S.P. Pathak, J. - (1.) This appeal is of the year 2001 and has not yet been admitted. Learned counsel for both the parties requested the court to dispose of this appeal finally at this stage, therefore, in the interest of justice, I do not deem it proper to admit the appeal and on the request of the learned counsel for both the parties, the matter has been taken up for final hearing.
(2.) The present civil second appeal under section 100 read with Order 41 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 1st April, 2000 passed by the Additional District Judge No.2, Ajmer in Civil Appeal No.44/1992 confirming the judgment and dcree dated 15th May, 1986 passed by the learned Munisff, First Class, Amer in Civil Suit No.277/1977 whereby the suit of the plaintiff for pre-emption was decreed but has been held to be dismissed under Order 20 Rule 14 Civil Procedure Code.
(3.) Briefly stated, the facts for the disposal of the second appeal are that the plaintiff-appellants filed a suit for declaration and pre-emption of the disputed property, description of which has been given in para 1 of the plaint. The disputed house is situated in Mohalla Badi Basti, Pushkar wherein the plaintiff-appellants had purchased some of the properties under a registered sale-deeds. On one occasion, the appellants under a registered sale-deed dated 28.3.1967 purchased some portion of the disputed house from Haridas and other portions by another sale-deed dated 25.4.1967 from Durga Shanker @ Rais Bhagwan and thereafter plaintiff-appellants became owner of the suit property. It was also averred in the plaint that some portions of the property were common like staircase, paul, chowk etc. It is alleged that defendant no.2 Shanker Lal (since deceased) vide registered sale-deed dated 20.6.1970 sold some of the portions for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,000/- effecting the right of pre-emption of plaintiff-appellants. It was further averred that it was the duty of the defendant no.2 to have informed to the plaintiff-appellants of his intention to dispose of the portion of the disputed property and an offer was required to be given to the plaintiffs as the vendor had illegally sold some portion of the property to defendant no.1, therefore, the sale-deed was in-effective and in-operative against the plaintiff-appellants and the same was liable to be cancelled. A prayer was made to decree the suit for cancellation of the sale-deed, damages etc. and to protect the right of pre-emption on the ground of Section 6(1)(ii) of the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act (to be referred in short as, 'the Pre-emption Act').;