In the Supreme Court of Bangladesh High Court Division

(Civil Revisional Jurisdiction)

Present:

Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdul Hafiz

CIVIL REVISION NO. 4821 OF 2006 Mohammad Altaf Hossain being dead his

legal heirs:

Md. Shaha Alam Howlader and others

Purchaser Pre-emptee-Respondent-Petitioners

Versus

Mohammad Jahangir Khan Pre-emptor-Appellant-Opposite Party

Pryalal Mistry and others Opposite Parties

Mr. Md. Salim Reja Chowdhury, Advocate for the Pre-emptee-Respondent-Petitioners

Mr. Debdas Samaddar, Advocate

for the Pre-emptor-Appellant-Opposite Party

Judgment on 16.6.2022 This Rule was issued calling upon the opposite party No. 1

to show cause as to why the impugned Judgment and Order dated 21.6.2006 passed by the learned Joint District Judge, First Court, Barishal in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 7 of 2002 allowing the appeal and thereby reversing those dated 22.11.2001 passed by the learned Senior Assistant Judge, Barisal Sadar in Miscellaneous Case No. 67 of 1994 under Section 96 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 disallowing the case should not be set aside

and/or such other or further order or orders passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper.

The opposite party No. 1 as pre-emptor filed Miscellaneous Case No. 67 1994 before the Court of learned Senior Assistant Judge, Barishal Sadar under Section 96 of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, 1950 for pre-emption.

The Case of the pre-emptor, in short, is that S.A. Khatian No. 1026 of Mouza Kawarchar under Police Station Kotwali of District Barishal was recorded in the name of Ramchandra Adhikari and others. Recorded tenant Sonai Bewa alias Sona Laxmi Gharami sold his 20 decimals of land on 24.8.1956 in- favour of opposite party No. 7 Hazera Khatun and Apater Uddin. Rest 1.01 acres of land has been sold by said Sonai Bewa and her son Haralal Gharami on 21.9.1956 in favour of Harendranath and that Harendranath died leaving 3 sons namely Hironmoy, Sanjay and Hiralal Mazumder. On 25.4.1992 Hiralal sold his share in favour of the pre-emptor. Thus the pre-emptor is a co-sharer in the case jote by purchase. The opposite party Nos. 2-3 are co-sharers in the case jote by inheritance and purchase. Opposite Party No. 1

3

is not a co-sharer in any way. Now it is found that the 1.40 4 acres

of land has been transferred on 15.4.1994 in favour of purchaser- pre-emptee including .83 acres of land from the said S.A. Khatian. The purchaser-pre-emptee is not a co-sharer in S.A. Khatian No. 550 described in the disputed Kabola. The pre-emptor is a co- sharer in S.A. Khatian No. 1026 and prays for pre-emption in S.A. Khatian No. 1026 and prays for pre-emption in respect of .83 acres of land of that Khatian. The pre-emptor is entitled to get it as pre- emption. The pre-emptor would have purchase it if he knew it. The purchaser-pre-emptee-opposite party No. 1 does not possess the case land and the pre-emptor knew it for the first time only on 01.9.1994 from Kallyan Adhikari and finally knew on 08.9.1994 when he obtained the certified copy and filed the present case.

The purchaser-pre-emptee contested the case by filing a written objection; contended that the case is not maintainable in its present from, the case is barred by limitation and bad for defect of parties and also denied all material allegations made in the application. The main contention of the purchaser-pre-emptee is that the vendor-pre-emptee becomes owner of the case land by purchase and later on he proposed to sell it and offered it also to the pre-emptor and all the co-sharers but they denied to purchase it at proper price then the purchaser-pre-emptee agreed to purchase it as contiguous land owner within the knowledge of the pre-emptor and other co-sharers by the disputed Kabola and got possession and erected living house, kitchen, cowshed at a cost of Taka

25,000/- over Plot No. 2203 and planted there at a further cost of

Taka 25,000/-. The pre-emptor is not a cultivator, he is a 1st Class

Contractor. The cas