SOHAN SINGH Vs. SARBA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this unsuccessful plaintiff-pre-emptors' appeal, the solitary question for determination referred to the Division Bench by the order of P.D. Sharma, J., dated May 16, 1968, is whether the right of pre-emption can be exercised in respect of the land which the vendees got as result of consolidation of land holdings in lieu of the land actually purchased by the vendees. The reference was made in view of the divergence of opinion between the view expressed by Abdur Rahman, J., in Beant Singh V. Jamadar Inder Singh, Regular Second Appeal 414 of 1943, decided on February 9, 1944, on the one hand, and the decision of I.D. Dua, J., in Sewa Singh and another V. Ghumand Singh and others, 1965 CurLJ 784, and of Mahajan, J., in Ram Singh and others V. Gurnam Singh, 1961 AIR(P&H) 160 on the other. It is unnecessary to go into this controversy as the same appears to have been authoritatively settled by their Lordships of the Supreme Court. In the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Sunder Singh and others V. Narain Singh and others, 1961 2 ILR(P&H) 882, S.B. Capor and A.N. Grover, JJ., held that in view of the provisions of Section 24 of the Patiala and East Punjab States Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act (V of 2007 Bk.), a landowner or a tenant has the same rights in the land allotted to him in pursuance of the scheme of consolidation as he held in the original holding or the tenancy as the case may be, and, therefore, the right of pre-emption may be exercised in respect of the land which a vendee gets in lieu of the land purchased by him. While affirming the judgment of the Division Bench, their Lordships of the Supreme Court held in Sunder Singh and others V. Narain Singh and others, 1966 AIR(SC) 1977, that it is open to a pre-emptor to follow the land which has been given to the vendees in consolidation proceedings in lieu of the land which was the subject-matter of the sale-deed. The instant case is from the original Punjab territory. Section 25 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act (50 of 1948), which is in the following terms, corresponds to Section 24 of the PEPSU Act :-

(2.) For the foregoing reasons we allow this appeal, grant the plaintiffs a decree for possession (in exercise of their right of pre-emption) of the land in suit with costs throughout, conditional on their depositing in the trial Court the balance of the purchase-money within two months from today. If the amount is not paid within the aforesaid period of two months, the suit of the plaintiff pre-emptors shall stand dismissed with costs throughout. I agree.