' The pre-emption suit filed by the petitioner for possession under M. L. R. 115 on the basis of superior rights of tenancy was decreed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Revenue)/Collector, Rawalpindi in his favour in respect of fields Nos. 204 and 205 measuring 12 Kanals and 2 Marlas. The matter was agitated in appeal by respondent No, 1, Mir Muhammad Khan, on which the learned Additional Commissioner (Revenue), Rawalpindi, vide orders dated 31-5-1084, set aside the judgment decree. It was held by the learned Additional Commissioner that the petitioner being a joint owner in the Khata had no pre-emption claim under M. L. R.
115. Hence this revision.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The matter in issue is as to whether or not a joint owner can bring a suit under preemption under M. L. R. 115 on the basis of claim that he held some of the joint holding as a tenant under all the joint owners. In the instant case the petitioner is a joint owner along with other shareholders in a joint partitioned Khata. He claims pre-emption tights against sale made by one of the joint owners, on the basis that he held as tenant under the joint owners to the extent of 12 Kanals and 2 Marlas. I have carefully considered this issue. In view of the fact that the petitioner as joint holder owns share in every inch of the joint holding a part of his pre- emption claim would be against his own ownership, which according to my interpretation was never the intention of M. L. R.
115. This special enactment gives superior rights of tenancy only to a tenant against a vendee- owner as A distinguished from the rights already given by the Pre-emption Act. On this interpretation of law, I would hold that the petitioner had no preemption rights to claim under M. L.
R.
115. I would accordingly maintain the orders of the learned Additional Commissioner and reject the revision.