ORDER :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

I.A. No. 7912 of 2023 in LPA No. 269 of 2022

The appellants have filed this interlocutory application under section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT seeking condonation of delay of 17 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal.

2. In view of the statements made in this interlocutory application, the delay of 17 days in filing this Appeal is condoned.

3. I.A. No. 7912 of 2023 is, accordingly, allowed.

I.A. No. 7229 of 2023 in LPA No. 269 of 2022

I.A. No.7230 of 2023 in LPA No. 271 of 2022

4. The appellants have filed I.A. No. 7229 of 2023 in LPA No. 269 of 2022 and I.A. No.7230 of 2023 in LPA No.271 of 2022 for deletion of the name of appellant no.1, namely, Kamla Devi from Memo of Appeals who died on 04th October 2022 leaving behind legal heirs who are already on record as appellant nos.2 to 5 in these Appeals.

5. Accordingly, I.A. No. 7229 of 2023 in LPA No. 269 of 2022 and I.A. No.7230 of 2023 in LPA No.271 of 2022 are allowed.

LPA No. 269 of 2022 and LPA No. 271 of 2022

6. Pre-emption Case No. 6 of 2006-07 was instituted by Manbahal Singh under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 against sale and registration of a piece of land comprised in Plot Nos. 1434, 1436, 1428 and 1390 in Khata No. 55 of Mouza Bare, total area measuring about 0.92 acres, by Laxmi Devi by a registered deed dated 27th March 2006 in favor of Saroj Munda, Karwan Munda and Arun Munda sons of Vishwanth Munda of village Bare within Budhmu PS within the district of Ranchi for a consideration amount of Rs.80,500/-. Manbahal Singh who was the husband of Kamla Devi and father of Nawal Nath Singh, Laxmi Nath Singh, Balmukund Singh and Satendra Nath Singh, all appellants before us, claimed himself a co-sharer of the khatiyani raiyat and also an adjoining raiyat. The case set up by him in brief was that Laxmi Devi wife of Ram Narayan Yadav had purchased 1.84 acres land through sale letter no. 12397 dated 29th December 1992 from Nirmala Devi and Khileshwari Devi, and Laxmi Devi suppressing the aforesaid fact executed a sale-deed dated 27th March 2006 in favor of opposite party nos. 1 to 3, ignoring his request and claim being an adjoining raiyat.

7. The Deputy Collector Land Reforms in his order dated 31st Octoer 2011 passed in Pre-emption Case No. 06 of 2006-07 recorded a finding that Manbahala Singh was a khatiyani raiyat and co-sharer of Nirmala Devi. On the other hand, Saroj Munda, Karwan Munda and Arun Munda were held not an adjoining raiyat or co-sharers of the seller and, accordingly, the application under section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act was allowed and a direction was issued to the seller Laxmi Devi and the buyers, namely, Saroj Munda, Karwan Munda and Arun Munda to execute a sale-deed within one month in favor of Manbahal Singh. However, this order of the Deputy Collector Land Reforms was set aside by an order dated 15th June 2012 passed by the Additional Collector at Ranchi. In the order dated 15th June 2012, there is a reference about sale of lands in Khata No. 55 on 26th May 1982, 29th June 1982 and 8th October 1983 in favor of Laxmi Devi. There is also a mention about Title Suit No. 59 of 1998. The Additional Collector has further taken note of a fact that the witnesses did not claim that Saroj Munda is not an adjoining raiyat.

8. The Additional Member of the Board of Revenue recorded in his order dated 9th April 2014 that the pre-emptor is not an adjoining raiyat of the lands transferred by Laxmi Devi through sale-deed date