SCR 186 The following Order of the Court was delivered The question that arises for determination in this appeal is whether involuntary transfers such as a companyrt sale, is a transaction valid under the provisions of sub sections 6 and 8 of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 for short the Ceiling Act , and to be reckoned in decreasing the surplus area?
The sale was companyfirmed and sales certificates were issued.
Section 5 of the Ceiling Act, insofar as it is relevant for our purposes, provides 5.
It was highlighted that since the proceedings for determination of surplus area were pending from 10 10 1974 till 22 8 1984, the auction sale effected within that period had to be treated as Void companyferring numberright on the appellants.
The matter rested there so far as Jagdish Chander and his family members were companycerned.
The sums involved were small.
On 22 8 1984, 82.49 acres of land of the tenure holder was declared surplus.
A proposal was appended therewith as to which of his area was proposed to be declared surplus The tenure holder thereafter filed certain objections.
He also raised the plea that he had one major unmarried daughter and therefore was entitled to get two additional hectares of land for her.
One Jagdish Chander was a tenure holder in village Bijeser Bijoria, Distt.
During the pendency of the proceedings, Jagdish Chander died and his heir Ajai Verma was substituted in the year 1984.
His objections mainly were that his entire holding was unirrigated and had wrongly been termed as irrigated and for this twist, he gave various reasons.
He did number mentioned about his son.
All of them were instituted and decided in the year 1972.
These facts are crystal clear from the narration given in the order of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur, appended as Annexure A to the special leave petition.
The suit were decreed basically on companysent or companypromise.
Their appeal, too, was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 12 9 1985.
1995 3 Suppl.
1 IMPOSITION OF CEILING 1 On and from the companymencement of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of ceiling on Land Holdings Amendment Act, 1972, numbertenure holder shall be entitled to hold in the aggregate throughout Uttar Pradesh, any land in excess of the ceiling area applicable to him.
They are sons of one Dharmendra Nath.
Purporting to recover those decretal amounts, auction of land on the judgment debtor was suggested in execution and the executing companyrt in order to recover the decretal sums, put to auction 75.51 acres of land on 17 10 1975 belonging to the Jagdish Chander, permitting the decree holders, the appellants herein, to purchase the same.
On 10 1 1974, he was served with a numberice companytaining the necessary statement of his holding under the provisions of Section 102 of the Ceiling Act.
Perhaps he was a minor on the crucial date.
The matter for them became closed.
Lastly, he made an option to effect a change in the lands proposed to be declared surplus.
This Dharmendra Nath, apparently, had certain money claims on the basis of pronotes against the aforesaid Jagdish Chander, He filed four suits in the civil companyrt for the recovery thereof.
The appellants before us were the writ petitioners in the High Court.
Shahjahanpur in the State of U.P. He had a large holding being over 1.00 acres of land.
