Back
2016 Supreme(Cal) 714
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Ashok Kumar Dasadhikari, J.
Nasiruddin Sk. @ Nasiruddin Hafij & Ors - Petitioners
Versus
Mahasin Ali Khan - Opposite party
C.O. No. 3919 of 2012
Decided On : 07-01-2016
For the Petitioners: Usof Ali Dewan, Arup Sarkar
For the Opposite party : Arindam Chattopadhyay, Niranjan Kr. Sinha
The provision under Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, is applicable to Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, and two brothers who are jointly owners and raiyat of the adjoining land are entitled to maintain an application for pre-emption.
Headnote:
PRE-EMPTION - WEST BENGAL LAND REFORMS ACT, 1955 - SECTION 8 - INTERPRETATION - APPLICABILITY TO JOINT OWNERS - Whether two brothers who are jointly owners and raiyat can maintain an application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955?
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners, two brothers, filed a pre-emption application under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, claiming the right to purchase a plot of land adjoining their own. The opposite parties, who had purchased the land, contested the application, arguing that the petitioners were not entitled to pre-emption because they were not the sole owners of the adjoining land. The Trial Court allowed the pre-emption application, but the Appellate Court reversed the decision, holding that the petitioners could not maintain the application because they were two brothers and not a single purchaser. The petitioners challenged the Appellate Court's order in the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court held that the Appellate Court's interpretation of Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, was erroneous and frustrated the object of the legislation. The Court held that the provision under Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which lays down that words in the singular shall include the plural and vice versa, was applicable in the present context, and that the petitioners, being joint owners and raiyat of the adjoining land, were entitled to maintain the pre-emption application.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners, being two brothers who are jointly owners and raiyat, can maintain an application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955? 2. Whether the provision under Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, is applicable in the present context?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The object of Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, is to secure consolidation of a plot of land by giving right of pre-emption to a bargadar or to a co-sharer or raiyat in the plot of land or to any raiyat possessing land adjoining such plot of land to prevent the fragmentation of plot of land. 2. The provision under Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which lays down that words in the singular shall include the plural and vice versa, is applicable in the present context, and the petitioners, being joint owners and raiyat of the adjoining land, are entitled to maintain the pre-emption application.
Final Decision: The High Court allowed the revisional application, set aside the order of the Appellate Court, and restored the order of the Trial Court allowing the pre-emption application.
Ashok Kumar Dasadhikari, J.
Order impugned dated 27th July, 2012 passed by the District Judge, Jangipur, Murshidabad, in Misc. Appeal No.14 of 2009 allowing the appeal there by reversing the order of the learned Trial Court which has allowed the preemption application in favour of the both petitioners is under challenge in this revisional application.
2. Petitioners filed a Misc. Case No. 52 of 1990 against the opposite parties in the Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court Jangipur under Section 8 of the West Bengal land Reforms Act praying for pre-emption. Petitioners purchased .18 acre of land of plot no. 136 of Mouza-Ratanpur on 10th May, 1979. The opposite parties purchased .0625 acre of land of plot no. 133 of Mouza-Ratanpur by a registered deed dated 6th January, 1986 which was registered on 3rd April, 1990. Petitioners are the adjoining land holders of plot no. 133. Petitioners are being two brothers claimed pre-emption on the ground of vicinity by depositing the consideration amount along with 10% of the amount as per the requirement under the relevant section.
3. Opposite parties contested the Misc. Case No. 52 of 1990 by filing a written objection contending that the opposite parties got no interest in plot no. 136 as the vendors of the deed dated 10th May, 1979 and had no title in the said plot. Learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court allowed the misc. case under section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act after consideration of all evidence on record.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court, Jangipur, dated 7th May, 2003, misc. appeal was preferred by the opposite parties on the ground that the learned Judge had held that the petitioners were not the owners of plot no. 136 and not the adjoining land holders of plot no.133. It was also contended by the opposite party that the learned Judge should not have placed reliance on the documents which were not legally proved nor admissible in evidence.
5. The appeal which was numbered as Misc. Appeal No. 4 of 2005 was heard by the Second Fast Track Court of the Additional District Judge, Jangipur, Murshidabad, and disposed of on 30th January, 2006. The learned Judge set aside the order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, 2nd Court, Jangipur, and sent it for rehearing on remand.
6. The learned Judge, Second Fast Track Court of the Additional District Judge, Jangipur, Murshidabad, was of the view that the learned Trial Court passed an order without any whisper about the deed of 6th January, 1986. Learned Judge was also of the view that the deed of transfer dated 6th January, 1986 in favour of the opposite parties in respect of plot no. 133 of Mouza Ratanpur is the most important document for proper adjudication of the case. In absence of the aforementioned document, it could not be held that the appellant/opposite party purchased 0.625 acre of land in plot no. 133 of Mouza Ratanpur on 6th January, 1986 and the registration was completed on 3rd April, 1990. However, the learned Trial Court once again heard the matter and allowed pre-emption in favour of the petitioners/respondents.
7. Against that opposite party preferred an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Jangipur, Murshidabad and as it appears, the learned Additional District Judge did not consider the arguments but he himself interpreted Section 8 of the W.B.L.R. Act holding that since the petitioners being the two brothers jointly purchased plot no. 136, according to the provisions under Section 8 of the said Act, both of them cannot maintain the application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the W.B.L.R. Act. That was the learned Judges own point which was neither argued by the petitioners nor by the opposite party.
8. Learned Judge was pleased to hold that the legislative intention is clear from the definition of the word "raiyat" in Section 2(10) of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act and, according t
