MD SALIM RAHAMAN Vs. MONORAMA MONDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TODAY the learned Advocate for the respondent has completed his submissions and thereafter the learned Advocate for the appellants has also made his submissions in reply. Hearing has been concluded.

(2.) THE Court now delivers the following judgement :

(3.) THE learned Trial Court came to the finding that it was a case of contingent contract as there was some event collateral to such contract i.e. the pre-emption case. On the basis of such findings the learned Trial Court decreed the said suit in preliminary form as already indicated above. The learned Lower Appellant Court found from the record that the plaintiff was not a party at all in the pre-emption proceedings which the plaintiff had mentioned in the said agreement (Ext. E) and the learned Lower Appellate Court raised a question as to how could, in such circumstances, the plaintiff transfer the 'Ka' schedule property to the agreement (Ext. E) in favour of the defendant.