Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953

28 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND OTHERSversusKELA DEVI AND ANOTHER

1979 INSC 22831 October 1979Dismissed

The original owner, Nathi, held about 46 acres, exceeding the permissible 30 acres, and the Collector declared 6 acres and 8 standard units as surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, allotting them to other tenants. After Nathi's death, his widow Kela Devi and mother Manda, each inheriting half of

SANT SINGH NALWA & ANR.versusTHE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA & ORS., ETC.

1981 INSC 7930 March 1981Dismissed

The appellants, displaced persons, were allotted sailab land which later fell under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. Revenue authorities, applying the Act, allowed each appellant only 50 standard acres and declared the balance surplus. The appellants contended that the classification of land in Annexure ‘

KIRPAL SINGH & ORS.versusKAMLA DEVI & ORS.

2020 INSC 9728 January 2020Dismissed

The case concerned land owned by Jaipal Singh that was declared surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, and subsequently sold to Mohan Singh in 1974 and later to the present appellant. While the surplus‑land proceedings were pending, the Haryana Ceiling of Land Holdings Act, 1972 came into force, r

KRISHNA KUMARI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1998 INSC 44427 November 1998Dismissed

The appellants, daughters of Banarsi Das, claimed that surplus land declared under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 was not utilised before their father's death, invoking the inheritance exemption under Section 10‑A(b). The State argued that the land had been allotted to a tenant, Mangat Ram, in 1964, with

SHYAM LALversusDEEPA DASS CHELA RAM CHELA GARIB DASS

2016 INSC 49627 February 2015Matter referred to larger bench

Shyam Lal, the appellant, claimed continuous possession of agricultural land in Faridabad for about 27 years under a lease that expired in May 2005, asserting that he became a statutory tenant protected by the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The respondent, Deepa Dass Chela Ram Chela Garib Dass, argued that

LAJPAT RAJ AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

1981 INSC 10324 April 1981Dismissed

The case concerned a displaced person (Respondent No.3) who, after being allotted more than 60 acres, gifted part of his land to his wife, who subsequently sold it to the appellants. The Special Collector, relying on a rule that post‑Act sales should be included in the landowner's "select area," declared the land as pa

SAILEN KRISHNA MAJUMDARversusMALIK LABHU MASIH (DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY SMT. JASSI & ORS.

1989 INSC 6921 February 1989Dismissed

The appellant, S.K. Majumdar, inherited land granted to his father as a gallantry award in Lyallpur before 1950. After partition, the family received 69 acres of compensation land in Jullundur district, of which 19 acres were occupied by the respondent as a tenant. The respondent applied under Section 18 of the Punjab

BAKHATAWARversusSHRI SATNARAIN ATID ORS.

1996 INSC 152319 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Neki, a tenant of demised agricultural land for over 50 years, paid one‑third of the crop produce as rent to the landlord's agent. In 1978 the rabi crop failed and he could not pay the share, but later paid the amount. The landlord's General Power of Attorney (GPA) filed an eviction application under Section 9 of

SAMPURAN SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1994 INSC 1619 January 1994Dismissed

Sampuran Singh's land was declared surplus under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 in 1964, but he continued to possess and enjoy it. After his three sons became majors, he sought to reopen the declaration and recompute the surplus land under sections 7 and 9 of the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 197

SMT. BHAGWANTI DEVI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR .

1994 INSC 1719 January 1994Dismissed

The appellants, a family owning 828 standard acres, had surplus land declared under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and were granted exemption under Rule 8 to continue using it. When the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 came into force, the appellants argued that the exemption should survive and

COL. SIR HARINDER SINGH BRAR BANS BAHADURversusBLHARL LAL AND OTHERS ETC.

1994 INSC 12118 March 1994Dismissed

The tenant, Biharlal, applied under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 to purchase 224 kanals 18 marlas of land owned by Harjinder Singh Brar. The Assistant Collector approved the purchase, but the land‑owner appealed, leading to a series of appellate and revisional orders that upheld the tenan

COL. SIR HARINDER SINGH BRAR BANS BAHADURversusBIHARI LAL AND ORS. ETC.

1994 INSC 12618 March 1994Dismissed

Harinder Singh, the landowner, sold a tenanted parcel of land to his tenant Bihari Lal under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The tenant applied for purchase, was granted a purchase price, and deposited the first instalment on 12 March 1963, thereby becoming a deemed owner. Before this depos

RAM SWARUP AND OTHERSversusS.N. MAIRA AND OTHERS

1998 INSC 48617 December 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The Collector, under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, declared land held by Prem Nath Maira surplus in 1960 and allotted it to landless persons, who have possessed it since 1976. The Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 was amended in 1976 inserting Section 12(3), which vests such surplus lands in t

SANWAT SINGHversusZAIL SINGLF AND ORS.

