D.K.Mahajan, J.

1. This appeal was posted for hearing before me on the 7th of November, 1966: and by my order of that date, I directed that this appeal be better heard by a Division Bench, in view of the importance of the question involved.

2. The only question, that requires determination in this appeal, is -- Whether the phrase brother in Section 15(1)(a) secondly of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 includes a step-brother. It is common ground between the parties that if the phrase brother does not include a step-brother, the appeal must succeed and the suit for pre-emption, which has been filed by the step-brother of the vendor, must fail. But if the expression brother includes a step-brother, the decision of the trial Court must stay and the appeal will fail.

3. No other question, than the one indicated above, arises for determination; and it is not necessary to set out the facts of the case.

4. In order to appreciate the contentions of the learned counsel for the parties, it will be proper to set out the provisions of Section 15 of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913 (Punjab Act I of 1913) as well as the provisions of that very Section in the Punjab Pre-emption Act (Punja