Bhag Singh vs Bhajan Singh and another

D.K. Mahajan, J.—This second appeal is directed against the concurrent decisions of the Courts below decreeing the tenants suit for pre-emption of the land of which he was a tenant.

The sale which has been pre-empted was made on the 29th of May, 1961. The suit was filed on the 29th of May, 1962. The vendee''s defense was that the plaintiff was not a tenant of the land in dispute. It was further maintained that the plaintiff had to maintain the relationship of landlord and tenant both at the time of the suit as well as at the time of the decree. This matter is not reintegrate. It has been held in three decisions of this Court in Chuhar Ram v. Kashmiri Lal (1965) 67 PL. R. 25 SN, Sohan Singh v. Udho Ram (1967) 09 P.L.R. 414, Gurbachan Singh v. Bhagat Singh (196 8)70 P.L.R. 553, that if the tenant is in possession of the land at the date of the sale that would be enough to enable him to get a decree.

Mr. Achhara Singh brings to my notice the decision of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Bani Ram v. Manji Ram (1967) 69 P.L.R. 608. This decision in fact does not take notice of the decisions is Chuhar Ram''s case and in Sohan Singh''s case. In fact the provisions of the Pre-emption Act have not been properly appreciated. With utmost respect to the learned Single Judge, if he wanted to take a contrary view, the matter should have gone to a Division Bench In any events the preponderance of authority is in favour of tie view that the only requirement, so far as tenant is concerned, is that he should be in possession of the land at the date of the sale and if be is in possession on that, date he is entitled to a | decree for pre-emption

For the reasons recorded above, this appeal fails and is dismissed, but there will be no order as to costs.