Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
ALKA SARIN
Jagat Ram (Deceased) Through Lrs. – Appellant
Versus
Rachpal Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Alka Sarin, J.
The present regular second appeal has been preferred by the defendant-appellants challenging the judgment and decree dated 24.02.1989 passed by the Trial Court and the judgment and decree dated 10.02.1993 passed by the First Appellate Court.2. The brief facts relevant to the present case that the plaintiff- respondent No.1 filed a civil suit averring that the land in dispute had been mortgaged in 1942-43 by one Jai Karan in favour of his son Suram Chand. It was alleged that Suram Chand died on 14.12.1981 leaving a Will in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 and thus the plaintiff-respondent No.1 had stepped into the shoes of Suram Chand. The mortgage had not been redeemed either by Jai Karan i.e. the original owner or his successors-in- interest and thus by efflux of time the plaintiff-respondent No.1 had become owner in possession of the land in dispute. Written statement was filed by the defendant-appellants wherein it was denied that the land in dispute was mortgaged by Jai Karan in favour of Suram Chand besides taking other preliminary objections. The execution of the Will by Suram Chand in favour of the plaintiff-respondent No.1 was also denied. Rep
In a usufructuary mortgage, the right to redeem does not extinguish after 30 years; it arises only upon payment of the mortgage money.
Usufructuary mortgagor's right to recover possession restarts upon payment of mortgage money, distinguishing it from other mortgage types, and is not extinguished after 30 years.
The nature of usufructuary mortgages dictates that a mortgage is always redeemable and a suit claiming ownership by efflux of time is not maintainable.
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 rights of a usufructuary mortgagee do not crystallize into a title without payment of the mortgage debt; thus, a suit for declaration is unsustainable once the right to redeem is extinguished.
The intrinsic right of a mortgagor to redeem a property exists as long as the mortgage is active, and limitation periods only commence upon the mortgage debt being fully discharged.
Point of law: Rightly observed by both the Courts below the evidence let in by the appellants to establish this oral sale, gets excluded in view of the prohibition under Section 92 of the Indian Evid....
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
