MAHOMED BEG AMIN BEG Vs. NARAYAN MEGHAJI PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiffs, who are the appellants before us, are two Mahomedan women, and they brought this suit to enforce their right of pre-emption in respect of two agricultural survey numbers which were sold by the 2nd defendant, a Mahomedan woman, to the 1st defendant, a Hindu. The plaintiffs own the fields adjoining the land sold.

(2.) The suit is from a village in the Nandurbar Taluka of the Khandesh District. Both Courts have held that the Mahomedan right of pre-emption does not exist in the Khandesh District and have accordingly dismissed the suit.

(3.) It is to be observed that no attempt was made in the trial Court to prove the right of pre- emption as a special custom or usage; but the plaintiffs relied exclusively on the doctrine of Mahomedan Law. It is now contended on behalf of the plaintiffs in this appeal that the Mahomedan rule of pre-emption exists in the District of Khandesh and should be enforced here, notwithstanding that the purchaser was a Hindu. This contention is based on Clause 26 of Regulation IV of 1827, and the reference there occurring to "the law of the defendant". Seeing that the principal defendant here, the purchaser of the property, is a Hindu, the appeal, it seems to me, would be exposed to many difficulties, even if the Court conceded the appellants primary argument that the Mahomedan rule of pre-emption was operative in Khandesh. But in my opinion that argument cannot be conceded.