SUMER Vs. VIJAY SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE trial Court decreed the suit for pre-emption filed by the two plaintiffs against Chitru vendee and Sumer alleged lessee (sic). Against the aforesaid order, Chitru vendee and Sumer lessee have come to this Court in second appeal.

(2.) SO far as Sumer is concerned, his case is that he is lessee on the land in dispute and whether suit for pre-emption is decreed or not he will continue in possession as lessee under the successful party, and, since he was not party to compromise the term of compromise that the possession can be taken after 31st October, 1988 cannot bind him. Obviously, since he is not party to the compromise and even if it were to be considered that compromise has been legally arrived at between Chitru vendee and the pre-emptors, his appeal before the lower Appellate Court had to be considered on merits to determine whether he was entitled to remain in possession in spite of the decree of pre-emption. To this extent the lower Appellate Court was in error in dismissing the entire appeal on the basis of statements to which Sumer was not party. Hence, the appeal of Sumer has to be decided on merits by the lower Appellate Court.

(3.) FOR the reasons recorded above, the appeal is allowed and after setting aside the order of the lower appellate Court dated 11th August, 1988, the matter is remitted to that Court for decision of the appeal on merits in accordance with law. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the lower appellate Court on 4.12.1989. Appeal allowed.