SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of three Regular Second Appeals bearing Nos. 2579 of 1993, 2580 of 1993 and 512 of 1994. These appeals have been filed by same defendants against the judgments and decree passed in three different suits filed by respondent Smt. Sohni for pre-empting three sale-deeds in favour of the defendants.
(2.) IN the present case, the defendant-appellants purchased 19 kanals 6 marlas of land from two co-sharers Mahabir and Babu Ram in the joint khewat Nos. 41, 42 and 111 situated in village Chhatarian vide registered sale-deed dated 12.6.1989. They also purchased 9 kanals 14 marlas of land from Nand Lal, who was a co-sharer in the same joint khewat vide registered sale-deed dated 17.8.1989. They further purchased 29 kanals 1 marla of land from Smt. Bhagwanti and Smt. Santo, daughters of and Raju son of Phool Chand. The respondent-Smt. Sohni filed three different suits for possession by way of pre-emption under Section 15 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 for pre- empting above-said three sales of the land made by co-sharers Mahabir, Babu Ram, Nand Lal, Smt. Bhagwanti, Smt. Santo and Raju on the ground that the plaintiff was having preferential right of pre-emption being co-sharer in the joint khewat from which the above-said land was sold by co-sharers to the defendant-appellants, who are totally strangers to the joint khewat.
(3.) THE defendant-appellants contested the suit, inter alia, on the grounds that in the revenue record the plaintiff has been wrongly shown as co-sharer. The sale-deeds were registered with the consent of the plaintiff, therefore, she is not entitled to pre-empt these sales. It is further contended that the plaintiff has inherited the land in the joint khewat from her husband Khiali Ram, who was the brother of the father of the vendors, therefore, the plaintiff has no right of pre-emption. The possession of the suit land was taken by the defendant-appellants two years prior to the sale-deeds after paying the earnest money and since then the defendants are in exclusive possession of specific killa numbers, therefore, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to be the co-sharer in the suit land at the time of registration of the sale-deed and at the time of filing the suits for pre-emption. It has also been pleaded that after purchase of the land, the defendants have spent some amount on the improvement of the suit land and in case the suit is decreed, the defendants are entitled to recover the said amount along with the sale consideration from the plaintiff.;