SALIM AND ORS. Vs. MUNIR KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appeals are connected and they address the same facts of the rights of the tenant to seek for enforcement of the right of preemption. The facts are drawn from RSA No.3013 of 1984 and the reasoning adopted in one would apply to the other case as well.

(2.) The plaintiff's suit for preemption was filed on his claim that he was a tenant in respect of the premises from its original owner but the same had been made a subject of sale in favour of the defendant on 16.03.1983. The suit was filed on 15.03.1983. It appears that there had been a suit instituted before the revenue authority for eviction of the tenant on certain grounds under the Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act and an order of eviction was passed on 13.02.1984. The suit came to be dismissed on the ground that on the day when the decree was passed, the tenant had lost the right and since he had been ordered to be ejected, he cannot secure the relief of preemption. The plaintiff's appeal was dismissed by the appellate Court and the second appeal is before this Court against assailing the judgments rendered by the courts below. An application has been filed under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to file as additional evidence and an order of the Financial Commissioner setting aside the orders passed by the authorities below on the ground that he had not been served in respect of the proceedings, the order of ejectment was, therefore, liable to be set aside. This order of the Financial Commissioner was passed on 08.09.1989.

(3.) The learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant would contend that his own prayer for preemption was denied only on account of a contemporaneous order passed by revenue authority directing ejectment and if that order had been annulled in the quasi judicial hierarchy by the order of the Financial Commissioner, the benefit of said order must avail to him and the plaintiff shall be given the right of preemption.