Law: N.W.F.P. Pre-emption Act, (XIV of 1950)

Section: S. 5 (c)

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O. XLI, rr.,4 & 33

  N.-W. F. P. Pre-emption Act (XIV of 1950), S. 5 (c) "Vacant site"-Expression wide enough to include agricultural land situated beyond outskirts of village-Intention of vendee-Deciding factor- Vendee, resident of village, purchasing agricultural land at considerable distance from village for construction of house-Sale not pre-emptible.   Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. XLI, rr.,4 & 33 Distinction and applicability.   There is a distinction between Order XLI, rule 4, C. P. C. and Order XLI, rule 33, C. P. C. Rule 33 applies to a case where the appeal is as to a part only of the decree, while Rule 4 applies to a case where .the appeal is from the whole decree. Order XLI, rule 4, C. P. C. is based on two considerations: firstly, to give the appellate Court full power to do justice to all parties whether before it or not, and secondly, to prevent contradictory decisions in the matter in the same suit. In order to apply rule 4, it is essential that the decree appealed from should have proceeded on a ground common to all the plaintiffs or defendants and the whole case is gone into by the appellate Court at the instance of the parties representing all the necessary contentions in the case.   In a pre-emption suit, all the six vendees jointly purchased the land and the decree of the trial Court decreeing the suit had proceeded on a ground common to all the defendants and the whole case had gone to the appellate Court at the instance of the defendants representing all the necessary contentions in the case. One of the six vendees was arrayed as respondent in the appeal and the remaining five vendees preferred the appeal claim ing the dismissal of the suit with respect to the entire claim of the plaintiff:   Held, that Order XLI, rule 4, C. P. C. was applicable to the circumstances of the case and the appellate Court was competent to grant the full relief, notwithstanding that one of the vendees had not been arrayed as the appellant.   Sher Muhammad Nawab Khan v. Mst. Aimna Bibi and others A I R 1937 Pesh. 69 and Bulaqi Mal v. Abdul Karim A I R 1933 Lah. 682 held not applicable.   Mst. Jagdei and another v. Sampat…