DHARAM PAL Vs. GANESH DASS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dharam Pal, petitioner No. 1, and his brother Deep Chand were tenants on 17 Kanals - 7 marlas of land situated in the revenue estate of village. Kapuri, Tehsil Dadri, District Bhiwani, under Ganesh Dass, respondent No. 1. Previously, this land was owned by one Chokha Ram, a displaced person. It was purchased by Ganesh Dass. He owns 30 acres of land. Ganesh Dass filed a suit for ejectment of his tenants Dharam Pal and Deep Chand from the suit land. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade passed a decree for ejectment and recovery of rent. On an appeal by the tenants, the Collector remanded the case for a fresh decision after affording the parties an opportunity to lead evidence. After remand, the Assistant Collector on the basis of the evidence led by the parties came to the conclusion that the tenants had made default in the payment of rent for three years and were liable to pay Rs. 156/- to the landowner within six months. He accepted Ganesh Dass's application and ordered the tenants' ejectment. The tenants went up in appeal which was partly allowed by the Collector on March 22, 1976. He affirmed the orders of ejectment but directed that since tenants were there on the land, in dispute, prior to the commencement of the Act, the landowner will get the possession of the land, in dispute, only when the appellant-tenants get land equivalent to the land in dispute out of the surplus pool. Both sides were dissatisfied with this order and preferred two appeals. Both the appeals were dismissed by the Additional Commissioner on Dec. 31, 1981. Deep Chand had died during the pendency of this appeal. Only Vijay Singh, petitioner No. 2 made an application and was impleaded as a legal representative of Deep Chand, Dharam Pal, petitioner No. 1, Vijay Singh, Raj Singh, Satbir Singh and Dharambir petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 sons of Deep Chand, Smt. Sarbati, petitioner No. 6 widow of Deep Chand and Smt. Lali, petitioner No. 7 daughter of Deep Chand filed a revision petition before the Financial Commissioner and raised inter alia the same plea that Dharam Pal and each of the successors of Deep Chand were entitled to the allotment of 17 kanals - 7 marlas of land before they could be evicted from the land, in dispute. The Financial Commissioner did not accept this contention and held that the petitioner-tenants were not entitled to the allotment of more than 17 kanals - 7 marlas of land from the surplus pool and the Collector had rightly decided this issue. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioners filed the present writ petition. The same very contention was raised by the petitioners at the time of motion hearing. Reliance was placed on a Single Bench decision of this Court in Gurmit Ram v. Financial Commr., Revenue, Punjab, 1979 Pun LJ 152, wherein it was held that sons of the deceased-tenant on the death of their father became tenants in their own rights and they became entitled to the benefit of the provision of sub-section (1) of section 7-A of the Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and they were entitled to the allotment of alternative land of equivalent value in standard acres to the area under their cultivation. The Motion Bench was of the view that Gurmit Ram's case (supra) required re-consideration. The writ petition was admitted and ordered to be heard by a Division Bench.

(2.) It will be expedient to reproduce the relevant statutory provisions before embarking upon determination of the legal issue raised in this writ petition : - The Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955- S.2(k).- 'tenant' has the meaning assigned to it in the Punjab Tenancy Act, 1887 (Punjab Act XVI of 1887), but does not include a person -

(3.) The Act constitutes a measure of the agrarian reforms. In order to bring about harmony between the "landlord" and their "tenants" whose relations had become strained resulting in an explosive situation land reforms and consolidation of existing law relating to tenancies were the need of the hour. So, the Act was framed to protect the tenants against unjust termination of their tenancies and to provide security of tenure to tenants by protecting them from unreasonable and capricious ejectment. The grounds for termination of tenancy have been furnished in S.7 and S.7-A of the Act. Chapter III thereof has been captioned "general rights of tenancy" and both Ss.7 and 7-A regulate the termination of tenancy. The orders of termination of tenancy lead to the eviction of tenants. The tenancy of a tenant is terminated on the establishment of grounds specified in Ss.7 and 7-A. However, under S.7-A, a further protection after the termination of the tenancy has been provided. A tenant can be ejected from his tenancy only from an area exceeding 5 standard acres or from an area of 5 standard acres if he is allotted by the State Government alternative land of equivalent value in standard acres.