GHUNII Vs. PURAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal from the,' order of the learned District Judge, Mandi, raises the question of interpretation of section 11(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estate's and Land Reforms Act (15 of 1954), hereafter referred to as the Abolition Act. Incidentally it also raises the question of impact of section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (78 of 1956), hereafter referred to as the Maintenance Act. on the construction of section 11(2) of the Abolition Act.

(2.) The appellant is a widow. She was not so when respondent Puran had applied under sub-section (1) of section II for conferment of proprietary rights of the land in dispute on him and his application was allowed by the Compensation Officer, as her husband Gangu was then alive. Gangu died during the pendency of her appeal and as such she claims that she became entitled to invoke the aid of sub-section (2) of section 11 of the Abolition Act to defeat the respondent's rights. It is common ground that if subsection (2) of section II does not apply the appellant cannot succeed and the order made by the Compensation Officer which was affirmed, on appeal, by the learned District Judge granting proprietary rights of land in Khasra Nos. 693, 691 and' 698/1, measuring 4-2-19 Bighas situate in village Dhemghi, Tehsil Sadar Mandi to the respondent on payment by him of Rs. 162.00 as compensation to the appellant, has to be upheld.

(3.) It is also common ground that besides the land in dispute of which the respondent has been held to be a tenant, the appellant owns 9-12-8 Bighas of land (vide Ex. P.B) in village Dauhandi, one-half share in 7-5-9 Bighas of land in village Kheuri (vide Ex. P.C) and 2-6-6 Bighas .of land in village Ragarh (vide Ex.P.D) on account of share of her deceased mother. She also owns 13-4-14 Bighas of land in the same village (vide Ex.PF) with Garib Das and others as non-occupancy tenants. Exhibit P.F. also shows that in village Rigarh she is in possession of 10-11-5 Bighas of land one- half of which is in her self cultivation. She also has l/6th share in 8-11-14 Bighas of land which she has inherited from her husband (vide Ex.PA). The total area of land which is under her self cultivation is thus 9-05 Bighas while the remaining land measuring 26-9-17 Bighas is with tenants for which a sum of Rs. 23-28 is being received by her as lagan (vide Exhibits P.B, P.C, and P.D). It may be mentioned here that the above figures are in accordance with the documents Exs. PA, PB, PC, PD and PF which are on record. These figures also tally with those mentioned in the order of the Compensation Officer. The figures given in the order of the learned District Judge, therefore, do not appear to be correct.