SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1957 Supreme(Raj) 222

WANCHOO, DAVE
Hansia – Appellant
Versus
Bakhtawarmal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Shrikishanmal, for Appellants; Panraj, for Respondents Nos.1 & 2

Wanchoo, C.J.—This is a second appeal by two out of four defendants against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge, Sojat, in a suit for redemption of mortgage. It has been referred to a Division Bench by a learned single judge as an important question of law is involved in it.

2 Respondents Nos 1 and 2 are plaintiffs. Their case was that their father and uncle had mortgaged a house situate in village Sawrad with Sobha, Tiloka and Bhoma, predecessors-in-title of the defendants for Rs. 209/- in Svt. 1967. The said mortgage was to be redeemed after a period of 31 years. When the plaintiffs sought to redeem the property after the expiry of this period, the defendant refused to accept the money and hand over possession. Consequently, the plaintiffs brought this suit for redemption against the defendants. Two of the defendants, namely Bhania and Benia, sons of Tiloka admitted the plaintiffs claim. The other two, Hansia and Achalia, contested this suit. They denied the mortgage and asserted that the property belonged to themselves. They also pleaded with respect to the document produced in support of the mortgage by the plaintiffs that as the document was not registered, it was of no
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top