1996 INSC 150517 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dalip Kaur sold her land to Jeet Kanwar in 1967. Zail Singh obtained a decree of pre-emption and attempted to take possession of the property, which was then occupied by the appellant who claimed to be a tenant of the vendor since before 1957. The trial court granted a perpetual injunction in favor of the appellant, bu

ASSA SINGH (D) BY LRS.versusSHANTI PARSHAD (D) BY LRS. & OTHERS

2021 INSC 74317 November 2021Dismissed

The appellants, claiming to have purchased land from a Mahant, obtained an order of ejectment against the respondent tenant under Section 14A of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The tenant contested the existence of a landlord‑tenant relationship, arguing that the Mahant had no authority to convey title a

AJMER SINGH AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1989 INSC 35317 November 1989Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by tenants (appellants) against land‑owners (respondents) concerning the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The land‑owners, heirs of an evacuee, had been allotted land and sought eviction of tenants, claiming they were "small land‑owners" whose holdings were below the permiss

SUBHASH CHANDversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2010 INSC 88816 December 2010Dismissed

The mother of the appellant filed an application for recovery of rent and eviction of a tenant under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The tenant argued that he was entitled to occupancy rights and therefore not liable for rent, and that the application should be treated as a suit under Section 77(3) of th

MALA SINGHversusTHE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

1993 INSC 34115 October 1993

Mala Singh, a long‑time tenant, occupied land owned by Kishan Dutt, a big land‑owner under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953. The land was declared surplus and later reserved as the tenant's permissible area, after which Kishan Dutt died and his heirs claimed to be small land‑owners. Mala Singh filed an app

BRIJ LAL (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

2007 INSC 129013 December 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned surplus‑area determinations made under the Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972, where land owners sought ejectment of tenants and the tenants challenged the orders after a long lapse of time. The Supreme Court examined whether the phrase "at any time" in Section 18(6) of the Act imposes a reas

SH. JANGLI AND ORS.versusSMT. BHAGWATI AND ORS.

1995 INSC 56312 September 1995Dismissed

The appellant, a tenant of Smt. Ajudhia, sought a declaration of title over a parcel of agricultural land that had been sold in execution of a money decree against her and later transferred to an auction‑purchaser, respondent No. 11. The appellant had earlier obtained a decree under the Punjab Pre‑emption Act, 1913, as

GURMEJ SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1999 INSC 10012 March 1999Dismissed

The appellants purchased a portion of land from Smt. Charanjit Kaur after the PEPSU Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1955 had been amended in 1956. The landowner held more than the permissible limit of 30 standard acres (equivalent to 60 ordinary acres) and had not applied for reservation of land under Section 5‑A w

JODHA RAM (DEAD) BY LRS.versusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, HARYANA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 32411 October 1993Dismissed

Jodha Ram, a small landowner, sought eviction of tenants Loti Ram and Rup Ram under Section 9(1)(i) of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, claiming his title remained despite the land being declared surplus. The Collector and higher authorities rejected his claim, holding that surplus land is to be utilized

AMAR SINGH AND ORS.versusAJMER SINGH AND ORS.

1994 INSC 23211 July 1994Appeal(s) allowed

Marn Ram, a large landowner, had 61 acres and 9 units of land partitioned among his sons. Under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953, 9 acres and 3¾ units were declared surplus in 1961 and the order became final in 1962. The Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972, Section 12(3) deemed such surplus land ves

GHANSHYAM DAS GUPTAversusDEVI LAL AND OTHERS

1989 INSC 468 February 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, G.D. Gupta, occupied a building in Danapur Cantonment under an invalid lease deed. The owner sued for eviction and arrears of rent, and during the pendency the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1947 was extended to the area on 14‑02‑1970 with prospective effect. The 1974 eviction suit alleg

RAJ KANTAversusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ANR.

1980 INSC 1107 May 1980Appeal(s) allowed

Four tenants of agricultural land owned by Raj Kanta applied to purchase the land under Section 18 of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and paid the first instalment. They failed to pay the rent for Kharif 1961, which was due on 15 January 1962, and offered no sufficient cause. The landowner sought ejectmen

HARNEK SINGHversusFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER, APPEALS, PUNJAB AND ORS.

2000 INSC 5756 December 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, legatee of the late Daljit Singh, challenged the allotment of land declared surplus under the PEPSU Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act to respondents 5‑10. The landowner had been declared surplus in 1976, but the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 came into force in 1973 and its Section 28 saved pending surpl

SUDARSHAN NATH AND ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

2000 INSC 1854 April 2000Dismissed

The case concerned surplus land of a large landholder, Raghubinder Nath, whose ceiling was fixed under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 and a portion declared surplus. Jagat Ram, a tenant, obtained a decree for allotment of the surplus land and the Collector allotted it to him; he deposited the purchase pr

UJJAGAR SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC.versusTHE COLLECTOR, BHATINDA AND ANR. ETC.

1996 INSC 8131 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Ujjagar Singh (deceased) held 218 kanals of land that were declared surplus under the Pepsu Tenancy Agricultural Lands Act, 1955, but the State never took possession of the land. When the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972 came into force, fresh proceedings were initiated to declare the same land surplus and to take possess

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search