Law:

Section:

  Bengal Tenancy Act (VIII of 1885), Ss. 103-B, 26-F & 26-C-Land recorded as korfa but described as occupancy raiyati holding in sale-deed Presumption of record-of-rights-Co-sharer seeking pre-emption presumed to have knowledge of real nature of tenancy-Estoppel arises if purchaser describing as occupancy holding gives notice to co-sharer tenant under S. 26-C and application under S. 26-F is filed thereon-Under raiyati interest-Pre-emption under S. 26-F not claimable-[Moulana Hafiz Athar Ali v. Abdul Taher Bhuiyan P L D 1961 Dacca 349 rel.]   East Bengal State Acquisition and Tenancy Act (XXVIII of 1951), Ss. 3, 24 & 46-A-Held, that entire interests of rent receiver will be eliminated only after publication of compen sation assessment roll and not after notification under S. 3. JUDGMENT   This rule is directed against the order of pre-emption passed against petitioners in an application under section 26-F of the Bengal Tenancy Act filed by the opposite-parties.   Petitioners purchased the case land by the kabala Exh. C (1) dated 6-8-56, fromJamir Bepari, Rabi Bepari, and Kalu Bepari. In the kabala, he was described as occupancy raiyati holding. Opposite-parties filed the application under section 26-F of the Bengal Tenancy Act for pre-emption of the land on the grounds that they were co-sharers of the occupancy holding and that the petitioners were stranger-purchasers. Petitioners opposed the application on various grounds. The main contention was that the land sought to be pre-empted was an under-raiyati land, and as such, it could not be the subject of pre-emption under section 26-F of the Bengal Tenancy Act.   The learned Munsif allowed the application for pre emption holding that although inthe C. S. record of rights the tenancy was described as an under-raiyati holding, the claim for pre-emption could not be resisted, as the petitioners purchased the land as occupancy raiyati holding, and as there was nothing to show that opposite parties were aware that the land was under-raiyati holding.   On appeal, the learned Subordinate Judge also held that the petitioners after purchasing the land as occupancy-raiyati holding…