BARKHA RAM Vs. BALVINDER SINGH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short and the only question that falls for consideration in this appeal is as to whether a female of the category mentioned in Sub -section (2) of Section 15 of the Punjab Pre -emption Act, 1913, hereinafter referred to as the Act, who received the land in dispute through a will from a male of the category mentioned in that Sub -section is to be treated to have succeeded to that property in terms of the said provision.

(2.) BEFORE examining the legal proposition aforementioned, facts bearing thereon deserve noticing. Smt. Mela Devi, widow of Thakur Dass, had got the property in dispute by a will executed by her said husband. She alienated the same by registered sale -deed to the Defendant -Respondents, hereinafter referred to as the vendees. This sale was pre -empted by the Appellant -tenant, hereinafter referred to as the tenant -pre -emptor. His claim to pre -emption was refuted by the vendees with the plea that the sale in question was pre -emptible only under Section 15(2) of the Act and not under Section 15(1) and that the provisions of Section 15(2) do not envisage a tenant as one of the pre -emptor.

(3.) IT appears the appeal was admitted to Division Bench, as there seemed to be holding the field two seemingly conflicting judgments of coordinate jurisdiction, one delivered by Tek Chand, J. in Mohinder Singh and Ors. v. Balbir Kaur and Anr., 1968 P.L.R. 752, and the other delivered by Dhillon, J. in Mahan Singh and Anr. v. Haryana State and Ors., 1978 P.L.R. 553.