But that Order being challenged by the tenant in an appeal filed before the Collector, the rate of purchase price of land was reduced, however, holding that it was number open to the Assistant Collector to companyfine the determination of purchase price to 48 Kanals 14 Marias companytrary to remand order which had become final and, therefore, the rate of purchase of the land determined by him was to extend to the whole land.
13,789.18 and the same was required to be paid by the tenant in four equal six monthly instalments or in lump sum.
28,179.26 according to the purchase price so determined by the Collector on March 3, 1969.
But, the Commissioner dismissed both the revisions by his Order dated May 22, 1973.
With the companying into force of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 hereinafter to be referred to as the Act , the relationship of the landowner and the tenant in respect of the said land came to be regulated by the provisions of the Act.
The said Order of the Financial Commissioner was challenged by the land owner in Civil Writ Petition No.
The Assistant Collector who was required by the appellate order of the Collector to redetermine the purchase price of that land, made an order on September 20, 1968 determining the purchase price at a higher rate only in respect of 48 Kanals 14 Marias of land leaving out 176 Kanals 4 Marias of land on his view that that land was number available with the tenant by that date because of its acquisition in the meantime under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 the L.A. Act for short .
The tenant, who was entitled to purchase the said land under Section 18 of the Act, made an application on February 3, 1961 before the Assistant Collector of First Grade who declared by his Order dated March 4, 1963 that the tenant was entitled to purchase 224 Kanals 18 Marias of the land and its purchase price was Rs.
The land owner, although challenged that appellate Order of the Collector by filing a further appeal before the Commissioner and a revision before the Financial Commissioner, did number succeed.
The said order of the learned Single Judge appealed against by the land owner in L.P.A. No.
3260 of 1973 filed in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana as regards the right of the tenant to purchase the tenanted land.
The land owner has filed the present Special Leave Petition in respect of the said order of the Division Bench of the High Court.
The tenant deposited a sum of Rs.
The Collector, by his Order dated August 5, 1963 partly allowed the appeal by remanding the case to the Assistant Collector as regards the tenants right to purchase that land.
The Financial Commissioner dismissed the revision on December 9, 1965 by an Order made thereon.
When the matter was carried in appeal by the land owner before the Commissioner it was ordered by him on August 19, 1969, that rate of purchase price as determined by the Assistant Collector on September 20, 1968 should be restored and that rate should become applicable to the entire land of 224 acres as held by the Collector.
3,447.30 which companystituted the first instalment.
That order of the Commissioner was challenged by both the tenant and land owner in revisions filed before the Financial Commissioner, the tenant seeking reduction in the rate of purchase price and the land owner disputing the right of the tenant for purchase of the whole land.
394 of 1979, was dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court by its Order dated September 16, 1982, declining to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge.
However, that order of the Assistant Collector was challenged by the landowner as regards both, the right of the tenant to purchase that land and the purchase price payable for that land, by filing an appeal before the Collector.
Venkatachala, J. 1.
Bihari Lal, the first respondent in this petition was the tenant under Harinder Singh, the landowner in respect of the land measuring 246 Kanals 18 Marias in Ballabhgarh in Punjab State.
The tenant deposited with the Assistant Collector a sum of Rs.
