RSA No.2471 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. RSA No.2471 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.07.2009 Hari Singh represented by LRs ...Appellants VERSUS Charanji (died issue-less) and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI Present: Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for the appellants. *** AJAY TEWARI J. This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the courts below rejecting the claim of the appellant for exercising preferential right to purchase the property held by Charanji. Learned Lower Appellate Court decided the case on the basis that Charanji having died, whatever preferential right which the appellant has had against him would also come to an end. Learned counsel for the appellant has proposed following substantial questions of law:- i. Whether the trial court can decide the controversy beyond the order of remand of the superior court? ii. Whether the admitted facts need be proved? iii.Whether all the relevant submissions of the appellants are required to be noted in the order of the Court? iv.Whether the review application is maintainable, when RSA No.2471 of 2008 (O&M) -2- some of the contentions have not been recorded by the Court? v. Whether the application for condonation of delay can be dismissed despite the plausible reasons and the delay of each and every day has been explained? vi.Whether the successors in interest are also entitled to the same relief, which the predecessor in interest had? As regards questions No.1 and 6, I find that in paragraph 25 of the judgment learned Lower Appellate Court had considered this aspect and has held that even if the trial court exceeded his jurisdiction, yet with the death of Charanji whatever preferential right which the appellant had against him would also come to an end. As far as remaining questions are concerned, the same pale into significance, in view of the decision taken on the above mentioned questions No.1 and 6. I find that the decision of learned Lower Appellate Court with regard to the coming to end of the preferential right after the death of Charanji cannot be faulted in the facts of this case. Consequently holding questions No.1 and 6 against the appellant, this appeal is dismissed. No costs. As the main case since has been disposed of therefore all the pending civil miscellaneous applications in the case also stand disposed of. ( AJAY TEWARI ) July 09, 2009 JUDGE ashish