BABU RAM Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jagmal, Raj Kumar and Shiv Chand three sons of Kehar Singh, sold their undivided half share measuring 16 Kanals 5 Marlas out of 32 Kanals 10 Marlas of land comprised in Khewat Khatauni No. 29/55, Khasra Nos. 24/20/2, 21, 22/2 and 29/1, 2 and 9 situated in village Ramgarh alia's Arjan Majra, tehsil Jagadhri, district Ambala to defendant appellants for Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only) vide registered sale deed dated 12th February, 1981.

(2.) Prem Singh and Singh Ram co-sharers in the suit land as owners of remaining undivided half share of land sold to defendant-vendee-appellants, filed against the purchasers a suit for possession by pre-emption of the land sold. Vide judgment dated 28th February, 1984, learned trial Court decreed the suit in respect of 15 Kanals 5 Marlas of land on payment of Rs. 35,084/- The claim in respect of remaining I Kanal of land comprised in Kasra No. 24/20/2 was negatived on the ground that ghair mumkin johar (waste land) comprised therein had been reclaimed by the vendees and therefore the suit for preemption in respect of it was not competent. In appeal the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, vide his assailed judgment of 15th November, 1984, affirmed the decision of the learned trial Court.

(3.) Feeling aggrieved against the judgment rendered by the learned Courts below, vendee defendant-appellants have filed in this Court Regular Second Appeal No. 3100 of 1984. Even the plaintiff-respondents, who did not file any appeal or put in any crossobjections before the learned Court of first appeal, have assailed the judgment rendered by the learned trial Court on 28th February, 1984 against them in regard to I Kanal of land comprised in Khasra No. 24/20/2 in regard to its being not pre-emptible, through cross-objections filed in this Court asserting that land aforesaid being ghair mumkin johar was not waste land, and. therefore, the question of its reclamation or exemption from pre-emption on account of reclamation does not arise and, therefore, the preemption suit, filed by them should be decreed in respect of it as well.