MOSA. RABEYA KHATUN Vs. MD. AFZAL HOSSAIN PRANG.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the instance of the petitioner this petition for Leave to Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 06.12.2005 passed by the High Court Division in Civil Revision No. 2638 of 2004 discharging the Rule affirming the judgment and order dated 28.06.2004 passed by the Joint District Judge, 1st Court, Bogra in Miscellaneous Appeal No.129 of 2002 allowing those dated 08.09.2002 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 31 of 1998 by the learned Senior Assistant Judge, 1st Court, Bogra dismissing the same.

(2.) The respondent No.1 as pre-emptor filed a Miscellaneous Case No. 34 of 1998 under Section 96 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act in the Court of the learned Assistant Judge, Bogra for getting pre-empted the land transferred by the preemptee Nos. 2-4 in favour of pre-emptee by a kabala deed dated 22.05.1997 as contiguous land holder. The pre-emption case, was filed stating, inter alia, that the pre-emptors were owner of Plot No. 981 and 962 and those two plots were contiguous to the Plot Nos. 967,966,965 and 964; that the land of those four plots belonged the pre-emptee Nos. 2-4 who sold 0.57 decimals of land from those four plots by kabala deed No. 8257 dated 22.05.1997 in favour of the pre-emptee No.1 that the pre-emptee No.1 is a stranger purchaser to the said land that the pre-emptors being contiguous land holder came to know about the said transfer on 01.04.1998, got the certified copy of the kabala deed on 05.04.1998 and filed the preemption case on 14.08.1998.

(3.) The pre-emptee No.1 contested the case by filing written objection denying the contiguity of the pre-emptors with the case land; that the pre-emptee is the owner of a portion of land of Plot Nos.981 and 962; that the Plot Nos.981 and 962 are in spite of contiguous to Plot No.967 but the portion of land possessed by the pre-emptors are not contiguous in the portion of land transferred by the deed under preemption from Plot No. 962; that the portion of land Plot No. 967 which is contiguous to the land of Plot No. 981 is in possession of the pre-emptee Nos. 17 and 18; that thereafter, the contiguous portion of land of Plot No.967 measuring an area of 0.9 decimals of land is in possession of Moslem and Younus who. have not been made parties; that thereafter, 0.18 decimals of land which is just contiguous to the Plot No.967 belongs to the pre-emptee-petitioner; that the land of Plot No.962 of the petitioner is contiguous to the Plot No.967; that there is no contiguity of the pre-emptor's land with the land of Plot Nos. 964, 965, 966 and 967; that the pre-emptors were given offer to purchase the land under pre-emption but they denied to purchase the same expressing their inability; that thereafter, the pre-emptee Nos.2-4 sold the case land by the kabala under pre-emption in favour of the pre-emptee No.1 (petitioner) within the knowledge of everybody; that the pre-emptors being not contiguous land holders the pre-emption case is liable to be dismissed.