JEET RAM Vs. NIHAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants have preferred this Regular Second Appeal (hereinafter to be referred as "RSA"), challenging the judgments and decrees rendered by both the Courts below. The appeal has been filed with the primary grievance that the findings recorded by the learned Sub-Judge, 1st Class, as well as the learned First Appellate Court, are allegedly contrary to law, based on mis-appreciation of evidence, and result in substantial prejudice to the appellants.

(2.) The concise facts of the present case are that the respondents- plaintiffs instituted a suit seeking possession of the property by way of preemption of the sale-deed executed in favor of the appellants by defendants No.3 to 5 on 24/7/1986. During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiffs expressly abandoned their claim against defendants No.3 to 5, as recorded on 24/10/1986. Defendant No.1 actively contested the suit, whereas defendant No.2 initially remained ex-parte. However, the ex-parte proceedings against defendant No.2 were subsequently set aside, thereby enabling him to participate fully in the litigation.

(3.) Defendants No.1 and 2 contested the suit by contending that Plaintiff No.3 had prior knowledge of the sale-deed, as evidenced by his earlier suit titled 'Mahender vs. Ganpat' filed before the Court of Additional District Judge, Narnaul. Defendant No.2 additionally raised preliminary objections, asserting that the sale had occurred with the consent of the plaintiffs and that the suit was barred for partial preemption. Plaintiffs are not entitled to preempt sale as the Khewat of the plaintiffs and the vendors had already been separated, and the plaintiffs were no longer co-sharers in the property.