BECHU SINGH Vs. LACHMI NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiffs alleged that they were co-sharers not only in the same thok but in the same patti as the vendor, while the vendees were co-sharers in the same thok but not in the same patti with the vendor. The only evidence the plaintiffs appear to have adduced in support of the alleged custom was the wajib-ul-arz of 1842, and certain judgments bearing on the interpretation of the clause in this wajib-ul-arz.

(2.) The Court of first instance seems to have presumed for the purposes of the case in the plaintiffs favour that a custom of pre-emption existed. It then went on to consider whether or not on the terms of the wajib-ul-arz the plaintiffs had a preferential right over the defendants. It held that the plaintiffs had no such right and dismissed the suit.

(3.) On appeal to the District Judge, the latter approached the consideration of the case entirely on a consideration of the actual terms of the wajib-ularz and held that under the terms of the wajib-ul-arz the plaintiffs had a preferential right over the defendants and remanded the suit to the Court of first instance for disposal.