Back
P. B. BALAJI
Kaliyaperumal – Appellant
Versus
Lakshmi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.B. BALAJI, J.
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside the Judgment and Decree dated 20.01.2017 in A.S. No. 16 of 2015 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Mannargudi confirming the Judgment and Decree dated 20.03.2015 in O.S. No. 88 of 2014 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Mannargudi.
1. The defendant in a suit for redemption of mortgage is the appellant.
2. The parties are described as per their litigative status before the trial Court.
3. The admitted facts are as hereunder.
4. The plaintiffs filed a suit for recovery of possession of a mortgaged property. It is the case of the plaintiffs that they had earlier filed a suit in O.S. No. 186 of 2008 and pending the suit, an Application was taken out, seeking leave of the Court under Order 23 Rule 1 CPC, to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action, as the plaintiffs felt that the pleading in the earlier suit was incomplete.
5. The said Application for leave to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action was finally decided by this Court in C.R.P. No. 1214 of 2010 and this Court, by order dated 22.11.2013, permitted the plaintiffs to withdraw the said s
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the liberty granted in an earlier suit does not extend the period of limitation for filing a fresh suit on the same cause of action.
In usufructuary mortgages, the limitation for redemption begins only upon payment of the mortgage debt, not upon the expiry of the redemption period.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the old and new Limitation Acts in determining the period for redemption and the entitlement to the benefits under the Agricu....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rights of the plaintiff were extinguished due to the expiration of the limitation period, and findings regarding an oral contract were not....
The court affirmed that in a usufructuary mortgage case, the right to recover possession commences upon payment of the mortgage amount, and time spent in previous legal proceedings can be excluded wh....
A usufructuary mortgagor can redeem the mortgage at any time; the right is not extinguished by the passage of 30 years, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.
The inapplicability of the 30-year limitation period for redeeming a usufructuary mortgage and the inability of a usufructuary mortgagee to file a suit for declaration claiming ownership of the mortg....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
