MEGH RAJ Vs. MANPHOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgement shall dispose of Regular Second Appeal Nos. 40 of 1984 (Megh Raj and others v. Manphool and others) and 2712 of 1987 (Maru and others v. Ratti Ram and others), as they invoke common questions of law.

(2.) IN order to place the present controversy in its correct perspective, a narrative of the facts would be appropriate. Ram Rikh S/o Shri Bhiwan R/o Village Umedpura, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa, transferred 6/7 share of his total land measuring 643 Bighas and 4 Biswas, situated in Village Umedpura, Tehsil and Distt. Sirsa, in favour of his wife, sons and grandsons, (herein after referred to as the 'Landowners') vide a civil court decree dated 27.8.1957 passed in Civil Suit No. 1019-A "Rameshwar v. Ram Rikh". The Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Punjab Act'), that placed a restriction on the extent of land holding came to be enacted. Admittedly, the suit land along with other land was declared surplus under the Punjab Act in the hands of Ram Rikh, pursuant to an order dated 24.10.60. Neither Ram Rikh nor any of the alleged beneficiaries, under the decree, challenged the aforementioned order.

(3.) THE State of Haryana, thereafter, framed a scheme titled as the Haryana Utilisation of Surplus and other Areas Scheme, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Utilization Scheme). Pursuant to powers vested under the Utilisation Scheme, the Sub Divisional Officer (Civil), Sirsa, exercising the powers of the Prescribed Authority, allotted the land subject matter of the decree to sitting tenants, (hereinafter referred to as the allottees) vide order dated 17.10.1978.