Pre-emption rights can be defeated by estoppel and acquiescence when the pre-emptor's conduct induces reliance by the purchaser.

A statutory right of pre-emption under the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act, being a weak and purely private right of substitution, may be waived or defeated by estoppel, acquiescence, or conduct. The statutory notice requirement operates as a condition for exercising the right, not as a rule that makes the transfer void or creates a public policy bar against estoppel. Where the pre-emptor knew of the sale, assisted in construction, and asserted the claim only after the purchaser altered position in reliance on that conduct, the defence of estoppel and acquiescence is available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the right of pre-emption under the Rajasthan Pre-emption Act could be defeated by estoppel, waiver, or acquiescence despite the statutory notice requirement.

Analysis: The right of pre-emption was treated as a weak and purely private right of substitution, capable of being given up by conduct. The notice provision under the Act was held to be a condition for the exercise of the right, not a rule making the transfer void or creating any public policy prohibition against estoppel. Since the pre-emptor knew of the sale, assisted in construction, and asserted the claim only after the purchaser had acted on that conduct, the pre-emptor's behaviour attracted the doctrine of estoppel and acquiescence.

Conclusion: The right of pre-emption could be defeated by estoppel and acquiescence, and the defence was available to the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory right of pre-emption that is private in character and not rendered void by the statute may be waived or defeated by estoppel and acquiescence where the pre-emptor's conduct leads the purchaser to alter position.

---