High Court Of Calcutta
Bhaskar Bhattacharya
ASHIMA DUTTA - Appellant
Versus
CHANDRA NATH BHATTACHARYA - Respondent
C. O. 2431 Of 2004
Decided On : 02/04/2005
WEST BENGAL LAND REFORMS ACT, 1955 - SECTION 8 - PRE-EMPTION - ADJOINING OWNERSHIP - CO-SHARER - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.
Fact of the Case:
The pre-emptor sought to pre-empt a property on the ground of adjoining ownership under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. The pre-emptee resisted the pre-emption on the grounds that (i) a third-party owned a small strip of land between the pre-emptor's property and the property sought to be pre-empted, and (ii) the pre-emptee had already become a co-sharer of the property sought to be pre-empted by virtue of an earlier purchase of a portion of the same property.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that (i) the existence of the third-party's land did not prevent the pre-emptor from being an adjoining owner for the purposes of Section 8, as long as the pre-emptor owned a plot adjoining the plot in which the property sought to be pre-empted was located, and (ii) the pre-emptee's earlier purchase did not make him a full co-sharer of the property sought to be pre-empted until the limitation period for filing a pre-emption application for the earlier purchase had expired and the pre-emptor had decided not to pre-empt the earlier purchase.
Issues: 1. Whether the pre-emptor was an adjoining owner for the purposes of Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. 2. Whether the pre-emptee was a co-sharer of the property sought to be pre-empted at the time the pre-emption application was filed.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 to mean that an adjoining owner for the purposes of pre-emption is a raiyat who owns land adjoining the plot of land, a part of which is transferred to a person other than a co-sharer of that plot. It is not necessary that the adjoining owner's land must adjoin the portion of the land that is being transferred. 2. The court held that a pre-emptee does not become a full co-sharer of a property until the limitation period for filing a pre-emption application for an earlier purchase of a portion of the same property has expired and the pre-emptor has decided not to pre-empt the earlier purchase.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the lower appellate court and held that the pre-emptor was not entitled to pre-empt the property.
( 1 ) THIS application under Article 227 of the constitution of India is at the instance of the opposite party in an application under section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for pre-emption of the suit property on the ground of adjoining ownership and is directed against order dated 5th January, 2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Mursidabad in Misc. Appeal No. 42 of 2003 thereby reversing the Order No. 60 dated 16th July, 2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Additional-1st Court, Berhampore in misc. Case No. 5 of 2001 since renumbered as Misc. Case No. 10 of 2003.
( 2 ) THE case made out by the pre-emptor in the application for pre-emption may be summed up thus: (A) The property mentioned in schedule 'ka' of the application comprising of holding No. 127, Netaji Road, under Berhampore Municipality record in R. S. Plot No. 689 and L. R. Plot No. 1284 originally belonged to one haridas Barat and Harigopal Barat. One Surendra Bhattacharya, the father of the pre-emptor purchased the same from the aforesaid two recorded owners on the strength of a registered Kobala dated 19th february, 1942. Thereafter, the said Surendra Bhattacharya died on 3rd february, 1972 leaving his two sons, namely, the pre-emptor and one somenath Bhattacharya and two daughters, namely, Kaberi Roy and alokananda Ganguli and the widow, viz. Hasi Rani Bhattacharya. On the death of Hasi Rani Bhattacharya, the aforesaid two sons and two daughters of Surendra Nath Bhattacharya inherited one-fourth share each in "ka" schedule property. (B) The "kha" schedule property, which is the subject-matter of pre-emption, originally belonged to one Biswanath Dutta. The pre-emptees purchased the "kha" schedule property from Biswanath Dutta on the strength of a registered Kobala dated 19th February, 2000 for a consideration of rs. 50,000/- but in the sale deed, the price was shown as Rs. 2,55,000/ -. (C) "kar schedule property is situated at the adjacent north of "kha" schedule property. The pre-emptor had a dwelling house on "ka" schedule property and he was residing there and happened to be an adjoining land owner of "kha" schedule property. A fictitious deed/sham transaction had been made in respect of 108 square feet land of "kha" schedule property in the name of one Asish Kumar Dutta, a son of Biswanath Dutta. In fact, asish Kr. Dutta had never purchased any portion of the suit plot for a valuable consideration from Asim Dalai, the vendor of Biswanath Dutta. In order to resist pre-emption, the aforesaid fake transaction had been made.
( 3 ) THE aforesaid application was contested by the present petitioners by filing written objection denying the material application made in the application for pre-emption and the defence taken by the petitioners may be summarised thus: (A) Aswini Kr. Dalai was the original owner and occupier of "kha" schedule property comprising in R. S. Plot No. 690, L. R. Plot No. 1286 measuring 0. 052 acre of land. While he was in possession of the aforesaid property, aswini Dalai died leaving behind his two sons namely, Asim Kumar dalai and Asesh Kr. Dalai and one daughter Anita Basak and his wife karunamoyee Dalai. The aforesaid heirs of Aswini Dalai had one-fourth share in "kha" schedule property. (B) Thereafter, those heirs of Aswini Dalai transferred the suit property to biswanath Dutta in respect of 0. 048 acres of plot No. 690 and 0. 008 acres in plot No. 691 for a valuable consideration of Rs. 4,80,000/- on the strength of a registered Kobala dated 28th January, 1999. (C) Thereafter, on 29th January, 1999 Asim Kr. Dalai and others also transferred 0. 00025 acres of land to Asish Kr. Dutta on the strength of a registered Kobala for a valuable consideration which was mentioned in red colour of the deed. (D) Subsequently, on 11th December, 2000 Biswanath Dutta transferred some portion of the "kha" schedule property measuri
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.