MAHARAJ KISHAN Vs. TARA SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE reference order of August, 29, 1962, will be read as part of this judgment. In view of that order before this Bench the question for consideration is this: -

(2.) IN the Punjab Pre -emption Act, 1913 (Act I of 1913), section 11 reads:

(3.) THERE has been some argument that section 11 refers to a sum deposited in or paid into Court by 'a pre -emptor', and that as soon as a pre -emption suit is decided, the pre -emptor ceases to be 'a pre -emptor' within the meaning of section 11. This apparently is not correct, for the words 'a pre -emptor' in section 11 are descriptive of the person making the deposit in or paying the sum into Court at the time the deposit is made or the sum is paid. Nothing in the language of section 11 justifies that any such status has to be maintained by the pre -emptor even after the decision of the pre -emption suit for section 11 to remain operative. The reason is obvious. The prohibition is against the attachment of the sum deposited in or paid into Court whilst in the custody of the Court and the emphasis in the section is upon the custody of the Court and not upon the person who initially made the deposit or paid the sum into Court. So that this approach is not correct.