The right of a mortgagor to redeem is legally upheld, and purchasing a share by mortgagees does not extinguish the mortgage right.

JUDGMENT :

AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.

1. This order of mine shall dispose of two cases i.e. RSA No.1671 of 2000 and COCP No.2542 of 2015. The former is preferred by the appellants-defendants No.1 to 4 against the concurrent finding rendered vide judgments and decrees dated 31.03.1999 and 19.01.2000 passed by the learned trial Court and the learned 1^st Appellate Court respectively whereby the suit for possession by way of redemption filed by contesting respondent No.1-plaintiff was decreed and the appeal preferred against the aforesaid judgment and decree by the appellants-defendants No.1 to 4, stood dismissed. The latter has been filed by the petitioners-defendants No.1 to 4 under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for imposing appropriate punishment on the respondents for willful disobedience of orders dated 27.04.2000 (Annexure P-1) and 14.03.2001 (Annexure P-2) passed by this Court in aforementioned regular second appeal. For the sake of brevity, facts are being enumerated from RSA No.1671 of 2000.

2. Succinctly, the facts are that Harbans Singh, Rattan Singh sons of Ganga Singh and Smt. Keso widow of Ganga Singh were owners in possession of the land in dispute mentioned in the head-note of the plaint and they mortgaged the same with defendants No.1 to 4, who are appellants before this Court, on 10.06.1975 and executed a mortgage deed in their favour for a period of 14 years i.e. upto 10.06.1989. Harbans Singh, mortgagor, died on 10.10.1991 and being unmarried, his estate was inherited by defendant No.8-Bachan Singh (proforma respondent No.5 before this Court) and his sister Tari Kaur. Tari Kaur also died and her legal heirs are defendants No.11 to 13 (proforma respondents No.8 to 10 before this Court). On death of Rattan Singh, mortgagor, his estate was inherited by his sons namely Sulakhan Singh, Dalbir Singh, Kashmir Singh (proforma respondent No.6 before this Court), Balkar Singh, Swinder Singh alias Jaswant Singh (proforma respondent No.7 before this Court) and his widow Smt. Mayo and out of them Sulakhan Singh, Dalbir Singh, Balkar Singh and Mayo also died. Sulakhan Singh, Dalbir Singh, Balkar Singh remained unmarried throughout their life and defendants No.9 and 10 namely Kashmir Singh and Swinder Singh alias Jaswant Singh i.e. proforma respondents No.6 and 7 respectively before this Court, are their legal heirs. Smt. Keso has also died and her estate was inherited by her grandsons i.e. defendants No. 5 to 7 (proforma respondents No.2 to 4 before this Court) namely Swinder Singh, Virsa Singh, Kirpal Singh and by the plaintiff-Joginder Singh (contesting respondent No.1 before this Court) on the basis of valid Will and mutation No.1373 dated 31.08.1981 has also been sanctioned in this regard. A case regarding redemption of the suit land was filed by contesting respondent No.1-plaintiff, who is legal heir of Bachan Singh (proforma respondent No.5 before this Court) in the court of S.D.O. (Civil), Gurdaspur exercising the powers of Collector but the same was withdrawn by him due to the incapacity of the Court on the basis of pecuniary jurisdiction. Thereafter, he asked defendants No.5 to 13 to pay the mortgage money to defendants No.1 to 4 and get the suit land redeemed but when they showed their incapacity in paying of the mortgage money to defendants No. 1 to 4, he came forward to pay the mortgage money to defendants No.1 to 4 for getting the suit land redeemed. Defendants No.5 to 13 were put at liberty to join at any stage of the s