Sheo Parshad, and also in favour of his two.
Collector.
The final order in the proceedings was passed by the Financial Commissioner who, by his order dated August 27, 1962, held that the appellants.
On appeal, the Collector varied the order but the variation is number material for the purpose of this appeal.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated July 1963 of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ No.
It is number in dispute that the appellants and their fathers had been in occupation of the land in dispute for the last 30 years, as sub tenants under Sheo Parshad, respondent No.
6,730/ .
4 to 10, who had given this land on lease to Sheo Parshad, respondent No.
The Assistant Collector, by his order dated November 30, 1959, accepted the application of the appellants and allowed them to purchase 274 kanals of land for Rs.
10 sold the land in dispute, on October 25, 1957, to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 2354 of 1966.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri, J. This appeal by certificate granted to the appellants by the High Court of Punjab under Art.
appellants then preferred an appeal to the Commissioner and Sheo Parshad filed Revision Petition to him against the order of the.
C. Misra, S.K. Mehta and K.L. Mehta, for respondent No.
During the pendency of the application, respondents Nos.
The Commissioner upheld the claim of the appellants to purchase the land under s. 18 of the Act at the price assessed by the Assistant Collector, but he modified the order in respect of 85 kanals 8 marlas which had been sold to the sons of Sheo Parshad.
Thereupon the appellants filed a petition under Art.
The appellants, Jaimal and Ram Singh, applied under s. 18 of the Act to.
1559 of 1962.
C. Chagla and Janardan Sharma, for the appellants.
the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Hissar, to purchase 280 kanals 4 marlas of land situate in village Mehnda, Tehsil Hansi, District Hissar.
were number entitled to purchase the land under s. 18 of the Act.
The land was originally owned by respondents.
