1. JUDGMENTGUL ZARIN KIANI, J.-Saidan Gul Shah and Zaman Shah sons of Tahir Shah were occupancy-tenants, in respect of one half share of the land measuring 69 Kanals, 13 Marlas, comprised in field No. 453, situated in revenue estate of Langer, in Tehsil Fateh Jang of which Sardar Iqbal Ahmad Khan and others were owners. Occupancy-tenants paid a half share of produce rent to the owners. Upon enforcement of Act VII of 1952 on 4-2-1952 relating to extinguishment of occupancy tenancies and conferment of ownership rights, the land falling in occupancy-tenancy of two brothers was distributed to them in proportion of the share of produce rent paid bv them through a sanctioned mutation No. 319.On 2-1-1963, Saidan Gul Shah instituted a civil suit for claiming, alongwith his other brother, full ownership rights in the land measuring 34 Kanals, I6 Marlas, which was a half share of total land comprised in Khasra No. 453. It was averred in the plaint that occupancy-tenants paid rent, partly in kind and partly in cash, that is, in additiors Vs. Sultan Mahmood Khan and 2 others 1988 CLC 1498 (Lahore), I had an occasion to comment on section 114 of the Punjab Tenancy Act and the Rules framed there under, and, had pointed out a defect in Rule 4 of the Punjab Tenancy (Amendment) Rules, 1953. Since then, the Punjab Government framed new Rules, known as Punjab Conferment of Ownership Rights to the Occupancy Tenants Rules, 1989, and omitted Rules 3 to 5 of the Punjab Tenancy (Amendment)
2. Rules, 1953, from the Statute Book. Meanwhile, extension in time for deposit of compensation by the occupancy- tenants was allowed either by amendment to the Rules or amendment by Ordinance or Act. Lately, Act IV of 1987, known as Punjab Tenancy (Validation and Extension of Period for Payment of Compensation) (Amendment) Act, 1987, was passed by the Provincial Legislature for extending the period for deposit of compensation. However, for an effectual, complete and satisfactory determination of the pivotal issue regarding kind and quantity of rent payable by the occupancy-. .1 _r -c ------------ * p Arf xm ..f IPS'? Fnrentitlement for acquiring ownership rights in the land, sufficient material on file was lacking. More was required for coming to a proper decision.
3. Saddar Qanoongo, District Attack, was summoned with Jamabandis pertaining to the land in dispute from the year 1940-41 onward. Detail of rent and its break up given in Khata No. 1 was taken from learned counsel for the appellant. Certified copy of the Jamabandi for the year 1940-41 taken from the learned counsel for the appellant for better understanding of the point at issue is placed on file of this Court. As deficiency of proper material prevented a fair decision of the controversial points, a remand of the case for its re-consideration upon proper material was considered necessary. 1 must not feel apologetic for directing a remand even after quarter of a century with a dear object in forefront for reaching a just and a fair decision on the rights of the parlies. Delay on the part of the Court must not be allowed to defeat cause of justice.Having regard to the aforesaid, appeal is allowed; impugned judgment and decree of the learned lower Appellate Court are set aside and the case is remitted to learned District Judge, Attock, for framing a following additional issue;"Whether land revenue was part of payable rent by the occupancy- tenants to their owners and if so, its effect upon the rights of the occupancy-tenants to acquire ownership rights in the land in dispute? OPP"and taking additional material from the parties on the added issue and deciding of the appeal afresh in accordance with law. Costs to be borne as incurred.Parties shall appear before the Court below on 20-6-1992, As the matter is fairly old and has already suffered enormous delay, learned District Judge shall expedite it for a final decision by the end of October.
4. 1992. And preferably earlier.Records be returned quickly.