Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Pre-emption Suit — Letter Held to Constitute Waiver of Right of Pre-emption. Agreement among co-sharers to give preference in sale was waived by plaintiff's letter consenting to sale to stranger.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: NAGPUR
  • 9
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, original plaintiff, filed a second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 31.08.1994 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 2/1993 passed by the Additional District Judge, Buldhana, which confirmed the judgment and decree dated 22.09.1992 in Regular Civil Suit No. 133/1987 by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana. The plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration that the agreement of sale between defendant no.2 Sakharam Bhokardankar and defendant no.1 Sakharam Sonune was void, and for possession of the property. The plaintiff's case was that he and defendant nos. 2 to 4 were brothers and members of a joint Hindu family. After partition in August 1978, there was an agreement among them that if any brother wanted to sell his share, preference would be given to the other brothers, and only if they refused could the share be sold to a stranger. Defendant no.2 entered into an agreement to sell his 1/4th share to defendant no.1 without offering it to the plaintiff. The trial court and first appellate court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiff had waived his right of pre-emption by writing a letter (document 'A') consenting to the sale. The substantial question of law was whether the letter constituted waiver. The High Court held that the letter clearly indicated the plaintiff's consent to the sale, thereby waiving his right of pre-emption. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) Pre-emption - Waiver - Consent Letter - Agreement among co-sharers to give preference in sale - Plaintiff's letter consenting to sale to stranger amounts to waiver of right of pre-emption - The court held that the letter clearly indicated plaintiff's consent to the sale, thereby waiving his right to pre-empt (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the letter marked as document 'A' constitutes waiver of the plaintiff's right of pre-emption under the agreement among brothers.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and decree of the lower courts are confirmed. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Pre-emption
  • Waiver
  • Consent
  • Agreement among co-sharers
  • Interpretation of documents
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2011 LawText (BOM) (01) 81

Second Appeal No. 73 of 1995

2011-01-14

R.M. Savant

Shri S.R. Deshpande for Appellant; Shri Sadawarte & Shri V. Oberai for Respondent No.1

Narayan Ramchandra Bhokardankar

Sakharam Patilba Sonune and others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Second appeal against concurrent findings in a suit for declaration and possession based on right of pre-emption.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the judgments of the lower courts and decree the suit declaring the agreement of sale void and for possession.

Filing Reason

Appellant claimed that defendant no.2 sold his share to defendant no.1 without offering it to the appellant, violating an agreement among brothers.

Previous Decisions

Trial court dismissed the suit; first appellate court confirmed the dismissal.

Issues

Whether the letter marked as document 'A' constitutes waiver of the plaintiff's right of pre-emption.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the letter did not amount to waiver; respondents contended that the letter clearly showed consent.

Ratio Decidendi

The letter (document 'A') written by the plaintiff consenting to the sale by defendant no.2 to defendant no.1 constitutes a waiver of the plaintiff's right of pre-emption under the agreement among brothers.

Judgment Excerpts

Whether in the last letter in question which was marked as document 'A' to which both the sides have given consent in the context of the oral evidence, the theory regarding waiver of right of pre-emption of the plaintiff can or cannot justify the action of accepting it ?

Procedural History

Regular Civil Suit No. 133/1987 was dismissed by Civil Judge, Senior Division, Buldhana on 22.09.1992. Regular Civil Appeal No. 2/1993 was dismissed by Additional District Judge, Buldhana on 31.08.1994. The present second appeal was filed against that judgment.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Rental Compensation in Land Acquisition Case — Government Policy Entitles Claimants to Compensation from Date of Possession to Award Date. Possession Taken Before Section 4 Notification and Award; Rental C...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Pre-emption Suit — Letter Held to Constitute Waiver of Right of Pre-emption. Agreement among co-sharers to give preference in sale was waived by plaintiff's letter consenting to sale to stranger.