SATYAWATI GARG Vs. PRADUMAN TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present second appeal under Sec. 100 CPC is directed against the judgment and decree dated 15.11.2014 passed by the First Appellate Court, namely the learned Additional District Judge, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in RCA No. 33/2013, whereby the first appeal preferred by the appellant/ plaintiff has been dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court, namely the JSCC/ASCJ/ Guardian Judge (East), Karkardooma Courts Delhi in Suit No. 351/2008 dated 23.04.2013 has been affirmed.

(2.) The appellant/ plaintiff had filed a suit for redemption of mortgage, possession, injunction, mesne profits against the respondent on the premise that she is the owner/ mortgagor of the suit property bearing No.C10, situated at village Ghonda, Gujran Khadar in the abadi of C Block, Main Road, Bhajanpura, Delhi 53 along with the structure constructed thereon. The plaintiff stated that the defendant is the mortgagee of the suit property. The plaintiff claimed that she had purchased the suit property from one Sh. Ranjeet Singh in the year 2004 for a consideration of Rs. 3,00,000/ -. She stated that she was in urgent need of money and requested the defendant to provide financial assistance of Rs. 30,000/ as loan on a monthly interest of 1.5% per month. The plaintiff claimed that the loan was granted and to secure the same, the suit property was mortgaged to the defendant by delivery of possession. She stated that since 28.09.2005, the defendant was in possession of the suit property as a mortgagee.

(3.) The plaintiff stated that the mortgage deed was reduced in writing between the parties on 28.09.2005 in the form of irrevocable GPA. She claimed that she had not understood the meaning of the said document, and the same was explained by the defendant/ mortgagee to the plaintiff as a mortgage. She stated that she had paid interest @ Rs. 1.5% per month on the loan amount upto July, 2008. She claimed that she expressed her willingness to redeem the mortgage, in order to get possession of her property. However, the defendant flatly refused to hand over the possession. Consequently, she issued a legal notice dated 11.08.2008, which was returned back unserved. Resultantly, she filed the suit on the premise that the defendant had misrepresented to her, and in the garb of mortgage deed, he had got executed the irrevocable GPA in his favour.