ASHOKE KUMAR DASADHIKARI, J. - (1.) These three revisional applications are taken up together since the issues involved in three revisional applications are same and relates to sale of same plot of land purchased by the opposite parties in these three revisional applications by three separate sale Deeds.
(2.) Learned appellate Court in Misc. Appeal No.33 of 2007 reversed the order of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Haldia thereby quashing the order of preemption granted in favour of the petitioners/pre-emptors and also rejected two appeals filed by the petitioners/pre-emptors against the order of learned trial Court passed in respect of two other purchasers i.e., minor son of Amar Krishna Panja viz. Subhankar Panja and his wife, Smt. Mina Rani Pradhan.
(3.) In the present case, one Bagala Prosad Pradhan was the transferor in respect of plot No.28 within mouza Dakhin Baisnabchak., He transferred the entire plot by three separate sale Deeds executed and registered in favour of the opposite party viz. Amar Krishna Panja for four decimals and three decimals to his minor son, Subhankar Panja and three decimals to his wife, Smt. Mina Rani Pradhan and all three Deeds were registered on 27th August, 1997. Learned trial Court allowed pre-emption against Amar Krishna Panja since the portion purchased by Amar Krishna Panja involved in P. Misc. Case No.72 of 1997 is adjacent the boundary of petitioners ' plot No.47 and 48. So far the portions purchased by his son and wife by to separate sale Deeds are not adjacent to petitioners ' aforementioned plots. Therefore, applications for pre-emption for those two shares involved in Misc. Case No.73 of 1997 and P. Misc. Case No.74 of 1997 were dismissed.;