CHANAN SINGH & ANOTHER versus JAI KAUR

CHANAN SINGH & ANOTHER versus JAI KAUR

The 1964 Amendment to s. 15(2)(b) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act is clarificatory and must be given retrospective operation. The respondent was entitled to pre-emption even before the amendment; any doubts were removed by the Act which must be applied retrospectively.

Parties
Appellant: Chanan Singh & Another; Respondent: Jai Kaur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 August 1969
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Decree of the Punjab High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 91 of 1961
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Pre Emption, Interpretation of Statute, Retrospective Operation of Amendments
Property Law Pre Emption Interpretation of Statute Retrospective Operation of Amendments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chanan Singh & Another

Appellant

Jai Kaur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Decree of the Punjab High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 91 of 1961

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1964 Amendment to s. 15(2)(b) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1913, operates retrospectively to affect pending proceedings
  2. 2 Whether a stepchild of the vendor's husband has a right of pre-emption under s. 15(2)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The 1964 Amendment to s. 15(2)(b) of the Punjab Pre-emption Act is clarificatory and must be given retrospective operation. The respondent was entitled to pre-emption even before the amendment; any doubts were removed by the Act which must be applied retrospectively.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Suit for possession by pre-emption is decreed in favour of the respondent. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.