{"id":146890,"date":"1993-10-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1993-10-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993"},"modified":"2018-02-13T04:09:55","modified_gmt":"2018-02-12T22:39:55","slug":"mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","title":{"rendered":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR  856, \t\t  1994 SCC  (1) 195<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K Singh<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Kuldip Singh (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nMALA SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nFINANCIAL COMMISSIONER\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT15\/10\/1993\n\nBENCH:\nKULDIP SINGH (J)\nBENCH:\nKULDIP SINGH (J)\nBHARUCHA S.P. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 AIR  856\t\t  1994 SCC  (1) 195\n JT 1993 (6)   303\t  1993 SCALE  (4)246\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nKULDIP SINGH, J.- Kishan Dutt, father of respondents 5 to  7<br \/>\nin  the\t appeal\t herein,  was  a  big  landowner  under\t the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act,\t1953<br \/>\n(the  Act).  Mala Singh, the appellant, was a  tenant  since<br \/>\n1951-52\t in a part of the land owned by Kishan\tDutt.\tMala<br \/>\nSingh  was  shown  in the revenue records  as  a  tenant  in<br \/>\ncultivating possession of the land.  Since Kishan Dutt was a<br \/>\nbig landowner, proceedings under the Act were initiated\t and<br \/>\nthe  Collector, Sirsa by its order dated January 3 1,  1962,<br \/>\ndeclared  certain  area owned by Kishan Dutt  including\t the<br \/>\nland  in Mala Singh&#8217;s possession, as surplus under the\tAct.<br \/>\nKishan\tDutt  was permitted to retain the  permissible\tarea<br \/>\nreserved  by  him  under  the  Act.   Mala  Singh  filed  an<br \/>\napplication before the Revenue Officer praying that the land<br \/>\nin his possession be reserved as &#8220;tenant&#8217;s permissible area&#8221;<br \/>\nand  be taken out of the surplus pool.\tThe application\t was<br \/>\nallowed\t by  the  Revenue  Officer,  vide  his\torder  dated<br \/>\nDecember 24, 1963.  The net result was that Kishan Dutt\t was<br \/>\npermitted  to retain his permissible area under the Act\t and<br \/>\nthe  land  in  possession  of Mala  Singh  was\tdeclared  as<br \/>\ntenant&#8217;s permissible area.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.Section 18 of the Act provided that a tenant who was in<br \/>\ncontinuous  occupation of the land for a minimum  period  of<br \/>\nsix  years  was entitled to purchase the same  provided\t the<br \/>\nsaid  land  was\t not included in the  reserve  area  of\t the<br \/>\nlandowner.   Mala  Singh filed an application  on  June\t 24,<br \/>\n1972,  under Section 18 of the Act for the purchase  of\t the<br \/>\nland under his possession as a tenant.\tIt would be relevant<br \/>\nto  mention  that  Kishan Dutt died on\tSeptember  4,  1971,<br \/>\nleaving his son Madan Mohan and two daughters.\tMadan  Mohan<br \/>\nand  his  sisters filed an application\tdated  November\t 23,<br \/>\n1971, for ejectment of Mala Singh from the land in  dispute,<br \/>\non  the\t ground that after the death of\t their\tfather,\t the<br \/>\nthree  successors had become small landowners and, as  such,<br \/>\nwere  entitled\tto  the land, possessed\t by  Mala  Singh  as<br \/>\ntenant.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">198<\/span><\/p>\n<p>3. Both the applications came for consideration beforethe<br \/>\nAssistant Collector, 1st Grade, Sirsa, who by his order<br \/>\ndated June 18,1977 rejected the application of Madan Mohan<br \/>\nand allowed the applicationof Mala Singh for the purchase<br \/>\nof  the\t land.\t Madan Mohan along with\t his  sisters  filed<br \/>\nappeal before the Collector, Sirsa against the order of\t the<br \/>\nAssistant Collector.  The Collector dismissed the appeal  on<br \/>\nthe following reasoning:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t       &#8220;In  this  case, the land in dispute  is\t the<br \/>\n\t      tenant&#8217;s\tpermissible  area and this  area  is<br \/>\n\t      equal  to\t the area as  utilised.\t  This\tarea<br \/>\n\t      cannot  be  reverted back to  the\t appellants.<br \/>\n\t      The  rulings cited by the appellants are\tonly<br \/>\n\t      applicable  when\tthe  surplus  land  was\t not<br \/>\n\t      utilised.