RACHHPAL SINGH Vs. SOHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Regular Second Appeal No. 465 of 1976 dated 25th April, 2007 is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The father of the appellant mortgaged the property in the form of usufructuary mortgage to one Mr. Beliram. The property was situated in Pakistan. After partition, the parties shifted to India. Since the appellant and his family were displaced from Pakistan, entire family was rehabilitated by providing alternative agriculture land in Village Bhatoya in favour of the father of the appellant. However, Beliram, the mortgagee also shifted to India and stayed in the same village and continued to hold the property which was provided to appellant's father in India for the purpose of rehabilitation as the mortgagee. Beliram transferred his mortgaged rights, in respect of the mortgaged property situated in India in favour of one Mr. Sohan Singh-respondent. After demise of appellant's father, the appellant filed the suit for redemption of mortgage. The Courts below including the High Court have dismissed the suit on the ground that no adequate material is produced by the appellant to show that he is the owner of the property and that he has mortgaged the property in favour of either Beliram or Sohan Singh.

(3.) It is relevant to note here itself that the appellant's father had owned another property in Pakistan which also was mortgaged in favour of one Inder Singh and one Jagat singh. Almost similar facts as mentioned supra regarding shifting to India after partition, rehabilitation, allotment of land and mortgage etc. are applicable to the case of Inder singh and Jagat Singh also. The appellant filed suit for redemption of mortgage in respect of the mortgaged land situated in India against Indersingh and Jagat singh and the said suit came to be decreed throughout. During the pendency of the said suit, the appellant herein went to Pakistan and obtained all the relevant records pertaining to the property in the said case and the same were produced. Ultimately based on such documents, the Courts including this Court held that the appellant's father and thereafter the appellant was owner and mortgagor of the said property and thus are entitled to redemption of mortgage. As mentioned supra, suit for redemption filed against Inder Singh and Jagat Singh was decreed.