Court : Delhi
Reported in : 19(1981)DLT138
..... liabilities it creates. afterwards, i will turn to the evidence for such assistance as it can give. (52) the tenure known as 'right of occupancy' is dealt with by the punjab tenancy act, 1887. from the definition of land' in section 4 it is an obvious inference that this tenure can exist only in respect of land which 'is occupied or has been let ..... rights by capitalising the rent, makes certain assumptions, which are not valid. it assumes that the rent once fixed is constant and unchangeable, which is not true. even under the punjab tenancy act 1887 the rent may be enhanced or reduced: through the scope is not too great : see sections 22 and 23. it farther assumes that the only benefit which the landlord derives ..... ) this was due to certain directions issued to settlement officers. the validity of such agreements recorded in a record-of-right was recognised^ and preserved by section 111 of the punjab tenancy act 1887. (11) since the wajib-ul-aiz is apart of the record-of-rights, the entries which it contains are 'presumed, to be true until the contrary is proved'. it is ..... , pay any land revenue because it was remitted (maufi). it has been proved, and is not now disputed, that the tenants had rights of occupancy under section 6 of the punjab tenancy act 1887. (4) in november 1959 the land was acquired by the government for the planned development of delhi'. before the collector, a controversy arose as to the apportionment of the compensation .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
..... ) of the said section shall also apply in relation to such application, provided that the tenant's rights to compensation and acquisition of occupancy rights, if any, under the punjab tenancy act, 1887 ( xvi of 1887), shall not be affected; (ii) a landowner desiring to recover arrears of rent from a tenant shall apply in writing to the assistant collector, second grade, having jurisdiction, who ..... the tenant and for recovery of arrears of rent and was really an application under section 14-a of the 1953 act and not a suit under section 77(3) of the punjab tenancy act, 1887. a reading of section 10(2) of the 1953 act shows that under the summary procedure contemplated therein the assistant collector is required to give notice to the parties in ..... not paying the rent earlier and he was not liable to be evicted under section 9(1)(ii) of the 1953 act. he submitted that the mother of the appellant had actually filed a suit under section 77 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 and the assistant collector had also recorded oral evidence of witnesses and had not followed the summary procedure laid down under ..... remained unsatisfied. he submitted that in the present case there is no decree for arrear of rent in respect of the tenancy of the respondent no.4 and, therefore, he was not liable to be evicted under section 39 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887.6. mr. swarup, learned counsel for the appellant, however, submitted that the assistant collector by recording oral evidence adduced on .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : (2003)135PLR123
..... pay the decretal amount. therefore, the petitioners-landlords filed an application before the assistant collector 1st grade, abohar under sections 42, 43 and 44 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as 'the tenancy act') with a prayer that respondent-tenant, who was the judgment debtor may be given notice in the prescribed form to pay the decretal amount to the ..... secondly, f also find substance in the contention that the procedure prescribed under the punjab security of land tenures act, 1953 should have been followed for ejectment of the tenant as provisions of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 became redundant after coming into being of the punjab security of land tenures act, 1953. for the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that revision petition be accepted ..... and the orders of the courts below be set aside.'7. the financial commissioner (taxation), punjab, after hearing both the parties, accepted the recommendations ..... . with regard to the first relief, it was countered that the decree with regard thereto had to be subjected to the fetters of section 42 of the punjab tenancy act, as has been rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the tenant-respondent, as a measure of legal caution. now, section 42 of the said .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1987SC2205; JT1987(3)SC516; 1987(3)KarLJ33; 1987(2)SCALE527; (1987)4SCC410; 1SCR93
..... the respondent therein on the ground that they were licensees. the respondents claimed that they were occupancy tenants and contended that under section 77 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887, die .suit was triable by a revenue court only and not by the civil court. the trial court and the first appellate court decreed the ..... , j.1. how far an order directing eviction of a person by the revenue court under section 77(3) of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 (hereinafter called 'the act') operates as res judicata for a title suit filed by a person claiming to be a mortgagee and not a tenant of the ..... to us that if the dispute was as to the nature of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties, the revenue court under the punjab tenancy act had no jurisdiction when there was admitted position, the relationship of landlord and tenant was accepted, the remedies and rights of .the parties should be ..... to entertain the suit. it was held by this court that the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit and section 77 of the punjab tenancy act was applicable 'only to suits between landlord and tenants where there was no dispute that the person cultivating the land was a tenant'. but where ..... to a larger bench was whether, the decision of rent controller under the rent control laws or a revenue court under section 77 of the punjab tenancy act upon the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties operates as res judicata and is not open to challenge in a subsequent suit or .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1970Delhi94
..... the allegations that they were forcibly dispossessed by the landlords on october 6, 1958, the tenants filed suit no. 1 of 1958 under section 50 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 (hereinafter called the act) in the revenue court of assistant collector, hamirpur, on november 24, 1958, for recovery of possession of these lands. the landlords contested this suit on the ground that the plaintiff ..... . (4) the only two points convassed before the learned single judge were (i) whether the present suits were barred under section 50-a and section 77 (3) (g) of the punjab tenancy act and (ii) whether the decision of the revenue courts operated as rest judicata between the parlies. the learned single judge after a consideration of the various sections of the ..... punjab tenancy act came to the conclusion that the suits filed by the tenants in the civil court were barred both by reason of section 50-a as well as section 77 (3) ( ..... (1) that after the failure of an action by a tenant under section 45 of the punjab tenancy act, a disappointed claimant can still seek his remedy in a civil court because recourse to a civil court is nto expressly barred by the tenancy act. the intention of the tenancy act is undoubtedly to make the decision of the revenue courts under sections 44 and 45 of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1972P& H232