\t Under the circumstances I feel that<br \/>\n\t      the  order passed by the\tAssistant  Collector<br \/>\n\t      allowing the purchase application is perfectly<br \/>\n\t      legal and after the purchase, application\t for<br \/>\n\t      ejectment\t of  the  tenant  has  no   meaning.<br \/>\n\t      Hence, the appeals filed by the appellants are<br \/>\n\t      hereby dismissed.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>4.   Madan   Mohan  and\t his  sisters  filed  two   revision<br \/>\napplications before the Commissioner, Hissar Division.\t The<br \/>\nCommissioner allowed the revision petitions and\t recommended<br \/>\nto the Financial Commissioner to dismiss the application  of<br \/>\nthe  tenant  for the purchase of the land and  to  have\t the<br \/>\nquestion  whether  the\tlandowners  were  small\t  landowners<br \/>\nredetermined.  The Financial Commissioner by his order dated<br \/>\nNovember  11,  1982,  accepted the  recommendations  of\t the<br \/>\nCommissioner and dismissed the application of Mala Singh for<br \/>\nthe  purchase  of  the\tland.\tThe  Financial\tCommissioner<br \/>\naccepted the revision petitions on the following reasoning:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;It  is  obvious that an application  for\t the<br \/>\n\t      purchase\tof  the\t land was  made\t during\t the<br \/>\n\t      lifetime\tof  the\t original  landowner.\t The<br \/>\n\t      succession opened as soon as the death of\t the<br \/>\n\t      original landowner took place and the question<br \/>\n\t      whether\tthe  heirs  were  small\t  landowners<br \/>\n\t      assumed\timportance.  Furthermore,  a   plain<br \/>\n\t      reading of Section 12(3) of the new Act  shows<br \/>\n\t      that  the tenant&#8217;s permissible area under\t the<br \/>\n\t      old  Act vested in the State  Government\twith<br \/>\n\t      effect from the appointed day.  This being so,<br \/>\n\t      the  land in dispute could not be held  to  be<br \/>\n\t      utilised.\t  I, therefore, agree with the\tview<br \/>\n\t      expressed by the learned Commissioner.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>5.   Mala  Singh  challenged  the  order  of  the  Financial<br \/>\nCommissioner  by way of writ petition under Article  226  of<br \/>\nthe Constitution before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana<br \/>\nwhich was dismissed by the High Court on May 26, 1988.\tThis<br \/>\nappeal by Mala Singh by way of special leave is against\t the<br \/>\norder of Financial Commissioner as upheld by the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.   The Haryana Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 (Haryana<br \/>\nAct) came into force on December 23, 1972.  Sections  12(3),<br \/>\n33(1) and 33(2)(i) of the Haryana Act which are relevant are<br \/>\nas under :\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8221; 12.  Vesting of surplus area.- (3) The\tarea<br \/>\n\t      declared\tsurplus or tenants permissible\tarea<br \/>\n\t      under  the  Punjab Law and the  area  declared<br \/>\n\t      surplus under the Pepsu Law, which has not  so<br \/>\n\t      far  vested in the State Government, shall  be<br \/>\n\t      deemed to have vested in the State  Government<br \/>\n\t      with  effect  from the appointed day  and\t the<br \/>\n\t      area  which  may\tbe so  declared\t in  pending<br \/>\n\t      proceedings to be decided under the Punjab Law<br \/>\n\t      or<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t      199<\/span><br \/>\n\t      Pepsu  Law shall be deemed to have  vested  in<br \/>\n\t      the State Government with effect from the date<br \/>\n\t      of such declaration.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      33.   Repeal and savings.- (1) The  provisions<br \/>\n\t      of  the Punjab Security of Land  Tenures\tAct,<br \/>\n\t      1953,  and the Pepsu Tenancy and\tAgricultural<br \/>\n\t      Lands  Act, 1955, which are inconsistent\twith<br \/>\n\t      the   provisions\tof  this  Act\tare   hereby<br \/>\n\t      repealed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (2)   The\t repeal\t of the\t provisions  of\t the<br \/>\n\t      enactments mentioned in sub-section (1),<br \/>\n\t      hereinafter   referred   to   as\t the\tsaid<br \/>\n\t      enactments, shall not affect\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (i) the applications for the  purchase of land<br \/>\n\t      under Section 18 of the Punjab Law or  Section<br \/>\n\t      22  of  the  Pepsu Law, as the  case  may\t be,<br \/>\n\t      pending immediately before the commencement of<br \/>\n\t      this  Act,  which shall be disposed of  as  if<br \/>\n\t      this Act had not been passed.