BARUN KANTI MAJUMDAR Vs. BIJOY KUMAR MAROTHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The pre-emptors/opposite parties herein made an application under Sec. 8 and 9 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act 1955 interalia seeking for pre-emption in respect of properties described in the schedule to the said application, being Misc. Case no. 18 of 2009.

(2.) In the said application pre-emptor /opposite parties pleaded that the property described in schedule "ka" to the application originally belonged to one Khuman Chand Marothi and his name was also recorded in Rs. Record of Rights. Said Khuman Chand transferred the "ka" schedule property along with the other properties to his six sons and delivered possession. Khimraj Marothi, predecessor of petitioners being one of the legal heirs became owner of "ka" schedule property to the extent of 1/6thshare. It is further pleaded that while they were possessing the same, they effected partition in between the co-sharers through a solenama in a suit before Civil Judge (Junior Division), Berhampore and thereby each of them were allotted specific share by way of said partition. It is further case of pre-emptors that the adjoining land owner of the "kha" schedule property has right to pre- empt the case property which was transferred to the pre-emptees/ opposite parties and accordingly prayed for pre-emption in respect of "kha" schedule property.

(3.) The petitioners herein contested the said Application by filing written objection and their specific case is that plot no. 23 originally belonged to Jayanta Mohan Saha and Mohini Mohan Saha and while they were in possession they transferred their 1/3rdshare to one Sachidulal Dhar and while the parties were in possession in plot no. 23, one suit being T.S. No. 53 of 2004 was filed, which was decreed in compromise. Subsequently said Jayanta and Mohini transferred a portion specifically allotted to them by means of said solenama to the petitioners for a valuable consideration. His further case is opposite parties herein are not the adjoining owner of plot no.23 and the plot no. 2269 and 2271 are not adjoining to the land transferred to the opposite parties, and that plot no. 2268 is situated in between plot no. 23 and 2269 and that entire share of Jayanta and Mohini in plot no. 23 has been transferred to the opposite parties and in such circumstances the predecessor in interest of the opposite parties are not entitled to pre-empt the disputed land and the predecessor in interest of the opposite parties was not exclusive owner of plot no. 2269 and 2271.