RAM CHAND Vs. RAJINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patents may briefly be stated as follows :

(2.) Inter alia the objection taken by the vendee-defendants, who are now appellants before us, was that the suit did not disclose any cause of action and was premature, because the sale could not be said to have been complete. The trial Court, however, found this issue against the defendants and finding that the plaintiff had a superior right of pre-emption decreed the suit. The first appellate Court confirmed this decision and so did the learned Single Judge in a regular second appeal, and hence this appeal by vendees.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellants before us urged only one point, namely, that the cause of action arises to a person having a superior right of possession by pre-emption under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), only on the basis of a completed sale; that till the sale is complete his right is only inchoate and no cause of action arises to bring a suit and that a sale or foreclosure can be said to be complete only after the document presented to the Sub-Registrar for registration is entered in the books of the Sub-Registrar. The decision of this appeal turns on the soundness or otherwise of this contention of the learned counsel.