SIREMAL Vs. KANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by Siremal and others against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Pali.

(2.) A suit was brought by Kantilal plaintiff respondent against Siremal and others for preemption of a house sold by Takhatmal defendant respondent to Siremal and his three sons for Rs. 9,001/-. The plaintiff appellant is the minor son of Takhatmal vendor. The case of the plaintiff was that he was living separate from his father, and was not a member of the joint family with his father, and the house was not joint Hindu family property. The plaintiff, therefore, claimed pre-emption under the second clause to Section 3, Marwar Pre-emption Act of 1922.

(3.) The suit was resisted by the vendees defendants, and their case was that the plaintiff was a member of the joint Hindu family along with his father, and that the house sold was joint family property belonging to the vendor and the plaintiff. As such the plaintiff was not entitled to pre-empt as the sale was made by the manager and karta of the family on behalf of himself and his minor son. It was also urged that the plaintiff had filed this suit mala fide for the benefit of another person and not for his own benefit, and the suit should be dismissed for this reason. Takhatmal vendor defendant also filed a written statement in which he practically supported the stand taken by the vendee defendants.