The court affirmed the necessity of full deposit of sale consideration for preemption claims, establishing that non-compliance invalidates such rights.

Hearing concluded on : 13.08.2025 Judgment on : 03.09.2025 Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.:

1. The civil revision has been preferred against order No. 123 dated 6^th September, 2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division at Kakdwip in Misc. Pre-emption Case No. 27 of 2008.

2. Vide the order under challenge, the trial Court held as follows:-

“……..From the reading of the instant paragraph of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India it is abundantly clear to the Court that the petitioner had to deposit the entire sale consideration along with 10% interest upon the same within the time as stipulated under Section 8 (1) of West Bengal Land Reforms Act , 1955. Here in the said order Supreme Court has not made it mandatory that the entire amount shall be deposited at the time of filing of the case rather Supreme Court is very clear in its observation that unless the entire amount had been deposited before the Court, the right of preemption would not be triggered off & here in the instant case the petitioner has deposited the entire consideration amount with interest, therefore, this Court finds no merit in the submission of the OP as alleged in the non- maintainability petition, that Supreme Court had ordered in the aforesaid judgment that prior to filing of the instant misc. case the petitioner had to deposit the entire consideration amount along with 10% levy upon the same, hence, this Court is inclined to hold that the instant misc. preemption case is maintainable at this stage on contest.

Hence, it is ORDERED that the instant Misc. Preemption Case being no. 27 of 2008 be the same is declared to be maintainable at this stage on contest.

The non-maintainable petition as filed by the OP on

03.09.2024 is rejected on contest.

Fix 26.11.2024 for evidence of PW1 positively, i/d n/o.

D & C by me. Sd/-

Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Kakdwip Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), South 24-Parganas Kakdwip, South 24-Parganas

3. Being aggrieved the opposite party has preferred the civil revision on the ground that the opposite parties no. 1 and 2 admitted that the sale deed was executed upon payment of consideration money of Rs. 40,000/- on 31^st January, 2001 amongst other statement. The present petitioner as well as the proforma opposite party have filed their respective objections to the said application.

4. The said application was filed on 19th April, 2001 by depositing Rs.

20,000/- along with 10% levy on the said deposit being Rs. 2,000/- being the total amount of Rs. 22,000/- on the date of filing. By an order dated 19^th April, 2001, the learned Court recorded about the deposit of Rs. 22,000/- and after recording the same, directed the office of the learned Court to issue notice upon the opposite parties by registered post as well as through Court Bailiff. Subsequently, an application for injunction was moved on 23^rd April, 2001, which was considered by the learned Court but was rejected by Order No. 3 dated 23^rd April, 2001. By order No. 8 dated 21^st May, 2001, the learned Court recorded that the petitioner has deposited another sum of Rs. 22,000/- and the deposit receipts were taken on record.

5. The total consideration amount of the sale was Rs.40,000/-. It is the contention of the petitioner that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court the total amount of consideration money with the further sum with 10% levy on the said deposit was to be made as a one time deposit and as the opposite party herein had not done so, he is not entitled to claim preemption as prayed for.

6. It is further stated that the finding of the learned trial Judge