Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Reference was also made to section 47 of the Punjab Tenancy Act, according to which execution of an order of ejectment cannot be done earlier than 1st May in a particular year.

Referring to this, the learned Judge went on to observe as follows:-

"....... section 47 of the Punjab Tenancy Act deals with the execution of the decree or order for the ejectment of a tenant and not with the determination of the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. It may be true that the decree for ejectment cannot be executed earlier than 1st May, but that does not mean that the relationship of landlord and tenant did not come to an end between the parties on the day when decree for ejectment of the tenant was passed." (emphasis supplied).
Similar view was expressed by this court in Hira Singh's case (supra), wherein it has been held that when a decree has been passed against a tenant, his status as a tenant comes to an end and from that day he will be considered to be trespasser.

In Rikhi Ram's case (supra), Hon'ble the Supreme Court opined that the landlord could not terminate tenancy by his unilateral act under the Land Tenures Act. An order of eviction was necessary to be obtained under Section 9 of the Act. The relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties ceases to exist after the passing of an order of ejectment against the tenant. Dispossession in execution of the order is not necessary for determination of tenancy.