Assandh, while permitting the decree holder to deposit the balance amount. 3. This case has a chequered history. In order to pre-empt a sale deed executed by Sh.Amar Singh in favour of Sh.Kashmir Singh and Sh.Pritpal Singh on 23.05.1980, Sh.Bakshish Singh, decree holder, filed a suit for possession by way of pre-emption of the sale deed. As required, 1/5th of the amount was deposited, which is commonly known as “z arepanjam” . The Civil Court decreed the suit subject to the payment of ₹42,676.25 minus the amount of z are-panjam i.e. ₹7,500/-. The defendants’ first appeal was dismissed on 30.05.1983. However, the second appeal filed by the defendants was allowed on 22.05.1986 while relying upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Atam Prakash v. State of Haryana and Others AIR 1986 Supreme Court 859 . Counter this, the plaintiff filed an appeal before the Supreme Court, wherein, an application amendment of the plaint was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the High Court for deciding afresh. On 12.01.2005, the High Court directed the trial Court to furnish a report after permitting the defendants to file a written statement to the amended plaint and permit them to lead evidence in support of the amended pleadings. On receipt of the report, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the defendants (petitioners herein). After decision by the High Court, the decree holder filed an application for deposit of the amount. On 04.06.2010, the Court adjourned the case sine die as the defendants filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed on 13.02.2013. Thereafter, the defendants filed an application for recall of the order dated 25.02.2008, which was also dismissed on
