(1.) This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Calcutta. The learned Single Judge has denied the right of pre-emption to the appellant who is a contiguous land owner. The land in question is a plot measuring 3.755 decimal. It was sold by a common vendor by the name of Bijindra Burman, who had earlier sold a plot of land measuring 2.060 decimal to the appellant. Bijindra Burman was entitled to sell his entire plot measuring 3.775 decimal to the respondent Mani Pal @ Kaltu Pal. He did so without first offering this plot to the appellant Chhana Rani.
(2.) There is no dispute about the fact that the appellant Chhana Rani is the owner of the contiguous piece of land, which she earlier purchased from Bijindra Burman. There is also no dispute about the fact that she is not a co-sharer of the plot in question, which is the subject matter of the present proceedings. That Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 of the confers on a contiguous owner on a raiyat, who is a contiguous owner, the right to pre-empt and purchase a land which is being sold, is not disputed.
(3.) The appellant applied under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 to the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Mathabhanga as a contiguous tenant. She also claimed to be a co-sharer. This capacity as a co-sharer is not relevant any more since admittedly she is not a co-sharer in respect of the land in question. The Civil Judge (Junior Division) found that the appellant is an owner of contiguous land in question. That the vendor Bijindra Burman did not give due notice of the proposed sale transaction to the appellant. She learnt of it from others. The trial Court, therefore, allowed the application and conferred the right, title and interest of the land in question on the appellant along with possession of the suit land.