CHARAN SINGH Vs. JAGIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts relevant to the question of law involved in this regular second appeal are that after the death of Tara Singh, his heirs sold the land in dispute on 15th June, 1963, to defendants Nos. 1 to 4. A part thereof had been under mortgage with possession with Karnail Singh, and at the time of the sale the mortgage subsisted. In the year 1961, it was Karnail Singh who inducted defendant No. 4 as a tenant therein. Jagir Singh claiming to be the brother's son of Tara Singh deceased and also a co-sharer in the joint khata with the vendors, filed the suit for possession of the entire land by pre-emption. In respect of the land held by defendant No. 4, as a tenant of Karnail Singh mortgagee also, the trial Court decreed the suit, but its decision in this behalf was reversed by the lower appellate Court. Feeling aggrieved, defendant No. 4 (Charan Singh) has preferred this appeal.

(2.) Upon the facts set out above, the sole question canvassed before me is; whether the sale in favour of defendant No. 4 of the land comprising his tenancy is protected by Section 17-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 ? Sub-section (1) of Section 17-A lays down :-

(3.) From a perusal of the provisions of law quoted above it is clear that the tenant of a mortgagee with possession nowhere figures. Besides, the exclusion of a mortgagee of the rights of a landowner from the definition of 'tenant' in Section 4 (5) of the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887, leads to the conclusion that a 'tenant' of a mortgagee could never be intended to be included in the term 'tenant'. Another aspect o the matter is that the classes of tenants, namely, a sub-tenant, a self-cultivating lessee, and a joint tenant to whom the legislature intended to give protection of Section, 17-A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, have been specifically mentioned.