1. ' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.-Two sets of rival pre-emptors have separately filed petitions for leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court dated 10-10-1984 whereby accepting the Revision Petitions, the judgments of the Courts below were set aside.
2. ' The rival pre-emptors succeeded on the ground that they were co-sharers of the Khatas from which sale was made. This fact was not interfered with by the impugned order but going behind the sale, the learned Judge held that the vendor was allottee of specific Khasara Numbers and not a co-sharer and what was sold was not a share in the Khata but specific Khasara Numbers.
3. MrAbdul Aziz Qureshi, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioners, has made a grievance of the fact that the petitioners had not received an adequate notice of the hearing of Revisions itself.
4. On merits it is stated that an obvious error has taken place as the sale which was subjected to pre- emption claim of the petitioners was, as the sale-deed shows, not of a specific Khasra Number but of a share in the Khata. In view of the nature of the sale, there was no occasion to go behind the sale for the benefit of the vendee and to the detriment of the pre-emptors and that too at the Revisional stage.
5. ' A case for leave to appeal is made out. Leave to appeal is granted. Security of Rs,5,000 in each case. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.