Preemption rights require strict adherence to statutory deposit requirements; failure to comply undermines legal assertion of ownership or co-sharership.

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order dated 15.12.2017 passed by the learned District Judge, Kandi, Murshidabad in Miscellaneous appeal No. 9 of 2017, reversing the judgment and order dated 27.01.2017 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), 2nd court Kandi, Murshidabad in Misc. Case No(L.R) 48 of 2010, present Application has been preferred by the petitioner.

2. Opposite parties herein as preemptors filed an application under Sections 8 & 9 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 (Herein after called as Act of 1955) against the petitioner herein being aforesaid Misc case no 48 of 2010. In the said application the Petitioners /opposite parties herein contended that the suit property originally belonged to one Amalesh Ghosh, since deceased. Thereafter the petitioner as well as the husband and the father of the vendors of the opposite parties namely Shymal Halder purchased the property by separate registered sale deeds. The “ka” schedule property was purchased by Shyamal Halder and “kha” schedule property by petitioner no. 1 and kha 1 schedule property was purchased by petitioner no. 2 and 3. It is further contended that petitioner no. 1 and 3 are residing on the north west corner of plot no. 1257 by specific demarcation but the plot no. 1095 is ejmali property and it has not been partitioned by metes and bounds. It is further contended that Shymal Halder filed a partition suit being T.S. no. 58 of 2004. After the death of Shyamal Halder his legal heirs transferred “ka” schedule property to the petitioner and before such transfer no notice was served upon the petitioners who claimed themselves as co- sharers. It is further alleged in the said application that the actual consideration amount of the case schedule property is Rs. 1,00,000/- but only to deprive the petitioners from their pre-emption right, the consideration amount has been written on the deed as 5,00,000/-. In the above backdrop petitioners filed said application seeking preemption on the ground of co-sharer ship as well as contiguous ownership of the boundary of the case schedule property, on depositing Rs. 1,00,000/- along with 10% levy. Thereafter petitioner deposited entire consideration money with 10% levy amount interms of order of the court.

3. The petitioner contested the said application for preemption by filing written objection and the specific case of the petitioner is that the preemptors are not the co-sharers nor the contagious owners in respect of the suit property. In fact Shyamal Halder, purchased the suit property with specific sketch map, and practically the property of original owner Amlesh, was purchased by different persons through different deeds along with different sketch maps. The learned Trial Court by its order no. 4