MANI RAM Vs. RAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff, who is cousin brother of vendor, namely Smt. Shanti Devi, had filed the present suit to pre -empt the sale deed dated 13.2.1985, vide which 11 kanals 9 marlas of land was sold by Smt. Shanti Devi in favour of defendants Ram Singh and Jug Lal sons of Shankar Lal. The said suit for pre -emption was filed on the basis of the co -sharership. The trial court dismissed the suit while coming to the conclusion that even though the plaintiff is a co -sharer in the suit land, but keeping in view the fact that the sale was made by a female, who was close relative of the plaintiff, the plaintiff is not entitled to pre -empt the sale in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case titled as Jagdish v. Nathi Mal, : AIR 1987 Supreme Court 68. On appeal filed by the plaintiff, the judgment and decree of the trial court was affirmed on the same ground. Hence, this Regular Second Appeal was filed.

(2.) DURING the pendency of this appeal, Punjab Pre -emption Act, 1913, as applicable to the State of Haryana, has been amended vide the Haryana Amendment Act, 1995, vide which the right of pre -emption to preempt the sale on the ground of co -sharership has been abolished. Now, after the said amendment, no suit for pre -emption can be decreed on the said ground. A controversy arose as to whether the amendment is applicable on the pending appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shyam Sunder and another v. Ram Kumar and another, : AIR 2001 SC 2472 has held that a pre -emptor has to maintain his right to pre -empt the sale upto the date of passing of decree. If the suit of plaintiff is dismissed by the first court, and during the pendency of his appeal, the right of pre -emption has been abolished, the appellate court cannot decree his suit as on the day of passing the decree, the plaintiff has lost his right of pre -emption.