- (1.) Appellant-Gurcharan Singh had been the rival pre-emptor in respect of the land sold vide sale deed dated 18.6.1980 by Mahesh Chand, Smt. Lila Devi and Smt.Bimla Devi in favour of defendantrespondent nos. 1 to 3 for a consideration of Rs.32000/-, the other preemptor being Bagga Singh, respondent no.4. While Bagga Singh claimed the right of pre-emption being a co-sharer in the joint khewat, appellant-Gurcharan Singh claimed the said right on the plea of tenancy. Apart from making aforesaid claims for superior right of preemption, they further claimed that the sale was effected for a lesser amount and some fictitious amount was added just to defeat the right of pre-emption.
(2.) The suits brought by appellant-Gurcharan Singh and respondent no.4 were resisted by the vendees as well as by the rival pre-emptors. They were consolidated vide order dated 2.11.1982 and the proceedings thereafter continued in the suit brought by respondent no.4-Bagga Singh. On the pleadings of the parties, the following consolidated issues were framed by learned trial court:- 1. Whether the plaintiff has superior right of preemption OPP 2. Whether the rival pre-emptor has superior right of pre-emption OPR 3. Whether the sale price of Rs.32000/- was fixed in good faith and actually paid OPD 4. If issue No.3 is not proved, then what is the actual market price OPParties 5. Whether the stamp and registration charges has been incurred by the defendants OPD 6. Whether the defendants are in cultivating possession of the suit land as tenant in khewat No.8 and co-sharer in other khewats Nos. 9, 12 and 19 OPD 7. Relief.
(3.) After taking the evidence of the parties, learned trial court, vide judgment and decree dated 6.12.1985, dismissed the suit of appellant-Gurcharan Singh because the vendees were co-sharers and the right of a tenant was inferior to that of a co-sharer under section 15 (b) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act,1913 ( for short 'the Act'). The right of respondent no.4- Bagga Singh to pre-empt the sale was found to cover the land measuring 10-2/3 marlas comprised in khewat no.8, khatnoi no. 18 and 19 against defendant-respondents no. 2 and 3, Shingara Singh and Ranjit Singh and his suit to that extent was decreed.;