Law:

Section:

Custom (Punjab) Ancestral property-Alienation-Declaratory suit by reversioner- Common ancestor occupying land as occupancy tenant and rights of landlord purchased by last male-holder-Occupancy rights merged in proprietary rights and property cannot be treated ancestral. Date of hearing : 13th June 1974.                                                                                                                                 JUDGMENT Briefly summarised the facts giving rise to this appeal are these. The suit land measuring 14 marlas has been sold by Habib Ullah, the second respondent, to Allah Rakha, the appellant, for Rs. 1,500.00. Sardar, the first respondent, brought a usual declaratory suit under custom in respect of this transaction against Allah Rakha and Habib Ullah. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and the appellant has remained unsuccess ful in his appeal before the learned District Judge. 2. In this second appeal, the only point raised is that Habib Ullah was an occupancy tenant and he became absolute owner of the land in question only after enforcement of the 1952 Amendment of the Punjab Tenancy Act when occupancy tenancy in the Punjab was extinguished and proprietary rights were ordered to be conferred on tenants in the manner provided in section 114 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, as amended and because of merger of occupancy rights with proprietary rights, the land is not to be treated as ancestral. Learned counsel has relied on the following dictum in Firm Shankar Das Bhagmal v. Labh Singh A I R 1937 Lah. 596. "It is beyond dispute, that only that property can be held to be ancestral in the hands of Mahna Singh qua his son which had devolved on him (Mahna Singh) from his father. It has been found that in the time of Mahna Singh's ancestors, occupancy rights had been created in this land in favour of third parties, and…