SADHA SINGH Vs. GURAN DITTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (18-2-1964) Sadha Singh along with his brothers have presented this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asserting that they originally belonged to village Pehuwind, Tehsil Patti, District Amritsar but went to District Montogomery (now in West Pakistan) as colonizers and took up their residence in Chak, No. 55/12-L, Tehsil and District Montgomery. respondents Nos. 1 to 6 also owned land in he same Chak. On 3-11-1945, by a registered sale-deed, the said respondents sold 50 acres of land in the same Chak to the petitioners along with their brotherin-law S. Bachan Singh for a sum of Rs. 25,000; the petitioners share was three-fourths and Bachan Singh's one-fourth. Later, Bachan Singh also sold his one fourth share to the petitioners, thus making them full owners of entire area of 50 acres. A sum of Rs. 12,700 out of the purchase price was taken by the respondents Nos. 1 to 6 on 2-11-1945 for the purpose of depositing it in favour of the Provincial Government on account of Zar-i-malkana and the balance of Rs. 12,300 before the Sub-registrar at the time of the registration of the conveyance-deed on the following day. The Zar-i-malkana, it is asserted, was actually deposited in the Government treasury and all these facts were actually mentioned in the sale-deed itself. The petitioners on account of the purchase also took possession of the land and so continued in possession till the partition of the country in 1947; the revenue records on the file of the rehabilitation authorities support it, there being the following entry in them:

(2.) AFTER partition the petitioners were allotted 5 standards acres and 7 3/4 units each in lieu of the above land because as colonizers they came back to their own village of origin. respondents Nos. 1 to 6 also got allotment of the land in their favour in lieui of the aforesaid land which they had sold to the petitioners. This allotment, it is asserted, was obtained by fraudulently concealing the true facts. The petitioners acquired permanent rights in the land allotted to them in 1955-56 and the original sands are stated to be on the file of the Chief Settlement commissioner who decided the matter on 27-5-1960.

(3.) THE Managing Officer referred the petitioners' case to the Chief Settlement commissioner for cancelling their allotment who accepted the recommendation on 27-5-1960 as per Annexure 'a' to the petition. In this Annexure, it may be pointed out, on behalf of the vendors, it was urged that the sale in question was prohibited by the law in Montgomery and was, therefore, void, with the result that no interest passed to the vendees. The learned Chief Settlement Commissioner has also observed that the record received from Pakistan showed that the provincial government was still the owner of the land and that the vendees had no proof with them to show full payment to the Government and conveyance by the government in favour of the vendors. The petitioners thereupon approached this court by means of a writ petitions No. 1194 of 1960, but Tek Chand, J. hearing the petition accepted a preliminary objection raised on behalf of the opposite party that there was an alternative remedy by way of revision to the Central government which the petitioners should avail. The petitioners accordingly preferred a revision to the Central Government which was dismissed on 9-2-1961 as per Annexure 'b'. From that order, it appears that the amount of Rs. 12,700 said to have been paid to the vendor was not paid in the Government treasury because the revenue records received from Pakistan showed the Provincial government to be the owners of the land. The sale deed in favour of the petitioners was thus considered to be void.