MANSU versus SHADI RAM

MANSU versus SHADI RAM

After Haryana Amendment Act 10 of 1995, pre-emption right survives only in favour of tenant; co-sharer's superior right withdrawn. The appellant's continuous possession as tenant entitles him to pre-emption.

Parties
Appellant: Mansu; Respondent: Shadiram
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 February 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Decision Dated 5.4.83 in C.r.s.a. No. 1860 of 1974
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment and order of High Court set aside; decree of lower appellate and trial court restored.
Legal Topics
Pre Emption, Tenancy, Statutory Amendment
Property Law Pre Emption Tenancy Statutory Amendment

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

Parties

Mansu

Appellant

Shadiram

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab & Haryana High Court Decision Dated 5.4.83 in C.r.s.a. No. 1860 of 1974

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant-tenant has a right of pre-emption to the suit property under the Punjab Pre-emption Act as applicable to Haryana after statutory amendments.
  2. 2 Whether the co-sharer's superior right of pre-emption survives after Haryana Amendment Act 10 of 1995.

Ratio Decidendi

After Haryana Amendment Act 10 of 1995, pre-emption right survives only in favour of tenant; co-sharer's superior right withdrawn. The appellant's continuous possession as tenant entitles him to pre-emption.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment and order of High Court set aside; decree of lower appellate and trial court restored.

Orders

  • No order as to costs.
  • Appellant to deposit pre-emption money within sixty days; failing which suit and appeal stand dismissed.