Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (1.36 seconds)
Documents citing Sk. Sajhan Ali & Ors vs Sk. Saber Ali & Anr on 9 February, 2015

Abdul Matin Mallick vs Subrata Bhattacharjee(Banerjee)&Ors on 17 April, 2019

The learned Judge of the appeal Court below allowed the application for pre-emption by reversing the judgment and order of the learned Trial Judge, placing reliance on the decision of another learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Sk. Sajhan Ali & Ors. Vs. Sk. Saber Ali & Anr. reported in 2016 (1) W.B.L.R (Cal) 133 wherein it has been held that even when the entire share of a co-sharer in plot of land is transferred to any person other than a raiyat in the said plot of land the application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the said Act is maintainable.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 7 - Cited by 9 - B Basu - Full Document

Sri Apurba Sarkar vs Sri Arabinda Adhikary And Another on 7 August, 2019

24. Learned counsel for the opposite parties also cites a judgment of the same co‐ ordinate bench reported at (2015) 3 CHN 689 [Sk. Sajhan Ali and others vs. Sk. Saber Ali and others], in support of the proposition that pre‐emption is maintainable even when the entire share or portion of a plot of land is transferred by a raiyat to any other person other than a co‐sharer raiyat.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 18 - Cited by 1 - S Bhattacharyya - Full Document

Abdul Matin Mallick vs Subrata Bhattacharjee on 5 May, 2022

4. Present appeals are opposed by Shri Mainak Bose, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting respondents. It is vehemently submitted that as such the learned Trial Court dismissed the pre-emption application as not maintainable on the ground that since the vendors of the pre-emptee have transferred their entire share in the suit property, the application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the Act, 1955 would not be maintainable. It is submitted that however, in view of the binding decision of the High Court in the case of Sk. Sajhan Ali & Ors. Vs. Sk. Saber Ali & Anr. reported in 2016 (1) W.B.L.R (Cal) 133 by which it has been held that even when the entire share of a co-sharer in the plot of a land is transferred to any person other than a raiyat in the said plot of land, the application for pre-emption under Section 8 of the Act, 1955 would be maintainable. It is therefore submitted that the First Appellate Court rightly set aside the order passed by the learned Trial Court and allowed the pre-emption application, which is rightly not interfered with by the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 4 - M R Shah - Full Document

Amal Kumar Ballav & Anr vs Juran Krishna Mazumdar on 19 August, 2016

In the case in hand, I do not find any proof of partition in respect of the case plot with its co-sharers following either of the provisions laid down in Section 14 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. After enforcement of the new provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 the definition of a 'raiyat' means a person or an institution holding land for any purpose whatsoever. Thus in common parlance holder of the land is a raiyat within the meaning of the Act. After introduction of the new provisions under Section 8 of the Act since a right of pre-emption has been indicated in favour of 'any co-sharer of a raiyat in the plot of land' or "any raiyat possessing adjoining such plot of land" by enforcing such provision w.e.f. August 7, 1969. Section 2 (6) of the Act is set out hereunder:-
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 18 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Bishnu Pada Maity vs Deepak Kumar Mondal & Anr on 30 March, 2017

Paragraph 24:-The right of pre-emption is known as a weak right. But equally this is the only way to adopt by a non-notified co-sharer or adjoining land owner to prevent an undesirable stranger purchaser from entering into the arena of co-sharership in the plot of land or a raiyat possessing land adjoining such plot of land. Therefore it would be a wrong proposition of law that any person, otherwise entitled to pre-empt under Section 8 of the Act, would be rejected or refused on the fallacy that the entire share of the plot was transferred, as already settled by this Court of co-ordinate Bench in the case of Ajit Mandal and Ors. V. Tapan Kumar Ghana and Ors. (supra) and also in C.O. No. 345 of 2015 with CAN 2170 of 2015 Sk. Sajhan Ali & Ors. v. Sk. Saber Ali & Anr."
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - M D Sheko - Full Document

Rabindra Nath Kundu & Anr vs Sudhir Hira & Anr on 23 April, 2018

In Sk. Sajhan Ali & Ors. Vs. Sk. Saber Ali & Anr. reported in 2015 3 CHN 689 the trial Court had dismissed the Misc. Case under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 holding that if a portion of share in plot of land is transferred, and not when the entire share is transferred the preemption was not attracted. The finding so made by the trial Court was reversed by the Appellate Court below with the observation that even if entire share is transferred, the application under Section 8 of the said Act is maintainable, when a co-sharer/raiyat transferred a portion of the share of his interest in the plot of land, the right of preemption can be exercised under Section 8 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955. The order of the Appeal Court was revised against before a coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - S Prasad - Full Document

Sri Rampada Jana vs Sri Maniklal Samanta on 10 November, 2025

14. It is his contentions that the co-sharers being the legal heirs of Ramsaran Samanta in the disputed plots along with Shital Chandra Duari and in gross violation of Section 5(5) read with Section 8 and 9 of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act,1955 said Sital transferred in favour of a stranger purchaser namely Rampada Jana by way of sale. That apart out of 26 plots he claims pre-emption only in respect of 25 plots as being the owner he left out plot no.1863 LR plot no.1431 which was also transferred through the same deed of sale and in the consolidated application under section 8 of W.B.L.R Act it has been categorically mentioned .He further submits that in Biswanath Sarkar & Anr vs Sunit kumar Saha21 reported in and in case of Sajan Ali vs Sk Saber Ali22 reported at it was decided that unless there is no clear demarcation of the suit plot the said sale in favour of the stranger person is required to be set aside.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sanjit Biswas & Anr vs Anil Kumar Biswas on 17 December, 2018

However, in a subsequent case of Biswanath Sarkar & Anr. vs. Sunit Kumar Saha reported in (2013) 3 WBLR 271 (Cal) and also in Sk. Sajhan Ali vs. Sk. Saber Ali reported in (2015) 3 CHN 689 (Cal). Another learned Single Judge held that if a co-sharer is holding an undivided, undemarcated share in the plot of land and such co-sharer transfers entire share in a plot of land to any person other than the co-sharer, the other co-sharer would have the right of pre-emption.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - B Chaudhuri - Full Document
1   2 Next