SAT PAL Vs. UMRAO SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main question arising for consideration in two R. S. As. No. 1096 of 1987 and 1459 of 1984 is whether the town of Ajnala in District Amritsar is en urban area within the meaning of East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 or not? An ancillary question is whether the demi(Sic)ed promises, which is subject -matter of controversy in the two R. S. As was situate outside the limits of the urban urea, if any, relating to Ajnala town under the aforesaid Act? Even though, the parties disputed both the above questions, there is insufficient material on the record to warrant a finding one way or the other. Undoubtedly; this is a matter, which will affect a large number of cases between landlord and tenant relating to that area. In brief, it may be mentioned that the Punjab Government issued a notification dated 7 -3 -1952 declaring Ajnala as an urban area under Section 2(i) of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as per boundaries mentioned in that notification a copy of the notification appears at page 51 of the record relating to R. S. A. No. 1096 of 1987. There is no other notification on the record rescinding the aforesaid notification under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. In fact, Umrao Singh appears to have filed a petition for ejectment against Sat Pal under the provisions of the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act. After being unsuccessful before the Rent Controller, he preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority, Amritsar. The appeal was dismissed by Shri K.C. Dewan, Appellate Authority. Amritsar by his order dated 19 -2 -1982. It may also be mentioned that by a notification dated 12 -4 -1978 the State Government declared specified areas of Ajnala to be a Notified Area Committee under the provisions of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. Photostat copy of the same is at page 55 of the aforesaid record. By another notification dated 7 -10 -1980 the area was de -notified Area Committee. By another notification dated 2 -12 -1980, the area in question was declared as Gram Sabha Area under the provisions of the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act.

(2.) THE question which still remains to be determined is (a) whether there was a subsequent notification rescinding the notification of 7 -3 -1952 under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act and (b) whether the demised premises/land was situated within or outside the area covered by the notification dated 7 -3 -1952. This is apart from the legal question whether declaration of area as Gram Sabha Area under the Punjab Gram Panchayat Act had the effect of rescinding the declaration of urban area under the East Punjab Urban Rent Restriction Act, 1949.

(3.) PARTIES through their counsel are directed to appear before Subordinate Judge, Ajnala, on 14 -3 -1989.