(1.) THIS writ petition is filed challenging the determination of the surplus land under the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972.
(2.) THE petitioner's case is that his father Bishan Singh executed a will on September 25, 1962, bequeathing his property to his grand son, Sarwan Singh and Bishan Singh died in the year 1963 and after his death Sarwan Singh inherited the property left behind by Bishan Singh under the will. The property was also mutated in favour of Sarwan Singh on November 29, 1964. It is further case of the petitioner Labh Singh that his uncle Sant Singh died issueless during 1960 -61. Prior to his death he executed a will bequeathing his property to Labh Singh. He also purchased some land. His wife Niranjan Kaur purchased some land on March 10, 1972, in her own name. While determining the surplus area of the petitioner, the authorities clubbed the holdings of the petitioner Labh Singh, his son Sarwan Singh and wife Niranjan Kaur treating his son as minor and allowed only one standard holding. According to the petitioner, his son Sarwan Singh was a major on the appointed day, i.e. January 24, 1971, and, therefore, he is entitled to separate holding in his own right. According to the respondents, Sarwan Singh was a minor on the appointed day, i.e. on January 24, 1971, and, therefore, the authorities rightly included the land held by him in the holding of the family consisting of the petitioner his wife and minor son.
(3.) THERE cannot be any dispute that it is for the petitioner to prove by cogent evidence that his son was a major and, therefore, he was entitled to a separate holding in his own right. Except that ipso Dixit of the petitioner Labh Singh before the Collector that his son was aged about 20 years, there is nothing on record to show the age of the son of the petitioner. He did not file any birth and School admission record and even an electoral roll. In the absence of any evidence, it is difficult to hod that Sarwan Singh was a major on the appointed day, i.e. January 24, 1971.