A.C.GOYAL
Shanti Devi – Appellant
Versus
Nand Lal – Respondent
(2). The plaintiff filed a suit on 22.5.1984 for redemption and possession of mortgaged property with the averments that House No. 4784 situated in Jaipur as described in para 1 of the plaint was mortgaged with the defendant vide registered mortgage-deed dated 16.11.1978 only for Rs. 16,999/-, for a period of seven years. The value of this property at that time was Rs. 60,000/- and the plaintiff never sold this property to the defendant. The cause of action arose to the plaintiff on 29.12.1983 when the defendant represented that she had become absolute owner of this property. The plaintiff was and is still ready to pay the mortgage money and thus the plaintiff is entitled to a decree of redemption of the mortgaged property with possession of the same and the defendant should be restrained not to make any alte
6. Chunchun Jha vs. Ebadat Ali (AIR 1954 SC 345)
7. Tamboli Ramanlal Motilal vs. Ghanchi Chimanlal Keshavlal (AIR 1992 SC 1236)
10. Narayan vs. Gopal (AIR 1960 SC 100)
20. Gangadhar vs. Shankar Lal and Others (AIR 1958 SC 770)
21. Chunchun Jha vs. Edabat Ali and Another (AIR 1954 SC 345)
3. M/s. Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (1979 (2)SCC 409)
15. Rajappa Hanamantha Ranoji vs. Mahadev Channabasappa and Others (2000(6) SCC 120 =
4. M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. Bombay vs. M.R.T.P.C. (A.I.R. 1977 Supreme Court 1285)
5. Food Corpn. of India vs. Mahipalk and Sons (1985 RLR 628)
11. Pooranmal vs. Ganga Sagar (1988(1) RLR 506)
13. Nand Lal and Others vs. Ramesh Chand and Others (RLW 2000(1) Raj. 223)
14. State of Rajasthan vs. Harphool Singh (2000(2) UJ 931(SC) = RLW 2000(3) SC 399)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.