DEVI SINGH Vs. NANDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This may be read in continuation of my judgment dated 1.2.1961, by which I had asked for a report from the Court below as to whether the land in dispute sold by Smt. Santi was received by her from her father, Tola, by inheritance or in some other way. The said report has been received and both the Courts below have concurrently found that the land in dispute had come to Smt. Santi by gift from her mother Swarna. That being so, it was the self-acquired property of Smt. Santi and the finding given by the learned District Judge in the judgment under appeal was correct.

(2.) Now the question arises whether the plaintiff-respondent, who has been held to be the vendor's (Smt. Santi) father's brother's son by the learned District Judge, and which finding of fact has not been-assailed before me, has a right of pre-emption as against the vendee-appellant, who is a stranger. The learned District Judge had held that the plaintiff being an heir of Smt. Santi had such a right. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that according to the provisions of the new Section 15, substituted by the Punjab Pre-emption (Amendment) Act ( No. 10 of 1960), the sale in dispute was not pre-emption at all, because only those sales made by a female, which are mentioned in sub- section (2) of this section, are pre-emptible and the present sale being not covered by the provisions of Section (2) could not be pre-empted. The provisions of Section 15 are as follows :-

(3.) In view of what I have said above, I find no force in this appeal which is hereby dismissed. In the peculiar circumstances of this case, however, I would leave the parties to bear their own costs throughout.