MALA SINGH versus THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

MALA SINGH versus THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

Land declared as tenant's permissible area stands utilized by virtue of the declaration; pending purchase application by tenant to be decided under law as it stood prior to Haryana Act; section 12(3) of Haryana Act not relevant to question of prior utilization.

Parties
Appellant: Mala Singh; Respondents: The Financial Commissioner and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 October 1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court on Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Declaration of Surplus Land, Tenant's Permissible Area, Utilization of Surplus Land, Purchase of Land by Tenant, Vesting of Surplus Area Under Ceiling Laws
Land Law Tenancy Law Agricultural Law Statutory Interpretation Declaration of Surplus Land Tenant's Permissible Area Utilization of Surplus Land Purchase of Land by Tenant +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mala Singh

Appellant

The Financial Commissioner and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court on Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether declaration of land as tenant's permissible area constituted utilization under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953.
  2. 2 Whether pending application for purchase by tenant should be disposed under provisions prevailing before Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972.
  3. 3 Whether S.12(3) of Haryana Act was relevant to determination of utilization under Punjab Act.

Ratio Decidendi

Land declared as tenant's permissible area stands utilized by virtue of the declaration; pending purchase application by tenant to be decided under law as it stood prior to Haryana Act; section 12(3) of Haryana Act not relevant to question of prior utilization.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Orders of Commissioner, Financial Commissioner and High Court set aside; order of Assistant Collector as upheld by Collector restored.
  • Appellant entitled to costs quantified at Rs.10,000.