Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated December 19, 1956, of the Patna High Court in Appeal from the Appellate Decree No.
On February 9, 1946, the documents were companyied in the Registrars books and thereupon the registration became companyplete as provided in B. 61 of the Registration Act.
On February 7, 1946, the receipt granted by the Registration Office to the Pandeys was made over by them to the respondent purchaser who there upon paid the balance of the price as stipulated in the deed.
632 of 1949.
The deed was presented at the registration office for registration by the Pandeys on the day it was executed and it was left with the Registrar in the Registration Office for the necessary entries and companyies being made, a receipt being given to the Pandeys.
P. Varma, for respondent No.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The deed also recited that the Pandeys had received Rs.
By the word claimant, the respondent purchaser was referred to.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General of India and R. C. Prasad, for the appellants.
The appellants filed their suit for preemption on September 9, 1946.
The suit was decreed by the trial companyrt and this decision was maintained by the first Appellate Court.
On February 2, 1946, the appellants on companying to hear of the execution of the deed of sale made the talab imowasibat.
The companysideration mentioned in the deed was Rs.
On January 31, 1946, the Pandeys executed a deed of sale in favour of the respondent purchaser in respect of their aforesaid house.
The respondent purchaser thereafter received the deed of sale from the Registrars Office on February 13, 1946.
The appellants had their residential house companytiguous to the house owned by certain persons whom we may call Pandeys.
104 of 1959.
The appellants claim a right of are emption on account of this sale.
was delivered by Sarkar, J. The judgment of Das Gupta and Ayyangar, JJ.,
The Judgment of Sinha, C. J., Sarkar and Mudholkar, JJ.,
April 27.
S. Bindra and D. Gupta, for Intervener.
