PURAN CHAND D Vs. KIRPAL SINGH D

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellants Nos. 2 to 4 are the owners of 247 Kanals and 15 marlas of agricultural land situated in the district of Patiala. The Appellant No. 1 is the erstwhile second mortgagee of the land. The Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 were the erstwhile prior mortgagees of the land and also claim to be tenants of the land. The question to be determined is whether despite redemption of the prior mortgage by payment to the respondents 1 and 2, they can claim to remain in occupation of the land as tenants.

(2.) The land was owned by Raunaq Ram, predecessor-in-interest of the appellants. Raunaq Ram mortgaged the land with possession to Amar Singh (the respondent No. 3 before us) on 22nd March 1950. During the year 1951-52, Amar Singh sold his interest in the land to Labhu Ram. Labhu Ram inducted Bir Singh, the father of the respondents 1 and 2, as a tenant in respect of the land in November 1953. After Labhu Ram's death, his son Sat Paul sold his rights as a mortgagee which he had inherited from Labhu Ram to the respondents 1 and 2 by two deeds dated 14th January 1963 and 5th December 1966. The respondents 1 and 2, therefore, became the mortgagees of the entirety of the disputed land by 1966. In 1971, Bir Singh died. The respondents 1 and 2, as his sons, claim to have inherited his tenancy rights to the land.

(3.) In the meanwhile, Raunaq Ram had died leaving behind him his widow, Ram Piari (respondent No. 6) and four daughters, namely, Purni, Lachhmi, Sheela (the appellants 2 to 4) and Dayawanti (respondent No. 5). Raunaq Ram had executed a will in favour of his four daughters by which he bequeathed the land to them. All four daughters executed a second mortgage with possession of the land in favour of Puran Chand (appellant No. 1).