' In this regular second appeal judgment and decree dated 9-3-1974 passed by the Civil Judge, Chiniot, as affirmed in appeal by the Additional District Judge, Jhang, on 20-11-1976, whereby suit for possession of land through pre-emption instituted by Niaz Muhammad deceased predecessor- in-interest of the appellants was partly decreed have been challenged by the appellants. On 15-1- 1971 one Mst. Fazlan sold land measuring 68 Kanals 18 Marlas situate in village Vijhalke, Tehsil Chiniot, District Jhang to Abdul Hamid respondent No. 1 for Rs.21,000 by means of a registered sale deed. Niaz Muhammad deceased predecessor-in-interest of the appellants instituted a suit to pre-empt the aforementioned sale. Likewise respondents No. 2 to 4 also filed a suit for possession of the land on the basis of superior right of pre-emption. Both the suits were consolidated by the learned trial Court. As many as nine issues were framed for the disposal of the two suits. On the basis of the evidence produced before it the learned trial Court found that Niaz Muhammad deceased possessed superior right of pre-emption in respect of land comprising Khata No. 106 as he was a co-sharer in that Khata. In respect of the remaining land it was found by the learned trial Court that Niaz Muhammad deceased's right of pre-emption, though superior to that of the vendee-respondent No. 1, was equal to that of the rival pre-emptors respondents No. 2 to 4 and as such he could get a share in the suit land proportionate to the area of land owned by him in the estate. A decree for possession of land measuring 27 Kanals 2 Marlas out of land measuring 68 Kanals 18 Marlas was passed in his favour on payment of Rs.8,217. Respondents No. 2 to 4 were found entitled to the decree for possession of the remaining land measuring 41 Kanals 16 Marlas on payment of Rs.12,783. Niaz Muhammad deceased respondent being dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 9-3-1974 passed by the learned trial Court filed an appeal in the District Court contending that he was also a co-sharer in land comprising Khewat No. 113 and as such he possessed superior right of pre-emption in respect of the said land as against the rival pre- emptors respondents No. 2 to 4. The appeal was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge on 20-11-1976 as it was found that Niaz Muhammad deceased was not a co-sharer in Khata No. 113.
2. The present appeal was filed by the legal representatives of Niaz Muhammad deceased and it was admitted to consider whether Niaz Muhammad deceased was a co-sharer in Khata No. 113 because it was submitted that the entries in the copy of Register Haqdaran Exh D.5 supported the appellants' above contention.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has referred to the entries of Register Haqdaran of 1968-69, copy of which was tendered in evidence and was marked Exh.D.5 by the learned trial Court. Khata No. 113, out of which land measuring 24 Kanals 10 Marlas was sold by Mst. Fazlan has four Khataunis.
Mst. Fazlan's land has been shown in Khatauni No. 1133. The appellants' contention is that Niaz Muhammad deceased was owner of land comprising Khatauni No. 1134. This contention is, however, not supported by the entries in the copy of Register Haqdaran Zamin referred to above. Land measuring 2 Kanals 4 Marlas shown in Khatauni No. 1134 was allotted to one Rehmat after whose death his heirs succeeded him. Niaz Muhammad deceased was shown in cultivating possession of the said land as tenant of the allottees. There is no ambiguity in the entries as he has been clearly described as A Ghair Mauroosi in column 4. Learned counsel for the appellants has not been able to refute the correctness of the above entries. The result is that the finding of the Courts below that Niaz Muhammad deceased was a co-sharer only in land comprising Khata No. 106 is correct as it is based on the entries in the Register Haqdaran Zamin.
' In view of what has been stated above there is no force in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed with costs.