BHOORA RAM Vs. MUKH RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition under Section 84 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 against the judgment and decree dated 24.9.1996 passed by the Collector Sirsa and the order dated 30.4.1998 passed by the Commissioner, Hisar Division.

(2.) BRIEF facts of this case are that the present respondent-Mukh Ram filed a suit before the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Ellenabad for recovery of rent amounting to Rs. 67797.33 in respect of Kharif 1988 to Rabi 1991 from the petitioner for cultivation of the land measuring 125 Kanals 15 Marlas situated in village Gindran, Tehsil Rania, District Sirsa. The Assistant Collector, Ist Grade vide his order dated 21.11.1995 dismissed the suit. Against this order of the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, an appeal was filed before the Collector Sirsa who vide his order dated 24.9.1996 accepted the appeal and ordered for payment of rent of Rs. 14,000/- after excluding the amount of batai for the crop Kharif 1988. Against this order of the Collector, a revision was filed before the Commissioner, Hisar Division. The Commissioner vide his order dated 30.4.1998 dismissed the revision finding no illegality in the order of the Collector. Against the order of the Commissioner, this revision petition has been filed before this Court.

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner's main argument was that entry of petitioner in revenue record as co-sharer gair maurisi does not ipso facto convey the status of a tenant. In order that a person is considered to be a tenant in Col. 9 of the Jamabandi, rent should be mentioned whereas this column was vacant. In support of this he cited 1980 PLJ 295, 1994 PLJ 539 and 1980 PLJ 115. He mentioned that the Collector and the Commissioner have wrongly relied upon a Civil Court judgment which was for permanent injunction and in which no decision was taken on the question of title. He cited 1987 PLJ 356 according to which in a suit for permanent injunction, the question of title cannot be decided. He further drew the attention of this Court to Rule 21 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Rules under which father, sons, brothers, cannot become tenants and are not entitled for utilising the surplus land. In Ex.P/2 and P/3, Jamabandis for the year 1986-87 and Khasra Girdawaris, rent has not been prescribed. He further argued that every co- sharer is co-sharer of the entire land. In support of which he cited 1981 PLJ 204. He pleaded that the orders of the Collector and Commissioner should be set aside and the order of the Assistant Collector, 2nd Grade should be restored.