SYED ALI vs ABDUL KHALIQ
The petitioner sought special leave to appeal against the concurrent judgments of the lower courts and the High Court which granted pre-emption of agricultural land to the respondent co-sharer tenant. The core legal question was whether the pre-emption application was barred by limitation on the ground that the pre-emptor had prior knowledge of the transfer by virtue of being an attesting witness to the registered kobala, despite the absence of statutory notice under Section 89 of the East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act. The Supreme Court held that under Section 96 of the said Act, a co-sharer tenant is entitled to claim pre-emption within four months of the service of notice under Section 89, or within four months of the date of knowledge of the transfer if no such notice has been served. The Court laid down the principle that the statutory limitation period of four months for filing a pre-emption application runs from the date of receipt of the obligatory notice under Section 89, and the mere attestation of the transfer deed does not alter the statutory limitation period when the mandatory notice has not been served.
- Within what period must a co-sharer tenant claim pre-emption under the East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act?
- Does the knowledge of a transfer derived from being an attesting witness to a kobala start the limitation period for pre-emption when no notice under Section 89 has been served?
- Section 89, East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act
- Section 96, East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act
1. M. R. KHAN, J.-The petitioner purchased an agricultural land by a registered kobala, dated the 20th February 1964, for a consideration of Rs. 500. The respondent, a co-sharer tenant applied for pre- emption of that land within four months of the date of receipt of the notice of the transfer: It was alleged before the trial Court on behalf of the transferee that the application or pre-emption was time-barred inasmuch as the pre-emptor had knowledge of the transfer from the date of transfer as he was an attesting witness to the kobala by which the transfer was made. The trial Court overruled the objection with regard to limitation and granted pre-emption. The order granting pre- emption was maintained by the appellate Court and also by the High Court. The petitioner now seeks special leave to appeal from the High Court's judgment maintaining the order of pre- emption.
2. According to section 96 of the East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act, a co-sharer tenant may claim pre-emption within four months of the service of the notice given under section 89 of the said Act. Section 96 further provides that if no notice has been served under section 89, the pre-emption may be claimed within four months of the date of the knowledge of the transfer. The service of notice of a transfer is obligatory under section 89 and section 96 gives a co-sharer tenant a statutory right to seek pre-emption within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such notice. In the instant case, the pre-emption was claimed within the said statutory period of four months. The Courts below were, therefore, right in holding that application for pre-emption was within time.
3. The petition is dismissed.