S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) HEARD the counsel for the purchaser -petitioners and the counsel for the pre -emptor -5th respondent.
(2.) IT appears that the Pre -emption Application preferred by 5th respondent under Section 16 (3), LC Case No. 1/1995 -96 was dismissed but it was set aside by Appellate Authority at the instance of 5th respondent in LC Appeal No. 9/96 -97. The Revision Application, thereafter preferred by petitioners -purchaser in Case No. 45 -2001/132 -98 was dismissed for default by the Member Board of Revenue, the Restoration Petition preferred by petitioners was also dismissed. In the facts and circumstances as the petitioner -purchaser claimed right and title on the basis of the sale -deed and the Pre -emptor -5th respondent claimed preferential right being the adjacent raiyat, it is desirable that the Revision Application should be heard on merit.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , I set aside the orders dated 19th April, 2002 and 7th June, 2002 passed in Revision Case No. 45 -2001/132 -98 and remit the matter to the Member Board of Revenue for decision on merit.;