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>7.   It\t is not disputed that the appellant was a tenant  in<br \/>\nthe  area  owned by Kishan Dutt which was  declared  surplus<br \/>\nunder the Act.\tIt is further not disputed that the area  in<br \/>\npossession  of\tthe  appellant\twas  declared  as   tenant&#8217;s<br \/>\npermissible area.  The only question before the\t authorities<br \/>\nunder  the  Act was whether the area in\t possession  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant  as  a  tenant could be considered  to  have\tbeen<br \/>\nutilised  before  the death of Kishan Dutt.   The  Assistant<br \/>\nCollector   and\t the  Collector\t gave  the  answer  in\t the<br \/>\naffirmative  whereas  the  Commissioner\t and  the  Financial<br \/>\nCommissioner  came  to\tthe  conclusion\t that  the  area  in<br \/>\npossession of the appellant was not utilised.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.   We have heard learned counsel for the parties.  We\t are<br \/>\nof  the view that the revisional authorities under  the\t Act<br \/>\nand  the High Court fell into patent error in  holding\tthat<br \/>\nthe surplus area of Kishan Dutt which was declared  tenant&#8217;s<br \/>\npermissible  area on January 24, 1971 had not been  utilised<br \/>\non September 4, 1971 when Kishan Dutt died.  The  expression<br \/>\n&#8220;utilised&#8221; has not been defined under the Act.\tIt has been,<br \/>\nhowever,  used\tin  Sections 10-A and 10-B  of\tthe  Act  to<br \/>\nindicate that the surplus area of a landowner gets  utilised<br \/>\non the resettlement of tenants on the said land.  Under\t the<br \/>\nscheme of the Act the surplus area of a big landowner  could<br \/>\nbe  used  for  the  resettlement  of  landless\ttenants\t and<br \/>\nSections 10-A and 10-B of the Act provided that as and\twhen<br \/>\nit was done, the said surplus area was taken to be utilised.<br \/>\nIf  the surplus land allotted to the landless tenants  under<br \/>\nthe  Act  stood utilised, we see no reason why\tthe  surplus<br \/>\nland  which was declared as tenant&#8217;s permissible area  under<br \/>\nthe  Act, be not considered to be utilised.   The  appellant<br \/>\nwas  an\t old tenant of the landowner.  The  land  under\t his<br \/>\npossession  was\t declared  surplus.   He  was  permitted  to<br \/>\ncontinue  in  the  said\t land by declaring  the\t same  as  a<br \/>\ntenant&#8217;s  permissible  area.   We are of the  view  that  on<br \/>\nJanuary 24, 1971 when the surplus land in possession of\t the<br \/>\nappellant  was\tdeclared as tenant&#8217;s  permissible  area,  it<br \/>\nstood  utilised\t by  virtue of the  said  declaration.\t The<br \/>\nlandowner, Kishan Dutt, having died after the utilisation of<br \/>\nthe land in dispute, his successors could not take advantage<br \/>\nof the fact that they had become small landowners after\t the<br \/>\ndeath of their father.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.   Since the application of the appellant under Section 18<br \/>\nof  the\t Act,  for  the purchase of  the  land\twas  pending<br \/>\nimmediately before the commencement<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">200<\/span><br \/>\nof the Haryana Act, the same was to be disposed of in  terms<br \/>\nof  Section 33(2)(i) of the Haryana Act as if the  said\t Act<br \/>\nhad  not  been\tpassed.\t The  Assistant\t Collector  and\t the<br \/>\nCollector,  Sirsa,  were  thus\tjustified  in  allowing\t the<br \/>\napplication  of the appellant, Mala Singh, for the  purchase<br \/>\nof  the land in dispute.  The said authorities were  further<br \/>\njustified  in rejecting the ejectment application  of  Madan<br \/>\nMohan and his sisters.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  The  reliance by the Financial Commissioner on  Section<br \/>\n12(3)  of the Haryana Act for reaching the  conclusion\tthat<br \/>\nthe land in possession of the appellant was not utilised, is<br \/>\nwholly\tmisplaced.   The  said\tprovision  has\tan  entirely<br \/>\ndifferent purpose.  