisions a liberal interpretation. However, I am satisfied that under the circumstances of the present case the Magistrate had no power to make the order he did. I accordingly must set aside the order of the Magistrate.