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

1950 Supreme(All) 119

GHULAM HASAN, HARISH CHANDRA, WANCHOO, KIDWAI, B.M.LAL
MAHABAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
RAM RAJ – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ghulam Imam, K.N.Tandon, R.N.Shukla

GHULAM HASAN, J.


( 1 ) THE fundamental question common to the revision and the two connected second appeals relates to the legal effect of a mortgage of tenancy or occupancy rights by a tenant and to the relief, if any, which can be granted to such a mortgagee in a suit brought by the mortgagor. There is also a question as to the appropriate form of action. The controversy arising in these cases will be clearer by a statement of facts in each case. I shall first take up the revision application.

( 2 ) THIS application arises out of proceedings under Section 12, Agriculturists Relief Act and has arisen in the following manner. On 13th October 1900, Ram Adhin and Drigbijai Singh mortgaged an occupancy holding to Sheo Narain for Rs. 1000/ -. The original mortgagors and the mortgagee are dead and are represented by their heirs and legal representatives. The representatives of the mortgagors filed an application under Section 12 for redemption of the mortgage and they claimed redemption on the ground that the entire mortgage money had been satisfied out of the usufruct of the property. The principal defence was that Section 12 did not apply to the case and the application was not mainta









































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