Under the Act, the surplus area on which<br \/>\nthe  tenants  were  settled  and also  the  area  which\t was<br \/>\ndeclared as tenant&#8217;s permissible area, continued to be under<br \/>\nthe  ownership\tof  the landowner and  he  was\tentitled  to<br \/>\nreceive\t rent  as permitted under the  Act.   Under  Section<br \/>\n12(3) of the Haryana Act the area declared surplus under the<br \/>\nAct,  whether  utilised\t or not, and the  area\tdeclared  as<br \/>\n&#8216;tenant&#8217;s  permissible\tarea&#8217;  stood  vested  in  the  State<br \/>\nGovernment.  Section 12(3) of the Haryana Act has nothing to<br \/>\ndo with the question as to whether before coming into  force<br \/>\nof the Haryana Act, the surplus land declared under the\t Act<br \/>\nhad  been utilised or not.  The Financial Commissioner\tfell<br \/>\ninto  patent error and, as such, the conclusions reached  by<br \/>\nhim   cannot  be  sustained.   Although,  there\t are   ample<br \/>\nprovisions under the Haryana Act for the allotment of  land,<br \/>\nwhich  stood  vested in the State Government  under  Section<br \/>\n12(3)  of  the\tHaryana Act, to the tenants but\t it  is\t not<br \/>\nnecessary  for\tthe  appellant to follow  that\troute.\t His<br \/>\napplication for purchase of the land under Section 18 of the<br \/>\nAct  was pending immediately before the commencement of\t the<br \/>\nHaryana Act and, as such, he was entitled to have a decision<br \/>\non  the\t said  application under  Section  33(2)(i)  of\t the<br \/>\nHaryana\t Act.  The said application was rightly\t allowed  by<br \/>\nthe Assistant Collector, Sirsa.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.  Mr Mela Ram Sharma, learned Senior Advocate,  appearing<br \/>\nfor  the respondent-landlords vehemently contended that\t the<br \/>\nappellant  has no right to purchase the land in view of\t the<br \/>\nlaw  laid  down by a Full Bench of Punjab and  Haryana\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt  in  Jaswant  Kaur v. State  of  Haryana&#8217;.   The\tsaid<br \/>\njudgment  of the Punjab and Haryana High Court was  affirmed<br \/>\nby  this Court in Nand Lal v. State of Haryana&#8217;.  We do\t not<br \/>\nagree  with the learned counsel. Jaswant Kaur case1  has  no<br \/>\nrelevance to the facts of the present case.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.  We\t allow\tthe  appeal,  set  aside  the  orders  dated<br \/>\nDecember  4,  1980 of the Commissioner, dated  November\t 11,<br \/>\n1982  of the Financial Commissioner and also of\t High  Court<br \/>\ndated  May 26, 1988.  We restore the order of the  Assistant<br \/>\nCollector,  Sirsa  as upheld by the Collector,\tSirsa.\t The<br \/>\nappellant  shall be entitled to his costs which we  quantify<br \/>\nas Rs 10,000.\n<\/p>\n<p>1   AIR 1977 P&amp;H 221 :1977 Rev LR 418: 1977 Punj LJ 230<br \/>\n2 1980 Supp SCC574:(1980)3SCR1181<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">203<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 856, 1994 SCC (1) 195 Author: K Singh Bench: Kuldip Singh (J) PETITIONER: MALA SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER DATE OF JUDGMENT15\/10\/1993 BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BHARUCHA S.P. (J) CITATION: 1994 AIR 856 1994 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-146890","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993\",\"datePublished\":\"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\"},\"wordCount\":1916,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\",\"name\":\"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993","datePublished":"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993"},"wordCount":1916,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993","name":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1993-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-12T22:39:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mala-singh-vs-financial-commissioner-on-15-october-1993#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mala Singh vs Financial Commissioner on 15 October, 1993"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146890","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=146890"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/146890\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=146890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=146890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=146890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}