..... be served on the land-owner like summons in the manner prescribed in section 90 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887. rule 23-a enumerates the prescribed relations for the purposes of section 32-ff of the act.12. broadly speaking the entries to be made in form vii-a relate to the name, ..... the requirement of service of notice on all persons interested under sub-rule (3) of r. 6 of the 1956 rules (framed under the punjab act) appears to us to be based on principles of natural justice requiring an opportunity being afforded to any person who is likely to be prejudicially affected ..... is the transferee an interested person to whom a notice must be given before declaring the surplus area of the transferor under the pepsu tenancy and agricultural lands act, 1955?'judgment of the full bench r.s. narula, j.8. the circumstances in which the following question of law has ..... follows:--'.............................. full bench judgment.................. relates to the pepsu tenancy and agricultural lands act (13 of 1955) and not the punjab act and that the distinction in the two acts in this respect is apparent from the discussion of the relevant provisions of the pepsu act in paragraph 14 of the full bench judgment in ..... dismissed in view of the amendment of the punjab pre-emption act by act 10 of 1960. dhan kaur, as a big landowner had to furnish a return under section 32-f of the pepsu tenancy and agricultural lands act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the pepsu act). but it is stated that since she .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 7(1971)DLT100
..... rights and liabilities of the parties in respect of this i .ad, thereforee, have to he decided with reference to the provisions of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 (hereinafter called 'the act') and not tho of the transfer of property act, 1882.(8) the decision, of the point in controversy will depend on the question if there is any difference in the scheme of the two ..... to restore possession of the demised property to lesser. this is not the position under the scheme of the punjab tenancy act, 1887. chapter v of the act makes provisions to regulate cases of 'relinquishment' 'abaondonment' and 'ejectment' of the tenant holding the land covered by the act under the landlord. sections 35. 36, 37, and 38 deal with relinquishment of land by the tenant or ..... to be sub-tenant because his interest in the land was not extinguished. the facts of this case were of course different and s. 295-a of the u, p. tenancy act had also come into force in that case to affect the rights of the defendant-appellant but for arriving at the conclusion mentioned above it can be said, and we ..... ), (3) and (4) o, this section and then if the conditions mentioned in sub-section (5) are satisfied, order the ejectment of the tenant. the act thus does not envisage the termination or determination of tenancy prior to the filing of the application for ejectment by the landlord. the possession of the tenant, thereforee, on the land demised continues to be lawful .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1965P& H372
..... was to establish the right of the plaintiffs to possess land as tenants and that the suit did not fail in any of the categories in section 77 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887, nor was it covered by further relied on a judgment of this court in parmanand v. rakha air 1952 punj 94, where it was held that to a dispossessed tenant ..... and if so, how much. this is a matter which can be tried only by a civil court there being no provisions either in the land revenue act, punjab tenancy act or section 44 of the consolidation act prohibiting the jurisdiction of the civil court in this matter. the decision of the court below though slightly on a different ground must be upheld.(4) in ..... no allegations of possession or dispossession and obviously therefore the provisions of section 50 and are not applicable. admittedly only clause (g) in section 77(3), first group of the punjab tenancy act can possibly be applicable but that refers to a suit by a tenant who has been is possessed under section 50 to get back possession. obviously therefore section 77 or ..... two remedies were open: (1) within one year he could file as suit in a revenue court under section 50 of the punjab tenancy act for possession in a civil court within the period prescribed by the limitation act. the court also relied on kundan v. sardara ramjilal 1956-61 pun lr 208: (air 1959 punj 206) for the proportion that section .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(5)SCALE734; (2004)7SCC381
..... to proceedings under the punjab land reforms act, 1972, show that the maximum period of limitation in case of appeal or review is ninety days. the appeal against the final order of the ..... 11 of the act. sub- section (7) uses the words 'where succession is opened after the surplus area or any part thereof has been determined by the collector...'. the words 'determined by the collector' would mean that the order of the collector has attained finality. the provisions regarding appeals etc. contained in sections 80 - 82 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887, as made applicable ..... challenging the order of the revenue authorities regarding declaration of a portion of land owner by predecessor in interest of the appellant as surplus under the punjab land reforms act, 1972( hereinafter referred to as the 'act'). briefly the facts are that daya singh, father of the petitioner filed a return regarding his and his wife kartar kaur's holding of lands ..... an heir by inheritance, no transfer or other disposition of land which is comprised in the surplus area under the punjab law, the pepsu law or this act, shall affect the vesting thereof in the state government or its utilization under the act.(6) ......(7) where succession has opened after the surplus area or any part thereof has been determined by the .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Reported in : 128CompCas945(Delhi); 107(2003)DLT595; 52SCL628(Delhi)
..... be made applicable in absence of any legal basis thereforee.25. thereforee, for filing application under section 143 of pepsu tenancy in agricultural lands act, 1955, limitation prescribed under section 50 of the punjab tenancy act, 1887 would not apply. no period of limitation would govern such application. the court observed that it is not the function of the court to prescribe their ..... . 32 in which their lordships of the supreme court observed that when legislature in its wisdom thought it appropriate not to prescribe the period of limitation for proceedings under the act, the court cannot apply the provisions by implication.22. reliance has also been placed on collector of central excise, jaipur v. raghuvar (i) ltd., : 2000ecr414(sc) . in ..... petitions were not filed within reasonable period and consequently are barred by limitation. according to the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents, article 137 of the limitation act provides that any application for which no period of limitation is provided elsewhere, three years period of limitation would be appropriate in civil suit which period is to be ..... from two forums but the petitioner has to choose either of the two forums and cannot be permitted forum shopping under the garb of provisions of section 12b of the act. since the petitioner has already approached this court in arbitration proceedings, thereforee, the petitioner is not entitled to file these proceedings. the commission has dismissed the cases being .....Tag this Judgment!