LAWS(P&H)-1969-5-44

ANOKH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On May 01, 1969
ANOKH SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a resident of village Mari Mistfa, Tehsil Moga, District Ferozepur. He was allotted 331 kanals and 15 marlas of land in that village out of which 13 kanals 8 marlas were sold to him by the Central Government for Rs. 1412.50 as a result of which he became the owner of this piece of land. The petitioner was an occupancy tenant of the rest of the land and became its owner under the provisions of the Punjab Occupancy Tenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1952. Respondent 5, Shri Harbans Singh, was the landlord of the petitioner qua the land and he made an application for fixation of compensation which was assessed at Rs. 6,516.25 by the Collector, Moga by order dated September 30, 1966. The Collector further ordered that the amount of compensation would be paid to respondent 5 by the petitioner in two equal instalments, first of which was to be paid within three months of the order and the second instalment after three months of the first instalment. The petitioner filed an appeal against that order which was dismissed by the Commissioner, Jullundur Division, on May 29, 1967, and revision against that order was dismissed by the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, on October 25, 1967. The petitioner then filed the present petition in this Court on February 12, 1968. Respondents 1 to 4 have not appeared to contest the petition but respondent 5, the landlord, has vehemently opposed the petition. In the writ petition, the following grounds have been stated in support of the plea that the orders of the Collector, the Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner are unsustainable being in violation of law and procedure :-

(2.) The petitioner had stressed only one point before the learned Financial Commissioner which is stated in Ground No. 1 set out above and no other point was pressed before the Financial Commissioner and dealt with by him. This point has also been vehemently canvassed before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Section 5 of the Punjab Occupancy Tenants (Vesting of Proprietary Rights) Act, 1952 (Act 8 of 1953), hereinafter called the Act, so far as is relevant to the decision of the case is as under :

(3.) As I read this Section with the Explanation it means that if rent is payable on the basis of batai the amount payable to the landlord will be in the same proportion as the batai but the compensation for the land has to be determined on the basis of average market value. This average market value has to be determined by taking into consideration the average of the market value of the land during the period of 15 years commencing from the first day of June, 1935. In such a case the price of the produce is not required to be determined. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, is not right when he says that the price of the produce during the 15 years commencing from the 1st day of June, 1935, had to be determined. This was the point he argued before the learned Financial Commissioner which was repelled.