https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273517 For pre-emption under the Bengal Tenancy Amendment Act, 1938, the decisive date was registration of the sale deed, not mere execution before the Act came into force, because the right arose only on a completed transfer and title passed on registration. The court held that Section 47 of the Registration Act did not change that result for pre-emption purposes, so the cosharer tenant's claim was maintainable. It further held that an application by one cosharer tenant under Section 26P was not bad for non-joinder of the other cosharer tenants, as the Act imposed no such joinder requirement and the joint-action rule in Section 188 could not be imported. The trial court's order allowing pre-emption was restored. en-us Fri, 03 May 1940 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jun 2018 11:03:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273517 For pre-emption under the Bengal Tenancy Amendment Act, 1938, the decisive date was registration of the sale deed, not mere execution before the Act came into force, because the right arose only on a completed transfer and title passed on registration. The court held that Section 47 of the Registration Act did not change that result for pre-emption purposes, so the cosharer tenant's claim was maintainable. It further held that an application by one cosharer tenant under Section 26P was not bad for non-joinder of the other cosharer tenants, as the Act imposed no such joinder requirement and the joint-action rule in Section 188 could not be imported. The trial court's order allowing pre-emption was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 May 1940 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273517