817 to 819 of 1968 and 1456 to 1458 of 1969 From the Judgment and order dated the 19th May, 1966 and appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated the 7th November 1968 of the Punjab Haryana High Court in C.W. No.
All these events took place in the early 60s.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA IYER,J. These two batches of appeals stem from the same judgment but raise two different questions of law under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 Punjab Act X of 1953 for short, the Act , the forensic focus being turned on two different facets of s. 18 of the Act.
Each of them applied for purchase of ownership under s. 18 1 of the Act.
771 to 773 of 1967 respectively.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Taja, the landlord, was admittedly a large land owner under whom there were three tenants.
1 and 3 in Cas.
818/68 and 1458/69 and respdt.
L. Gosain and E. C. Aggarwala for respdt.
The Assistant Collector, who is the primary authority, found them eligible, fixed the price and the instalments of payment, and they duly deposited the first instalment.
1 In A. Nos.
Rameshwar Dial and A, D. Mathur for the appellants In all the appeals .
819/68 .
The first set of appeals relates to the right of the tenants to purchase the ownership of the companymon landlord, Teja, while the second set of appeals turns on the principles of companypensation awardable to the landlord pursuant to the vesting of ownership in the tenant.
817/68, 1456 1457/69 respdt.
1 In CA No.
2205, 2206 and 2215 of 1965 and in C. Revsn.
