Skip to content


Surajbali Vs. Nakched Tewari and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in9Ind.Cas.276
AppellantSurajbali
RespondentNakched Tewari and ors.
Excerpt:
pre-emption - wajib-ul-arz--construction--hissadar karibi--nearness in blood or space. - .....pre emptor are situate in the one and the same khewat. the court of first instance interpreted the term hissadar karibi to mean a co-sharer who is nearer in space than some other person and dismissed the claim. this interpretation was upheld by the court of first appeal. the pre-emptor preferred a second appeal to this court and his learned vakil contended that the expression hissadar karibi in the wajib-ul-arz in this case meant a blood relation. in support of this contention he relied on sukhdeo singh v. bahadur singh 1 a.l.j. 272 : a.w.n. (1904) 104 : 26 a. 544 and lok singh v. balwant singh 1 a.l.3. 705 : a.w.n. (1903) 239. he further said that the use of the term karibi in dealing with adoption in the pre-emption clause of the wajib-ul-arz indicated that the term hissadar karibi.....
Judgment:

Karamat Husain, J.

1. This was a suit for preemption on the basis of a wajib-ul-arz. That wajib-ul-arz divides pre-emptors into the three following classes: (1) hissadar karibi (2), other hissadaran of the thoke and (3) hissadars in other thokes. The thokes in the village in question as found by the lower appellate Court are sub-divided into khewats. The property in dispute, the share of the vendee and that of the pre emptor are situate in the one and the same khewat. The Court of first instance interpreted the term hissadar karibi to mean a co-sharer who is nearer in space than some other person and dismissed the claim. This interpretation was upheld by the Court of first appeal. The pre-emptor preferred a second appeal to this Court and his learned Vakil contended that the expression hissadar karibi in the wajib-ul-arz in this case meant a blood relation. In support of this contention he relied on Sukhdeo Singh v. Bahadur Singh 1 A.L.J. 272 : A.W.N. (1904) 104 : 26 A. 544 and Lok Singh v. Balwant Singh 1 A.L.3. 705 : A.W.N. (1903) 239. He further said that the use of the term karibi in dealing with adoption in the pre-emption clause of the wajib-ul-arz indicated that the term hissadar karibi signified a blood relation. The learned Counsel for the respondent contended that having regard to the terms of the preemption clause of the wajib ul-arz in question, the expression hissadar karibi meant a hissadar who was nearer in space than some one else and not a blood relation. In support of the interpretation placed by him on the wajib-ul-arz, he relied on Hira Lal v. Ramjas A.W.N. (1883) 206; Balzor Rat v. Madho Rai A.W.N. (1895) 78 and Pirthi Rai v. Sittlu Rai 2 A.L.J. 707 : A.W.N. (1905) 192. Having regard to the terms of the wajib-ul-arz and the findings returned by the lower appellate Court, I am of opinion that the interpretation placed by the Courts below on the term hissadar karibi is right and that it does not mean a blood relation. The fact that in the pre-emption clause of the wajib-ul-arz, the term karibi for the purposes of adoption means a blood relation is no reason for holding that the expression hissadar karibi means a blood relation. This is the only point which I have to decide in this appeal. The result is that the appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //