JHABBAR SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS \ BALAK RAM S/O SHRI SANTU Vs. JAGTAR SINGH S/O DARSHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dtd. 17/8/2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in RSA No.1470/1983 and RSA No. 1557/1983, whereby the High Court, while allowing the said appeals filed by the original plaintiff Jagtar Singh (predecessor of the present respondent) decreed the Civil Suits no. 420/1981 and 421/1981, filed by him, seeking decree for the possession of the suit lands, claiming right of pre-emption against the original defendants Jhabbar Singh and others (the predecessor of the present appellants). The present appellants and respondent have been substituted as the legal heirs of the original defendant Jhabbar Singh and original plaintiff Jagtar Singh respectively.

(2.) The factual matrix giving rise to the present appeals are as under: -

(3.) The learned senior counsel Mr. Narender Hooda appearing for the appellants (original defendants) placing reliance on the provisions contained in Sec. 121 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Revenue Act ') submitted that after the partition was completed, the function of the Revenue Officer to prepare an instrument of partition and fixing the date for taking effect of the partition was only an executory or ministerial act. As such "Naksha Be " having already been prepared when the Assistant Collector had passed the order, and the objections of the respondent (original plaintiff Jagtar Singh) with regard to the mode of partition having already been rejected vide his order dtd. 25/5/1982, the said "Naksha Be " had stood confirmed, and thereafter the said "Naksha Be " was to be treated as "Naksha Zeem " for the final allocation of lands between the parties. According to him, thereafter the Assistant Collector had passed the order on 31/7/1982 accepting the partition, and the appeal against the said order preferred by Jagtar Singh before the Collector was dismissed on 12/10/1982, and therefore the right of pre-emption even if had existed in favour of the plaintiff Jagtar Singh on the date of filing of the suits, did not survive on the date of passing of the decrees in the civil suits on 1/12/1982. He further submitted that the right of pre-emption under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Pre-emption Act ') is a weak kind of right, and as per the settled legal position, the right of pre-emption should not only exist on the date of filing of the suits, but has to subsist on the date of passing of decree also. Mr. Hooda has placed reliance on the decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Har Devi vs. Ram Jas and Others (1974 PLJ 345); Lala Ram vs. The Financial Commissioner, Haryana (1991 SCC Online P&H 1105); Pritam Singh Vs. Jaskaur Singh (1992 SCC Online P&H 676) and Munshi vs. The Financial Commissioner, Haryana, Chandigarh (1993 SCC Online P&H 1086) to buttress his submissions.