P.C. Pandit, J. - (1.) THE following short -pedigree -table will be helpful in understanding the facts of this case.
(2.) ON 22nd of June, 1962, by a registered deed, Tulsi Ram Defendant 3 sold the agricultural land in dispute in favour of Banwari Lal and his brother Hari Singh (Defendant No. 1) for Rs. 5000/ -, On first of July, 1963 Gita Devi brought a suit for possession of the said land by pre -emption on the ground that she was a co sharer in that land and thus had a preferential right of pre -emption as against the vendees. The suit was resisted by the vendees on a number of grounds, but in the present appeal we are only concerned with one of them namely that the Plaintiff was not a co -sharer in the land in dispute. The trial Judge decreed the suit, holding that the Plaintiff has a superior right of pre emption on the ground alleged by her. This finding was, however, reversed in appeal by the learned District Judge, Sangrur, with the result that he set aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit of the Plaintiff. Against this the Plaintiff has come in second appeal. The facts proved on the record are that Tulsi Ram was allotted agricultural land, measuring 11 biswas, in village Bunde Baj Nagar, Tehsil and District Mohindergarh comprised in Khasra Nos 26/29 Min, 31 Min and 57/29 Min The khewat number of this land was 1 and khatauni number 32. It was this land which was sold by him to the vendees in the instant case. Tulsi Rams's brother. Tek Chand, was allotted 7 bighas and 9 biswas in the same village and it was comprised in khasra No. 31. This land was also in khewat No 1 and khatauni No. 32. After the death of Tek Chand. his widow Gita Devi got his land. The trial Judge was of the view that since the land sold and the one which was held by Gita Devi was in the same khewat, therefore, she was a co sharer in the khewat out of which the land was sold and, therefore, she had a preferential right of pre -emption as contemplated by Section 15(1)(b) of the Punjab Pre -emption Act, 19l3. It has been established from the evidence of Gita Devi herself as P. W. 2 and the Patwari Bool Chand produced by her as P.W. 1 that khewat No. 1 consisted of about 600 bighas of land and it was allotted to 8 different persons, including. Tulsi Ram and Tek Chand. AN those persons had been given land separately with separate khasra numbers. Later on sanads were also given to them. The relevant portion of Section 15(1)(b) reads - "(1) The right of pre -emption in respect of agricultural land and village immovable property shall vest - * * * (b) where the sale is of a share out of joint land or property and is not made by all the co -sharers jointly. * * * * * * Fourthly, in the other co -sharers ; * * * * * According to this section, if the sale has been made of a share out of the joint land, but not by all the co -sharers jointly, then the right of pre -emption will vest in the other co sharers of the said land. The question that arises is -"Was there any joint land which had been sold in the instant case - As I have already said, separate lands with separate Khasra numbers had been allotted to various persons, including Tulsi Ram and Tek Chand, and later on they had been given separate sanads regarding the lands that had been allotted to them. The land. sold in the instant case by Tulsi Ram was not held by him jointly with anybody else. It belonged to him exclusively. Simply because various portions of the land which had been allotted to Tulsi Ram and Tek Chand were in one khewat did not mean that Tek Chand, and subsequently his widow Gita Devi was a co -sharer in the land sold. The learned District Judge had, therefore, in my opinion, correctly set aside the finding of the trial Court on this point. No other point was urged before me.
(3.) THE result is that this appeal fails and is dismissed. In the circumstances of this case, however, I leave the parties to bear their own costs throughout.;