Disposed

Kehar Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Dec 2015CWP/22369/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused to decide the title dispute pending in a civil court but directed petitioners to deposit security amounts for crop years to balance the Gram Panchayat's vested rights. The court mandated that the civil suit adjourn until compliance and expedited its disposal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to deposit security amount; Civil suit halted until compliance with security deposit directions.

Kehar Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.22369 of 2014 Date of Decision: December 10, 2015

¶3

Kehar Singh and others

¶4

....Petitioners

¶5

versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others

¶7

.....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI.

¶9

¶10

Present: Mr.Raj Kumar Garg, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.K.K.Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. Mr.C.L.Premy, Advocate, for respondent No.4.

¶11

-.-

¶12

Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

¶16

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioners have laid challenge to the orders dated 24.10.2011 and 29.10.2013 whereby they were ordered to be evicted from the land measuring 42 kanals in a petition filed by the Gram Panchayat of their village under Sections 3 to 5 and 7 of the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 and their appeal against that order has been dismissed by the Joint Development Commissioner (I.R.D.) exercising the powers of Commissioner under the Act.

¶18

[2] The authorities have held vide the impugned orders that the subject-land is owned by Panchayat deh and it being a gair mumkin rasta (public passage) vests in Gram Panchayat.

¶19

MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.01.06 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶20

CWP No.22369 of 2014

¶21

[2]

¶22

[3] The petitioners and proforma-respondents on the other hand claim that the suit land is jumla mustarka malkan and they have purchased the same by way of registered saledeeds from the proprietors who contributed the land on prorata basis. It is also the case of petitioners that they have already filed a civil suit for declaration of their title against the Gram Panchayat which is pending consideration.

¶23

[4] We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record especially the entries in the revenue record [P-1 & P-2 (colly.)].

¶24

[5] In view of the fact that the title dispute between the parties is sub-judice before the Civil Court, it is not expedient or desirable for this Court to express any views on that issue least it causes prejudice to either of them. At the same time, the petitioners cannot be allowed to enjoy possession of the suit land un-conditionally as in the event of failure of their suit, the Gram Panchayat is entitled to be compensated for the loss suffered by in the interregnum.

¶25

[6] Taking into consideration the totality of circumstances and the fact that such like land does not fetch lease-money of less than Rs.25,000/- per acre per annum, we direct the petitioners to deposit a lump-sum amount of Rs.1,25,000/- as security amount for the crop year 2014-15 (rabi and kharif) as well as same amount for the crop year 2015-16 before the District Development and Panchayat Officer-cum-Collector, Hoshiarpur. The security amount for the crop year 2014-15 shall be deposited within one month while for the crop year 2015-16, within two months thereafter.

¶26

[7] The Gram Panchayat shall be at liberty to withdraw that amount subject to the undertaking to be given

¶27

MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.01.06 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶28

[3]

¶29

CWP No.22369 of 2014

¶30

by its Sarpanch that if the petitioners succeed in the civil suit, the said amount shall be refunded to the petitioners without any interest, within a period of two months on attaining finality of the civil litigation. However, if the petitioners fail in the civil suit, the amount shall stand appropriated and adjusted towards the mesne-profits to which the Gram Panchayat would be entitled to in law.

¶31

[8] The Civil Court shall not proceed with the suit unless an affidavit of compliance of the aforesaid directions is filed by the petitioners. However, as soon as the compliance is made, the Civil Court shall dispose of the civil suit in accordance with law preferably within a period of six months. If it is so required, the petitioners shall furnish/deposit security in future also, i.e., beyond the crop year 2015-16.

Ordered accordingly.

Dasti.

[SURYA KANT]

JUDGE

December 10, 2015 [P.B.BAJANTHRI] mohinder JUDGE

¶37

MOHINDER KUMAR 2016.01.06 12:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Kehar Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kehar Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Chahal Retreads Vs State of Punjab

Suraj Mal and Ors. Vs Financial Commissioner Haryana and Ors.

Ajit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Bhai Dilawar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Raj Pal Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Gram Panchayat Sansowal Kalan Vs State of Punjab and Others