LexBHAJAN LAL versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
497
BHAJAN LAL
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.
September 28, 1970
(J, C. SHAH ANP A. N. GROVER, JJ.]
Punjab ,Security of
Land Tenures Act of
1953 ss.
l4A
18-
Applications for ejectment by landlord, and for purchase of land by
tenant-I/ tenant's applicr:tion can be ard"ed,
The appellant instituted a proceeding in ejectment under s. 14A of the
Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 but before orders were passed
on the application, the tenant initiate.d a proceeding under s. 18 exetcising
his right to purchase the land.
The two proceedings ended in orders
dismissing the ejection application and .declaring the tenant entitled to
purchase the land. On the question whether the tenant's application could-
be granted.
HELD : Under s. 18 of the Act if a tenant bad remained in conti-
nuous occupation of the land for a minimum period of six years ·he is
entitled to purchase the land on payroent of the compensation determined.
Under s. l4A, the landowner may obtain possession of the land on the
ground of non-payment of rent by a proceeding filed before the Assistant
Collector. If the tenant, after notice, fails to pay the. rent or give. proof
of payment, the Assistant Collectorshall after a summary inquiry, eject
the tenant and put the landowner in possession.
But so long as the
Assistant Collector has not passed the ejectment order, the tenant's right
is not extinguished; he contioues ti> be a tenant and being a tenant is
entitled to exercise his right of purchase. (501 C-G]
In the present case, before the Assistant Collector passed an order in
ejectment, the tenant exercised his right to purchase the land, and that
right would not be defeated merely because, on a subsequent date, an
order of ejectment was passed against him. He is entitled to purchase
the land on payment of the amount 1lf compensation together with the
amount ·Of rent due by him. {501 G-H; 502 BJ
Har Sarup v. Financial Commissioner, Revenue, Punjab, (1965) 44
Lah. L.T. 157, approved.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1338 of
1967.
Appeal by special leave from the order dated March 7, 1967
of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ No. 326 of
1967.
B .. R. L. Iyengar, R. L. Kohli and /. C. Talwar, for the appel-
lant.
S. C. Manchanda, M. L. Aggarwal and N. K. Aggarwal, for
H
respondent No. 3.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
Shah, J. Bhajan Lal was the owner of land measuring 21
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(1971] 2 S.C.R.
bighas 2 biswas and bearing Khasra Nos. 11/12, 18, 20 and 43
in village Sukhchen. Shadi was the tenant ·Of the land for agri-
cultural use. Alleging that Shadi had failed to pay the rent due
by him for the period Kharif Season 1957 to Rabi Season 1960,
Bhajan Lal applied under s. 14-A of the Punjab Secuiity of
Land Tenures Act, 1953, to the Assistant Collector for an order
in ejectment against Shadi.
The application was dismissed by
the Assistant Collector and that order was confirmed in appeal
by the Collector. The Financial Commissioner set aside the
order and remanded the case· for a fresh decision by order dated
January 8, 1962.
There was yet another proceeding regarding the same lands.
On February 20, 1961 Shadi applied to the Assistant Collector
to purchase the lands Uinder s. 18·. of the Punjab Security of
- Land Tenures Act, 1953. The Assistant Collector rejected the
application.
The Collector confirmed that order.
By
order
dated October 5, 1962, the Financial Commissioner remanded the
case for determining whether Shadi was in occupation of the
lands for six years before the date of the petition.
The Assistant Collector held that Shadi could claim to pur-
chase the lands under s. 18 of the
Punjab Security of Land
Tenures Act, 1953 on paying Rs. 8,409/- in ten equal instal-
ments to Bhajan Lal. The Assistant Collector held in the pro-
ceeding for ejectment started by Bhajan Lal that the tenant Shadi
had without sufficient cause committed default in paying rent
and ordered that he be evicted. The two order5 were passed on
April 30, 1964.
Whereas in the proceeding started by Bhajan
Lal he held that Shadi was liable to be evicted from the lands
because he had without sufficient cause committed default in
paying rent, in the proceeding filed by Shadi the Assistant Collec-
tor declared that Shadi was entitled to purchase the lands from
Bhajan Lal.
The two orders were challenged respectively by
Shadi and Bhajan Lal iExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.