Hanuman Rai vs Udit Narain Rai and Others

W. Comer Petheram, C.J.—I am of opinion that this appeal must be dismissed with costs. The sale, in respect of which the right of pre-emption is claimed, is a sale in which the right was claimed by another party, and was the subject of a compromise. The appellant urges that this compromise of a former suit had all the virtue of a private sale, and that, he being a nearer co-sharer, his right of pre-emption accrued in consequence. This action is, in effect, to have it established that another suit by the present defendant Udit Narain Rai was wrongly decreed. If we were to allow this, it would be reducing the right of action and proceedings for pre-emption to an absurdity. No sooner one suit was decreed for pre-emption, than another would be filed, and so it might go on from the nearest co-sharer''s suit to the next and the next, down to the person whose interest in the village was the smallest and most remote. The Lower Appellate Court was right in dismissing the suit, and this appeal must be and is dismissed with costs.

I am of the same opinion.