KRISHNA DASS AGARWAL versus KANHAIYALAL

KRISHNA DASS AGARWAL versus KANHAIYALAL

The right of pre-emption must subsist at the time of the final and operative decree, including appellate decrees; as the Act was repealed during pendency of appeal, the plaintiff's right was not enforceable. Section 10 of the M.P. General Clauses Act does not save inchoate rights such as pre-emption after repeal.

Parties
Appellant: Krishna Dass Agarwal; Respondent: Kanhaiyalal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 July 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Pre Emption, Statutory Interpretation, Repeal of Statute
Property Law Pre Emption Statutory Interpretation Repeal of Statute

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Krishna Dass Agarwal

Appellant

Kanhaiyalal

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the right of pre-emption subsisted at the time of the decree after repeal of the Gwalior Pre-Emption Act during the pendency of appeal
  2. 2 Interpretation of the expression 'at the time of decree' under Section 23 of Gwalior Pre-Emption Act
  3. 3 Applicability of Section 10 of the Madhya Pradesh General Clauses Act to a right of pre-emption

Ratio Decidendi

The right of pre-emption must subsist at the time of the final and operative decree, including appellate decrees; as the Act was repealed during pendency of appeal, the plaintiff's right was not enforceable. Section 10 of the M.P. General Clauses Act does not save inchoate rights such as pre-emption after repeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs