IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA-217-1992 (O&M)

Date of pronouncement: 27.02.2025 Vikram Singh ...Appellant(s)

Vs.

Waryam Singh & Another ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate with Mr. Mohit Potalia, Advocate for respondent No.1.

***

NIDHI GUPTA, J.

The defendant No.1 is in second appeal before this Court against the concurrent judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below; whereby the suit of the respondent no.1/ plaintiff for recovery of possession by way of pre-emption of suit land, was partly decreed by the learned Senior Sub-Judge, Ambala vide judgment and decree dated 14.12.1990; and the appeal filed by the appellant/defendant No.1 thereagainst has been dismissed by learned Additional District Judge, Ambala vide impugned judgment and decree dated 09.01.1992.

2. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their status before the learned trial Court i.e. the appellant shall be referred to as the ‘defendant no.1’; and the contesting respondent no.1 shall be referred to as ‘the plaintiff’. Respondent no.2 herein is the defendant no.2 who was directed to not be served by this Court vide order dated

25.9.1997. Vide order dated 30.01.1992 execution of the judgment and decree dated 09.01.1992 was stayed by this Court till further orders. It has further been stated by learned counsel for the defendant No.1 that the defendant no.1 is presently in possession of the suit property.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the defendant No.2 sold her half share in the suit land measuring 81 kanals (comprising in 4 khewat no. 250 – 59 kanals; khewat no. 251 – 16 kanals; khewat no. 306 – 1K 4M; and khewat no. 307 – 4K 16M), to defendant No.1 for Rs.40,000/- through registered Sale Deed dated 18.02.1988/Ex.P1. The said sale deed shows that defendant No.2 sold the land falling in khewat Nos.250, 251, 306 and 307 without any notice to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed that he has superior right to pre-empt the sale being a co-sharer in 2 khewat nos. 250 and 307 to the extent of 20 kanals 7 Marlas. Hence the present suit was filed by the plaintiff on

23.4.1988by way of pre-emption of agricultural land.

4. Upon notice, the defendant No.1/appellant herein appeared and resisted the suit by filing written statement dated 12.11.1988in which the co-sharership of the plaintiff was denied and it was further pleaded that suit is barred in partial preemption. It was also pleaded that the suit land was bought for valuable consideration; that the suit is time-barred etc. Defendant No.2 was proceeded against ex parte before the learned trial court vide order dated 05.09.1988. The plaintiff filed replication dated 21.11.1988 reasserting the averments made in the plaint.

5. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed: -

“1. Whether the plaintiff has superior right of pre-emption?

OPP

2. Whether the sale price was fixed in good faith and actually paid? OPP

3. If issue no.2 is not proved, what was the market value of the suit land at the time of sale? OPP

4. Whether the suit is not maintainable as alleged? OPD 5. Whether the suit is bad for partial pre-emption? OPD

6. Whether the plaintiff has not deposited the 1/5^th pre-

emption money in time? OPD

7. Whether the suit is time barred? OPD

8. Whether the vendee defendant is entitled to purchase of stamp registration charges and if so to what amount? OPD

9. Whether the plaintiff has waived his right to pre-emption as alleged? OPD

10. Whether the plaintiff is estopped by his own act and conduct from filing the present suit? OPD

11. Relief.”

6. The plaintiff placed on record Ex. P-1 (copy of sale deed) and Ex. P-2 (copy of Jamabandi); whereas the appellant as defendant no.1 placed on record Jamabandi for the year 1983-84/Ex. D-4 to demonstrate that the plaintiff was not a co-sharer in Khewat Nos. 251 and 306; and as per the sale deed Ex.P-1, the appellant had pur