Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
PANKAJ JAIN
Banwari (since deceased) – Appellant
Versus
Jai Bhagwan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ JAIN, J.
1. Present appeal is directed against judgment and decree passed by District Judge, Gurgaon dated 24.03.1994 affirming the judgment and decree passed by Sub Judge IInd Class, Gurgaon (now Gurugram) whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff has been partly decreed.
2. The issue relates to pre-empting the sale deed dated 05.09.1988 with respect to suit land as detailed out in the plaint. The suit land is comprised of two different khatonis i.e. Khatoni No.727 and 728. In khatoni No.727 plaintiff was the exclusive tenant in possession in land bearing Killa No.79/10 admeasuring 2 K 14 M. In the rest of the land plaintiff was co-tenant along with Banwari S/o Kalu, the present appellant. Once the sale deed was executed by the land owner, both the tenants exercised their superior right to pre-empt the sale deed being tenant over the suit property. Banwari instituted plaint on 17.05.1989 Ex. D-1. The suit was decreed on 01.05.1989. The present suit was instituted on 26.05.1989. The same was decided on 17.11.1992. The Courts below have partly decreed the suit filed by the plaintiffs with respect to Killa No.10 (2-14) Rect. No.79 and have also decreed the suit with resp
A tenant must demonstrate continuous entitlement to pre-empt a sale on specific key dates; failure to do so invalidates the claim.
A claimant of tenancy must prove a contractual obligation to pay rent; mere possession does not confer tenancy rights.
The right of pre-emption is not valid for partial possession when the claimant is a co-sharer in only part of the land sold.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
