' The sole point being urged by the learned counsel for appellants in support of this appeal is that there was nothing to show that the pre-emptor would succeed as an heir to Mst. Rehmat Bibi and therefore, the recognition of superior right of pre-emption was misconceived.
2. Having heard the learned counsel, I do not think that this is the real spirit of Punjab Pre-emption Act. All that is required to be done b the pre-emptor is that he is related to vendor in a reasonable degree which may entitle her to succeed to the estate. The wording of the section does not permit of an interpretation that a pre-emptor should show that he is the only heir we shall succeed to the estate. Therefore, in my view, no foul could be found with the approach of two Courts below and no interference is called for in this second appeal.
3. No other point has been raised by the learned counsel in support of this appeal.
' This appeal is without any merit and is accordingly dismissed.