Judgment

M.N.Venkatachaliah, CJI.

(1) BIHARI Lal was a tenant of 246 kanals 18 marlas of land of the Village Ballabhgarh in erstwhile Punjab State, now in Haryana State. He got a right to purchase that land from its landowner, Harinder Singh, since such right was conferred upon him by Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, the Tenures Act for short. That on 2/3/1961, he made an application for such purchase before the Assistant Collector of First Grade Ballabhgarh the authority empowered to decide on the right to purchase and determine the purchase price. The Assistant Collector granted that application by his order dated 3/3/1963 recognising the tenants right to purchase 224 kanals 18 marlas of the said land and determining its purchase price, besides ordering deposit of that purchase price, either in a lump sum or in four equal six-monthly instalments, so that the same may be paid to the landowner. The tenant who chose to deposit the first instalment of that purchase price, deposited the same on 12/3/1963, well before the time allowed therefor. The said order of the Assistant Collector made, recognising the right of purchase of the land by the tenant, became final, when the Financial Commissioner by his order dated 9/12/1965, dismissed the revision petition of the landowner questioning the tenants right of purchase, in that, that order of the Financial Commissioner was not got set aside by the landowner from any superior forum. However, the order of the Assistant Collector dated 3/3/1963, relating to purchase price, which was required to be redetermined by appellate remand order of Collector as affirmed by the revisional order dated 9/12/1965 of the Financial Commissioner, was indeed, redetermined by the Assistant Collector by his order dated 20/9/1968. But, such redetermination of the purchase price was confined to the portion of the said land which was not by then acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the L.A. Act for short. However, the Commissioner, by his order dated 19-8-1969, made in second appeal arising from the said order of the Assistant Collector, held that the rate of purchase price of portion of land redetermined by the Assistant Collector shall extend to the whole land, the purchase of which was allowed by the Assistant Collector, by his earliest order dated 3/3/1963.

(2) IN the meanwhile, that on 3/8/1961 a notification under Section 4(1 of the L.A. Act had come to be published in Haryana State Gazette, proposing acquisition of 25 kanals 2 marlas out of the said 224 kanals 18 marlas of land, which had been allowed to be purchased by the tenant according to Assistant Collectors order dated 3/3/1963. Possession of the land proposed for acquisition was also taken by the Land Acquisition Collector (L.A. Collector) from the tenant on 14/10/1961, resulting in vesting of that land in the State of Haryana, in that, such possession was taken undersection 17(1 of the L.A. Act. Subsequently, on 14/10/1961, the L.A. Collector, who made an award under Section 11 of the L.A. Act, determined the compensation payable for the acquired land of 25 kanals 2 marlas as Rs. 26,271.00 and paid the whole compensation to the tenant. The landowner, who had claimed the whole amount of compensation, feeling aggrieved by the award of the L.A. Collector and the payment of whole compensation to the tenant, made an application to the L.A. Collector under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, for making a reference to the court of Additional District Judge, Gurgaon for its decision under Section 30 of the L.A. Act. That court, by its judgment and decree dated 29/10/1965 held that the landowner alone was entitled to the whole of compensation awarded for the said land by the L.A. Collector, on its view that the acquired land had vested in the State government before the tenant could become its deemed owner under Ss. (4 of Section 18 of the Tenures Act by depositing its purchase price, as allowed b