Prasanta Kumar Deka, J.

1. Heard Mr. S. Biswas, learned counsel, appearing for the Plaintiff appellant. Also heard Mr. P.K. Deka, learned counsel, appearing for the defendants/respondents. The present appellant as the plaintiff in T.S. No. 104/2006 in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hailakandi filed the suit against the defendants/respondents for a decree for direction to execute a registered sale Deed of the suit land after receiving Rs. 30,000.00 (Rupees thirty thousand) only for delivery of khas possession of the same by invoking his right for pre-emption and in addition to that for return of Rs. 10,000.00 (Rupees ten thousand) only to the plaintiff/appellant and for cost of the suit. It is the case of the plaintiff/appellant that the defendant/respondent No. 1 is his father and during childhood the father of the plaintiff appellant divorced his mother following which he was brought up by his maternal uncle. Vide registered sale Deed No. 632 dated 28.6.02, the defendant/respondent No. 1 sold 13 Khatas of land in favour of the plaintiff/appellant on consideration and delivered khas possession of the said land.

2. By way of another sale Deed bearing No. 958 dated 19.7.2001 the plaintiff/appellant purchased 18 Khatas 3 Chataks of land from one Abdul Mannan whereupon he constructed his residential house and since then residing thereon. The land of the defendant/respondent No. 1 is situated on the adjacent northern side of the homestead land of the plaintiff/appellant. A plot of land measuring 1 Bigha 4 Khatas 4 Chataks was supposed to be sold by the defendant/respondent No. 1 to the plaintiff/appellant and accepted a sum of Rs. 10,000.00 as advance sale consideration and promised to transfer the same after execution of a valid registered sale Deed obtaining NOC from the competent authority.

3. The defendant/respondent No. 1 delayed in execution of the registration of the sale deed on various pretexts. On 17.7.2005, the defendants/respondents started measuring the suit land standing on the northern side of the house of the plaintiff/appellant. On enquiry he could come to know that his father, defendant/respondent No. 1 sold the land to the defendant respondent Nos. 2 to 6. Observing the requisite formalities for invoking the right of pre-emption under the Mohammedan Law, the plaintiff/appellant demanded the defendants/respondents including his father to sell the land to him after returning the sale consideration to the defendant/respondent Nos. 2 to 6. He also demanded to transfer the land to the defendant/respondent Nos. 2 to 6 which was not complied with. Accordingly the suit was filed with the reliefs as mentioned hereinabove.

4. The defendants/respondents No. 1 to 6 filed their joint written statement thereby denying the contention of the appellant/plaintiff. The defendant/respondent No. 1 divorced the mother of the plaintiff/appellant and thereafter the mother of the plaintiff/appellant married to else. The defendant/respondent No. 1 suffered from diseases and as he was financially weak, no help was forthcoming from the plaintiff/appellant. The defendant No. 1, being unable to cultivate the landed properties, the defendant/respondent Nos. 2 to 6 were allowed to cultivate the land about 10 years back as Bhagidar and they become non-evictable tenants under him. The defendant/respondent No. 1 for his personal necessity sold the suit land on 20.4.2005 at a consideration of Rs. 30,000.00 (Rupees thirty thousand) only to the defendant/respondent No. 2 to 6. The possession was delivered to them. Accordingly, the defendants/respondents' side prayed for dismissal of the suit.

5. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues were framed:

"(1) Whether the suit is maintainable and its present form?

(2) Whether the plaintiff has the right to exercise the pre-emption (shufaa)?

(3) What reliefs the plaintiff is entitled to?"

6. The learned trial court after considering the evidence on record decided that the