COL. SIR HARINDER SINGH BRAR BANS BAHADUR versus BLHARL LAL AND OTHERS ETC.

Citation: [1994] 3 S.C.R. 107 · Decided: 18-03-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

\ 
\ 
COL. SIR HARJNDER SINGH BRAR BANS BAHADUR 
A 
v. 
BlHARl LAL AND OTHERS ETC. 
MARCH 18, 1994 
IK. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, J.1.J 
77ie Punjab Secwiry• of Land Tenures Act, 1953: S.18--Land in tenan· 
C)-Tenant's application for purchase of-Held, 1ight of tenant to purchase 
the land having been upheld by appellate and revisional arltho1itiesi landolvner 
B 
ivas disentitled to reagitate the issue in writ petition before High Cozut in guise C 
of seeking redetennination of the purchase price of the land. 
Respondent No. I, a tenant of the appellant-land owner in respect of 
land measuring 246 Kanals, 18 Marlas, filed an application to purchase 
the said land under s. 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. 
The Assistant Collector allowed the application by his order dated 4.3.1963 D 
in respect of 224 Kanals, 18 Marlas. The land owner tiled an appeal before 
the Collector challenging the order as regards the right of the tenant to 
purchase the land as well as the purchase price payable for the land. The 
Collector, by his order dated 5.7.1963 upheld the tenant's right to purchase 
the land, but remanded the case to redetermine the purchase price of the E 
land. Land owner's further appeal was dismissed by the Commissioner. 
His review application was also dismissed by the Financial Commissioner 
on 9.12.1965. 
The Assistant Collector, by his order dated 20.9.1968 redetermined 
the purchase price only in respect of 48 Kanals, 4 Marlas of land. This F 
gave rise to a second round of litigation between the parties and ultimately 
both the revisions- one filed by the tenant to reduce the purchase price 
and the other preferred by the land owner disputing the right of the tenant 
for purchase of the whole land-were dismissed by the Financial Commis-
sioner. Against this, the land owner filed a writ petition before the High G 
Court challenging the right of the tenant to purchase the land. The Single 
Judge dismissed the writ petition. The intra court appeal was dismissed 
by the Division Bench of the High Court. The land owner filed the Special 
Leave Petition. 
l)ismissing the special leave petition, this Court 
107 
H 
A 
B 
c 
108 
j l994J 3 S.C.R. 
HELD : The High Court cannot be said to have gone \\Tong in 
t:oncluding that the land-owner was disentitled to reagitate the question 
relating to right of purchase of the land by the tenant in the guise of 
seeking redetermination of the purchase price of land made by Ute Assis· 
tant Collector on 20.9.1968, pursuant to an order of remand. The order 
dated 43.1963 passed by the Assistant Collector under s. 18 of the Punjab 
Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 as regards the right of the tenant to 
purchase 224 Kanals 18 Marlas of land was justly upheld by the appellate 
authority and ultimately by the revisional authority, the Financial Com-
missioner, on 9.12.1965. [110-C-D; 109-H] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 
(Civil) No. 11296 of 1992. 
Special Leave Petition 
From the Judgment and Order dated 16-9-82 of the Punjab and 
Haryana High Court in LP.A. No. 304/1979. 
Rajinder Sachhar, S.K. Mehta, Dhruv Mehta and Aman Vachhcr for 
D the Petitioner. 
M.L. Verma, N.D. Garg, Ms. Nisha Bagchi, Ms. Dania Pradhan, Ms. 
Laxmi Arvind and Ms. lndu Malhotra for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
E 
VENKATACHALA, J. Bihari Lal, the first respondent in this peti-
tion was the tenant under Harinder Singh, the landowner in respect of the 
land measuring 246 Kanals 18 Marlas in Ballabhgarh in Punjab State. With 
the coming into force of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 
(hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), the relationship of the land-
F 
owner and the tenant in respect of the said land came to be regulated by 
the provisions of the Act. The tenant, who was entitled to purchase the 
said land under Section 18 of the Act, made an application on February 3, 
1961 before the Assistant Collector of First Grade who declared by his 
Order dated March 4, 1963 that the tenant was entitled to purchase 224 
G Kanals 18 Marlas of the land and its purchase price was Rs. 13,789.18 and 
the same was required to be paid by the tenant in four equal six monthly 
instalments or in lump sum. The tenant deposited a sum of Rs. 3,447.30 
which constituted the first instalment. However, that order of the Assistant 
Collector was challenged by the landowner as regards both, the right of the 
tenant to purchase that land and the purchase pr

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.