2020 Supreme(SC) 76

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, NAVIN SINHA, JJ.
Kirpal Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Kamla Devi & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos.356 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (C) No.23296 of 2010)
Decided On : 28-01-2020

IMPORTANT POINTS
Proceedings for determination of surplus area started under Punjab Security of land Tenures Act, 1953 should be disposed not taking provisions of the Act, 1972 into consideration.
Selection of permissible area is covered in expression determination of surplus area in terms of Section 2(5a) of Act 1953.
Question of fraud can be raised by the person defrauded, not his successor-in-interest.

Headnote:

(a) Haryana Ceiling of land Act, 1972 - Section 33(2) (ii) and (iv) - Proceedings for determination of surplus area started under Punjab Security of land Tenures Act, 1953 - Should be disposed not taking provisions of the Act, 1972 into consideration. (Para 13)

(b) Haryana Ceiling of land Act, 1972 - Section 9 - Selection of surplus area - Section 9 has to be read in reference to permissible area as referred to in Section 3(l) read with Section 4 and selection there on - Instantly, Order for permitting the land owner to make selection and submit the plot numbers to collector made under Punjab Security of land Tenures Act, 1953 - Provisions of Act 1972 will not apply in terms of section 33 - Held, provisions of Section 8(3) and 9(3) of Act, 1972 will not apply in present case. (Para 20)

(c) Punjab Security of land Tenures Act, 1953 - Section 2(5a) - Surplus area - Area in excess of permissible area - Selection of permissible area is covered in expression determination of surplus area. (Para 23)

(d) Administration of justice - Locus standi - Appellant purchased land from Mohan Singh to whom it was sold by the original land owner concealing the fact that the same was declared as surplus land - Appellant cannot plead that the original land owner played fraud on his predecessor-in-interest - It was for Moahn Singh to raise the issue during his life time. (Para 30)

Facts of the case:

One Jaipal Singh, land holder, was owner of the land measuring 221.72 standard acres in village Kheri, Shishgarh on 15.04.1953, when Punjab Security of land Tenures Act, 1953 was enforced. Permissible area under the 1953 Act was defined as 30 standard acres. Land owner who owned land in excess of permissible area was entitled to intimate his selection in the prescribed form and manner to the Patwari of the State. The Collector of the area passed an order dated 28.07.1960 determining 191.72 standard area of land as surplus in the hand of Shri Jaipal Singh. An appeal was filed by Jaipal Singh to the Commissioner, Ambala Division which was dismissed on 14.11.1960. The Revision Petition before the Financial Commissioner, Punjab which was also dismissed on 01.05.1961.

Writ petition filed by the Jaipal Singh was allowed by the High Court and authorities were directed to redecide the surplus area in accordance with the law laid down by the High Court. During pendency of matter, State of Haryana was created and State legislature passed the Haryana Ceiling of land Act, 1972. Jaipal Singh on 18.06.1974 executed sale deeds in favour of one Mohan Singh of an area of 125 Kanal and 8 Marla. The Collector by an order dated 12.05.1978 allowed exemption of land of Jaipal Singh declared surplus measuring 150 standard acres and balance of 36.47 standard acres was declared surplus.

Jaipal Singh gave Khasra numbers which were sold to Mohan Singh in surplus pool. A notice was issued to Mohan Singh to vacate the land. An application was filed by Mohan Singh before the prescribed authority objecting notice given to him to vacate the land which was rejected.

The Collector accepted the appeal directing that if the surplus land had to be taken the same will be taken from the land of the owner and if the same could not be completed from his land, only then, the land be taken from land in dispute i.e. land of the vendees. Appeal thereagainst was allowed. Revision filed by Mohan Singh before the Financial Commissioner, Haryana was dismissed against which writ petition No.2979 of 1989 was filed by Mohan Singh.

Mohan Singh executed a sale deed on 16.06.1989 in favour of appellant of the land which was purchased by him from Jaipal Singh vide sale deed dated 18.06.1974.

The writ petition of Mohan Singh was allowed by Single Judge setting aside the order of Commissioner and Financial Commissioner.

Against the judgment of the Single Judge LPA was filed by the legal heirs of the land owner which has been allowed.

Finding of the Court:

Provisions of the Act 1972 are not applicable to the present case.

Result: Appeal dismissed.