SITAL CHANDRA KOLLEY Vs. HEIRS OF MIHILAL KOLLEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raises an interesting question.

(2.) On 4/7/1945 respondents 1-4 filed a suit against the appellants and one Mohanta Patra for specific performance of a contract of reconveyance. That suit was dismissed by the trial court but, on appeal, it was decreed by the learned Subordinate Judge, First Court, Howrah. From this appellate decision the present second appeal has been preferred by defendants 2 and 3.

(3.) Briefly stated, the plaintiffs-respondents' case was as follows: The disputed property which comprises an undivided share of an occupancy rayati holding originally belonged to them (respondents 1-4). On 15-3-45, in pursuance of an arrangement between the parties for sale and resale, they (the plaintiffs) sold the suit property to Mohanta Patra (who was defendant 1 in the trial court) by the Kobala (Ex. 1) and simultaneously obtained from him the agreement for reconveyance (Ex. 2) which is the foundation of the present suit. The appellants before us (who were defendants 2 and 3 in the trial Court), alleging to be cosharers of the disputed occupancy rayati holding, applied for pre-emption under Section 26F, Bengal Tenancy Act, against the transferee defendant 1 alone and succeeded in getting an order in their favour. The respondents duly tendered to the appellants the consideration, payable under the agreement for reconveyance (Ex, 2), but the latter refused to accept the same and reconvey the suit property.