MST. PHULA WANTI AND ORS. Vs. KASHMIRI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) KASHMIRI Lal Respondent's suit for pre -emption, on the basis of contiguity, was dismissed by the trial Sub Judge as time -barred, the rest of the issues having been decided in his favor. The learned District Judge, Kapurthala, accepted the Plaintiff's appeal and decreed the suit for possession on payment of the full consideration holding that the Plaintiff was kept ignorant of the sale by fraud and consequently the suit was within time. This is Defendant's second appeal.

(2.) THE only point agitated by the parties is one of limitation. The house in dispute is situate at Phagwara, to which place the Plaintiff belongs.. Mst. Durga Devi of Chatha is the vendor. On 6 -6 -1996 she sold the house in suit by three separate unregistered deeds, each relating to one -third share of the house and for a consideration of Rs. 100/ -.

(3.) SHRI K.N. Tewari, learned Counsel for the Appellants contends that the vendees were not bound to inform the Plaintiff of the sales in their, favour and therefore, mere silence on their part, does not amount to fraud. It is correct that mere failure, or 'omission to give the pre -emptor information or notice of the sale is not, by itself, enough to bring the case within Section 18, Limitation Act, as it does not amount to keeping the pre -emptor from the knowledge of his right by means of fraud.