KHARATI RAM Vs. RAM LAL AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to the F.B. is in these words:

(2.) THE question indicates that in the suit from which the reference has arisen the pre -emptor has claimed not only to pre -empt the rights sold to the mtgee. in possession, but to pre -empt the entire property so as to extinguish all rights of the mtgee. Under Section 4 of the Punjab Pre -emption Act, right to pre -empt is created in respect of sales. It is well established that there is no right of pre -emption of a mtge. By pre -emption the pre -emptor is substituted in the place of the seller at the date of sale. It seems arguable that a suit to enforce a right of pre -emption, which is a special right created in the Punjab by statute, must be a suit simpliciter for that purpose. I do not wish, however, to express an opinion one way or the other whether a composite suit for pre -emption and redemption is competent for by the reference we are concerned only with the question of limitation.

(3.) ARTICLE 10, Sch. II, Limitation Act, is as follows: