Mr. Amit Rawal J. (Oral) - The appellant-plaintiff has not been successful in seeking redemption of the suit property by laying challenge to the order dated 11.07.2006 passed by the Collector whereby identical application under local law was dismissed.

2. It was alleged that vide mutations bearing nos.433 and 449, it was reflected that the suit land measuring 7 bighas 7 biswas was mortgaged. The mortgage amount of Rs.7,000/- had already been deposited in the Government Treasury and the suit land was mortgaged with the original mortgagees, namely, Nand Ram, Ran Singh and Nasib Singh and after their death, defendants were enjoying the usufruct of the suit land.

3. The defendants opposed the suit while admitting that plaintiff no.2-Mam Raj, vide registered sale deeds dated 21.12.1979 and 14.04.1981 had already sold the land to the defendants which had not been challenged and mutation nos.585 and 732 in this regard were sanctioned. Even if the entries in the jamabandi continued to be in the name of Mam Raj and plaintiff no.1 Seeta Devi, the plaintiffs, would not confer the title of ownership in view of the registered documents.

4. On preponderance of the evidence, the trial Co