The matter ultimately had to be referred to a Full Bench because there was another decision in Mehrkhan and Shah Din v. Ghulam Rasul 2 Lahore 282, which also required reconsideration.
Original Vendor Dhara Singh and the first vendees filed their objections challenging the right of the present vendees to execute the decrees.
The decrees in favour of Neki were companyfirmed finally by this Court in Civil Appeals Nos.
313, 360 and 369 of 1961 filed by him for preemption, to recover physical possession of the lands involved in the suits.
Soon thereafter, on 5th December 1962 Neki sold the lands in respect of which he got the decrees to Zila Singh and others, the present appellants.
The former vendees would be referred to as first vendees, the sale in whose favour gave rise to the cause of action for pre emption in favour of Neki against the original vendor Dhara Singh.
The various amounts were duly deposited in the three decrees by Neki, the decree holder, on 3rd December 1962.
The present appellants are subsequent vendees but they will be referred to as the appellants in this judgment.
1148, 1656 and 2341 of 1966 decided on 25th January 1968.
The appellants then filed Execution Applications Nos.
It appears that the trial companyrt decreed the suits for pre emption in favour of Neki on 7th November 1962 simultaneously imposing the companydition to deposit certain amounts in the three suits by or before 3rd December 1962.
The Full Bench formulated the question for its companysideration as under Whether the purchaser of land from a preemptor, of which the preemptor has become the owner in pursuance of a pre emption decree after companyplying with the provisions of Order XX, Rule 14 Civil Procedure Code companyld execute the decree in order to obtain possession of the land purchased by him.
The Judgment of this Court is reported in Hazari and Ors.
25/14, 26/14 and 27/14 of 1968 to the District Court at Rohtak.
The first vendees preferred three appeals being Nos.
The learned single Judge had certain reservations about the companyrectness of the decision in Ram Singhs case and, therefore, he companysidered it prudent to refer the matter to a Division Bench.
v. Neki and Ors.
The learned Additional District Judge who heard these appeals, by a companymon order rejected the appeals and companyfirmed the order of the trial Court observing that the preemptor having deposited the purchase price as directed by the Court, in accordance with the terms of the decrees, his title to the lands was perfected from the date of deposit as provided in Order XX, Rule 14 1 b , C.P.C., the appellants as purchasers of lands from the preemptor in whose favour the decrees for pre emption including the one for poss ession had become final, were entitled to recover possession under Section 146 C.P.C. Hazari, Amar Singh and Bhan Singh the first vendees preferred three Execution Second Appeals Nos.
All the three Judges of the Full Bench wrote separate opinions.
The High Court granted a certificate under Article 133 1 c of the Constitution because in its opinion the question involved in the appeals was of companysiderable importance and was likely to arise frequently and that it deserved to be decided finally by the Supreme Court.
In accordance with this majority opinion, the appeals preferred by the first vendees were allowed and the applications for execution filed by the present appellants were dismissed.
After the sale in favour of the present appellants, they applied to be joined as parties to the appeals preferred by the first vendees against the decrees for pre emption which were then pending in the High Court and the Court directed by its order dated 13th July, 1963 that the present appellants be joined as parties to the appeals subject to just legal exceptions.
The facts which ultimately resulted in decrees for pre emption in favour of Neki are fully set out at pages 834 835 of the reported judgment and repeating the same would merely add to the length of this judgment.
Suffice to state that there is numberdispute that decrees for pre emption were passed in favour of Neki against the original vendor Dhara Singh and his vendees Hazari and others and the satisfaction of the companydition in the decrees of pre emption for payment or deposit of the amounts as directed by the Court within the stipulated time is number questioned in the present proceedings.
That is how the matter came before a Full Bench.
Desai, J. These appeals by certificate under Article 133 1 c of the Constitution granted by the High Court of Punjab Haryana arise from three Execution Petitions filed by the present appellants for executing three decrees obtained by one Neki since deceased in three suits bearing Nos.
