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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 1635

AMIT RAWAL
Banta Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeaerd:Mr. Sushil Kumar Verma, Advocate, for appellants no. 3 to 5.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Jangra, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Amit Rawal, J. (Oral):- This matter has been remanded by the Supreme Court.

2. Present regular second appeal i.e. RSA No. 253 of 1982 preferred against the judgment and decree whereby the suit seeking redemption of the mortgage dated 22.04.1947 was dismissed by the trial Court as well as appellate Court and the appeal was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 15.10.2004. The aggrieved party assailed the findings before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the same was allocated a Civil Appeal No. 4987 of 2008 and vide order dated 12.05.2017 remitted to this Court. Order reads as under:-

“We have heard learned counsel for the parties and deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the High Court, after setting aside the impugned judgment and order, with the request to determine afresh on the question of limitation with reference to the date of mortgage and how much period was available after the enforcement of the new Act.

All other questions are kept open for determination.

The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside and the appeal is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.”

3. The facts as revealed from the plaint and the records of the Courts

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