I.S. Tiwana, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will dispose of Civil Writ petition No. 1352 of 1973 and R.S.A. No. 706 of 1973, as these two emanate from the same set of facts and are inter partes Petitioner in C.W.P. No. 1352 of 1973, Malik Lah Labhu Masih (since dead and now being represented by his legal representatives) is a tenant of Salien Krishna Majumdar, the Appellant in the regular second appeal (for purpose of convenience hereinafter they would respectively be referred to as the tenant and the landlord). The facts which are beyond the pale of controversy are as follows.
(2.) FATHER of the landlord, late Wing Commander K.K. Majumdar, who laid down his life in the 2nd World War, was given a gallantry award posthumously and as a result thereof 442 Kanals and 10 marlas of land was granted to him in Chak No. 535 G.B., Tehsil and District Layallpur. Possession of this land was taken by Salien Krishna Majumdar, the present landlord, on July 24, 1947. As a result of the partition of the country, the family of late Wing Commander K.K. Majumdar migrated to this part of the country and was allotted 69 Standard Acres and 2 Units of land in village Bhogri, Tehsil and District Jullundur, as compensation for the land left behind in Pakistan. Out of this land, 19 Standard Acres came to be in possession of the Petitioner, Malik Lah Labhu Masih, the tenant. On an application dated February 26, 1961, under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act 1953, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the tenant was allowed to purchase the land under his tenancy by the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, - -vide his order dated January 15, 1962, against the payment of Rs. 21,007.88 paise in ten equal six monthly installments of Rs. 2,100.88 paise each. As a result of an appeal by the landlord, the Collector, Jullundur, enhanced the amount payable to the landlord to Rs. 23,133.53. During the pendency of these proceedings, the landlord also moved an application under Sections 9 and 14 -A of the Act and actually secured an order of ejectment of the tenant on September 27, 1961. On a revision filed by the landlord before the Commissioner, in the proceedings under Section 18 of the Act, the said officer made a recommendation to the Financial Commissioner for setting aside the orders of the Assistant Collector and the Collector allowing purchase of land by the tenant on the ground that the landowner's application for the ejectment of the tenant had since been allowed. This recommendation was accepted by the Financial Commissioner and through an ex parte order, the orders of the Assistant Collector and the Collector allowing the purchase of land in favour of the Petitioner -tenant, were set aside. The tenant, however, successfully assailed this order of the Financial Commissioner in this Court through a writ petition No. 1158 of 1963 Malik Lah Labhu Masih v. Financial Commissioner Punjab and Anr., - -vide which the order of the Financial Commissioner dated April 9, 1963, was quashed on August 30, 1966 (Copy Annexure 'A' to the petition). As a result of this, the landlord received the full payment of the amount from the tenant and a mutation recording the change of ownership in favour of the tenant was also attested. It may be mentioned here that the order of ejectment which the landlord had secured against the tenant had also been upheld up to the Financial Commissioner and was even later affirmed by the High Court in Labhu Musih v. Financial Commissioner Punjab etc. As in the meantime the tenant had secured the proprietary rights of the land under his tenancy, no ejectment of his, however, could take place. Having failed to eject the tenant through the revenue officers, the landlord ultimately brought a suit (suit No. 86 of 1970) in the Court of Sub -Judge 1st Class, Jullundur, against the tenant with the allegation that since the land in question was a gallantry award in favour of a member of the Armed Forces, the tenant had no right to purchase the said land or any portion thereof in exercise of his right under Section 18 of the Act in view of the introduction of Section 19DD with retrospective effect, - -vide Punjab Act No. 12 of 1968. This section provides that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any land is granted for gallantry at any time before the 26th day of January, 1950, to any member of the armed forces, whether maintained by the Central Government or by any Indian State, then so long as such land or any portion thereof, as the case may be, has not passed from the original grantee into more than three successive hands by inheritance or bequest and is held by the grantee or any of such hands, such land or portion, as the case may be, shall not be taken into account in computing the surplus area under the Act, nor shall any tenant of such land or portion have the right to purchase it under Section 18. The civil Court, after framing various issues on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, held that though the land was covered by the provisions of Section 18 of the Act, yet it had no jurisdiction in the matter and dismissed the suit, - -vide its judgment dated March 21, 1972, Annexure 'B' to the petition. An appeal against this judgment and decree by the landlord to the District Judge, Jullundur, also failed, - - vide judgment and decree dated February 14, 1973, Annexure 'C' to the petition. It is against this decree that the present R.S.A. No. 706 of 1973 has been filed.
(3.) HAVING failed once again in the civil Court to take possession of the suit, land, the landlord yet thought of another device to achieve that end by filing an execution application seeking to execute the order of the Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jullundur, dated June 26, 1961, - -vide which ejectment of the tenant had been ordered. The plea put forward by the landlord before the Assistant Collector was that after the order of affirmance by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 1158 of 1963 (Annexure 'A' to the petition) - -vide which the purchase of the land by the tenant under Section 18 of the Act had been upheld, Section 19 -DD was introduced in the Act with retrospective effect, that is, from the date of the inception of the Act in 1953, through an ordinance which later assumed the form of Punjab Act No. 12 of 1968 and in view of the later provision of law, the very right of the tenant to purchase the land had been negatived with effect from the date of commencement of the Act, that is, April 15, 1953. It was also contended before the Assistant Collector that the civil Court, - -vide their judgments, Annexures 'B' and 'C', had upheld the claim of the landlord that the land in suit was covered by the provisions of Section 18 of the Act and the tenant had no right to purchase the same. Therefore, 'the Assistant Collector could execute the eviction order dated June 26, 1961, passed against the tenant. The Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Jullundur, accepting these pleas of the landlord ordered the issue of warrant of possession against the tenant, - -vide his order dated March 28, 1973 (Annexure 'D' to the petition). It is this order which led to the filing of the present petition No. 1352 of 1973. The implementation of this order was stayed by the Motion Bench at the time of admitting the writ petition. So the tenant continues to be in possession of the land in question.;