In usufructuary mortgages, the limitation period for redemption starts not from the mortgage date but from the date payment is made, preserving the mortgagor's right until then.

JUDGMENT :

B.V. NAGARATHNA, J.

We have heard learned senior counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioners herein, the original plaintiffs, are the mortgagees of the disputed property admeasuring 114 Kanals and 4 Marlas of land situated at Village Tamkot, Tehsil Mansa, district Bathinda. The said property was mortgaged by the ancestors of the respondents herein who were the original defendant in the Civil Suit No.291/1975 that was filed by the petitioners/original plaintiffs challenging the order of the Collector dated 17.09.1975. The respondents/defendants had filed an application under Section 6 of Redemption of Mortgage Act, 1913 for redemption of the said property that was mortgaged by the ancestors of the respondents/defendants. The said order was allowed by the collector vide order dated 17.09.1975, and therefore allowed the redemption of the mortgaged property in favour of the applicants i.e. respondents/defendants herein. Aggrieved by the Collector’s order dated 17.09.1975, the petitioners/original plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 291/1975. The said suit was decreed in the favour of the petitioners/original plaintiff vide order dated 22.09.1976 wherein the Trial Court observed that the application for redemption of mortgaged property preferred by the respondents/defendants was barred by limitation and therefore the Collector's order dated 17.09.1975 was set aside.

3. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the respondents/defendants preferred first Appeal before Additional District Judge, Bhatinda in Civil Appeal No.107/R.T.-99 of 76/77 which was dismissed vide order dated 24.12.1980.

4. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondents/defendants preferred Regular Second Appeal No.1053/1981 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The Regular Second Appeal No.1053/1981 was allowed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order dated18.09.2001 thereby holding that the respondents/defendants’ right to redeem the mortgage was not barred by limitation and that the fresh cause of action for redemption accrued based upon the adjustments made to the loan from the income arising from the land.

5. Aggrieved by the said judgment dated 18.09.2001, the petitioners/original plaintiffs preferred an appeal before this Court in Civil Appeal No.6084/2002. The said appeal was allowed, wherein vide order dated 16.04.2009, the case was remanded to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on procedural grounds for re-adjudication as the High Court had failed to formulate substantial questions of law before allowing the appeal. Thereafter, after formulating substantial questions of law, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Regular Second Appeal No.1053/1981, again allowed the appeal vide order dated 25.01.2010 in favour of the respondents/defendants herein.

6. It was observed by the High Court, while placing reliance upon Ram Kishan and Ors. Vs Sheo Ram and Ors. 2008 (1) RCR (CIVIL) 334, that in case of usufructuary mortgage, where no time limit is fixed to seek redemption, the right to seek redemption would not arise from the date of mortgage but will arise on the date when the mortgagor pays or tenders to the mortgagee or deposits in Court, the mortgage money or balance thereof and hence the order of the Collector dated 17.09.1975 was restored and the the Civil Suit No.291/1975 filed by the petitioners/original plaintiffs was dismissed.

7. Aggrieved, by the said judgment in Regular Civil Appeal No.1053/1981 dated 25.01.2010, the petitioners/original plaintiffs are here before this Court.

8. We have perused the impugned judgment passed in RSA No.1053/1981. We find that the High Court had placed reli