MOHINDER SINGH Vs. BAHADUR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the unsuccessful pre -emptor against the judgment and decree dated 07.10.1988 of the lower Appellate Court passed by the District Judge, Ambala.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the land in dispute was owned by three sisters. The plaintiff -appellant became the owner of the land owned by two sisters by way of court decree. Subsequently the third sister sold her share of land to the respondents. This sale was sought to be preempted on the ground that the plaintiff -appellant had become a co -sharer with the third sister and hence he had preemptive rights over the acquisition of third party. The trial Court decreed the suit on 25.03.1987 (the date is material because it falls before the date on which the preemption law was outlawed). The lower Appellate Court however upset the judgment and decree of the trial Court by holding that by purchasing third sister's share the respondents had also become the co -sharers of the land and had therefore improved their status and acquired an equal right and footing along with the plaintiff -appellant and consequently the sale was not pre -emptible. Reliance was placed upon Ram Kishan v. Smt. Sharbati and others,, 1972 PLJ 54, Anup Singh and another v. Illam Chand,, 1978 PLJ 328 and Chander v. Madan Gopal, : 1981 PLJ 310.

(3.) IN Ram Kishan's case (supra), the issue was that the purchaser had purchased the land out of which some land was not pre -emptible and some land was pre -emptible. It was contended that in respect of the pre -emptible land the purchaser's rights would give way to the claim. This contention was repelled by this Court and it was held that the sale transaction would have to be split up into two parts, one for pre -emptible land and one for non -pre -emptible land and on purchase of the non -pre -emptible land the purchaser would improve his status. In my opinion, this judgment would not advance the case of the appellant.