IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CWP No. 12410 of 1989 Date of decision March 16 , 2011 Surja Ram ....... Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab and another ........Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN Present:- None for the appellant. Ms. Reeta Kohli , Additional Advocate General, Punjab. **** 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? K. Kannan, J (oral). 1. There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. I have proceeded to examine the case on merits on the basis of records available and with the assistance of the counsel for the State. The petitioner was a beneficiary of an allotment as a tenant of a property that had been declared as surplus from a land owner. The allotment to the petitioner had been made by the Collector Agrarian, Abhor, District Ferozepur under the Punjab Utilization of Surplus Area Scheme, 1973 that contained a contention as follows: “The allottee shall not be competent to transfer his rights in the land allotted to him to any person till he becomes the owner or before the expiry of a period of 15 years of the date of possession whichever is later.” The contention in the writ petition is that after it acquired ownership rights he could not be debarred from transferring the property. A basis of such a contention is untenable. A fetter of transferability cannot normally be imposed on an owner but the exception to such set of things is provided under Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act itself. Section 10 reads as follows:- Age Occupation Claimants Heads of claim Tribunal High Court 1 Income 3000 3000 2 Deduction 1/3rd 1/3rd 3 Multiplicand 2000 2000 X12 4 Multiplier 10 17 5 Loss of dependency 4,08,000/- 6 Loss to estate 2500/- 7 Funeral expenses 10,000/- 2,000/- Total 4,12,500/- Government grants for an exception at all times and it is saved through bare reading of the Section itself. There have been decisions from every High Court allowing for such transfers. AIR 1983 237, AIR 1926, 726, Hiba Ahmad Vs. M. D. Rampiari AIR 1937 Allahabad 533, ILR 9 Bombay 561. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is dismissed. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE March 16, 2011 archana