Summary: Further, if others from without the street also claim pre-emption, those who are contiguous have priority over those who are at a distance. It was so decided in Pershad Singh v. Tina Ram (1881), 2 All. 619, and a decision of this Court to that effect would not be a matter of surprize.' The principle upon which the law of pre-emption rests is, that those who enjoy a right of pre-emption reside in the locality, and are likely to be injured by the introduction of a stranger as a co-sharer or neighbour. Jankeeswar Roy v. Girjadai Lal (1883) 18 Cal. 760. Precedence Among The inhabitants of the village have precedence All Inhabit- over those who live out of the village even though ants of the former may be the nearer adjacent neighbours, and there is no fixed rule as to the proxim­ ity being limited to neighbours. This is the rule in Srimati Purna Moyee Dossee v. Jagdieb Dos Pal (1878) 2 Cal. 359 ; Taki Prasad Singh v. Jankee Singh (1878) 4 All. 24. These were cases which came under the definition of a sale as given in para. 12; Law of Pre-emption under Saran v. Amir Singh (1884) 2 All. 866. Illiterate Mohomedan law of The right of pre-emption under a writ­ ten instrument. ten instrument even where it operates as a sale is dependent upon the operation of the instrument as indicated in the document : where, how­ ever, there is no express restriction as to the time of the sale, it should be assumed that the parties dealt with the intention that the sale should be made absolute without any delay. If an agreement is made to sell, if a particular sum of money is not paid within a particular time, such an agreement is within the definition of a sale as defined in para. 12. Moreover, where the parties agree that -the sale shall become complete provided no co­herent person comes and pays the money within three days, such agreement is tantamount to a sale in the definition, vide Ruprai v. Mathura Das (1873) 20 W. R. 298.' Moreover, the decisions notice that the right does not arise until the execution, moujoo or sol-dhu marks are affixed on the deed of sale. Hormus Jahania v. Hoosein (1876) I. L. R. 1 Bom. 993. In this case, the Court laid down that a co-ordinated undivided share in a house adjacent to a temple vested social prestige in its possessors, and the right of pre-emption resided in them. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Mohomedan law acts on the presumption of continuity as manifested in the secular and religious life of the people. Many cases in this province have to be tried with reference to such customs. The definition contained in para. 12 of the law of pre-emption has to be strictly adhered to.
The law of pre-emption is deeply entrenched in the customs and traditions of the region and is aimed at preserving the social fabric and ensuring the continuity of community life. The right of pre-emption arises under specific conditions, such as an absolute sale without any restrictions, and the application of the law depends on the written instruments and agreements between the parties. The local customs and social considerations play a significant role in determining the precedence among pre-emptors, with proximity to the property and residency in the locality being crucial factors. The law of pre-emption is a unique aspect of property transactions in the region, reflecting the importance of community relations and social cohesion in property dealings.