' The petitioner Bhapoo Khan had brought a pre-emption suit under M. L. R. 115 on the basis of superior rights of tenancy, on which five issues were framed by the AC/Collector, Kasur. While other issues were found in his favour, his suit was rejected on ground that he held the suit land as lessee and as such had no pre-emption claim under M. L. R.
115. The petitioner having failed in appeal, which was rejected by the learned Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Lahore, vide orders, dated 28-2-1983, has come up in revision.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The point at issue is as to whether the petitioner held the suit land as tenant-at-will or as a lessee. According to entries of Jamabandi and Register Girdawari, the petitioner is entered as tenant-at-will. However, in the rental column he is shown as paying cash rent. Also, in his statement given before the trial Court he described himself as cultivating the land on "Thekadar". The lower Courts interpreted his statement as an admission that the land was held by him on lease. The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contends that the status of the petitioner stands determined by the entries of register Girdawari, according to which he was a tenant-at-will, paying cash rent. The learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand maintains that since the petitioner describes himself as `Thekadar' he is to be treated as lessee.
3. I have considered this issue. I would agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner that the status of the petitioner is to be determined by the entries of register Girdawari. Payment of rent in cash and the description of the petitioner as `Thekadar' does not reduce him to the position of a lessee; when he is described as tenant-at-will in the Jamabandi and the entries of register Girdawari. I would, therefore, accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and hold that the findings of the lower Courts are based on misinterpretation of the evidence. The revision is accordingly accepted with direction that decree would be awarded by the trial Court subject to payment of Rs, 32,000, the price when was admitted by the trial Court.