LOHANA GOMTIBAI MADHAVJI DECD HER HEIRS AND LRS VRAJLAL DUNGARSI Vs. POKARAN BRAHMIN RAMANKANTA RATILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These matters arise out of the final decree for redemption of mortgaged property. The questions involved are regarding the accounts taken and the amounts determined to be due for redemption of the mortgaged property. The trial court held that a sum of Rs. 5441.00 was due to the mortgagee and the plaintiff was directed to pay the same within six months from the date of the decree ( 30/10/1974) and the mortgagee defendant No. 1 was to give possession of the mortgaged property on receipt of the said amount. The trial court had worked out the amount as follows: @@@ 1 Rs. 400.00 Principal amount. 2 Rs. 1668.00 Interest on principal amount of Rs. 400.00 for the period from 6-7-35 to 6-4-70 at rule of Re. 1 /- per hundred per month without cumulative interest. 3 Rs. 2958.00 For expenses. Rs. 617.00 surface and floor repairing after 6-9-1951. Rs. 400.00 water connection in 1954. (S. Y. 2010) Rs. 225.00 electric collection No. 1962. Rs. 853.00 for construction of ladders an(i wooden ladder in S. Y. 2019. Rs. 250.00 Expenses for rent collection. Rs. 891.00 Expenses for rent collection. Rs. 524.00 Expenses cut by tenants at the tenants of pay- ment of rent to the defendant. 4 Rs. 3036.00 Interest on expenses. Rs. 1338.00interest on Rs. 617.00 for 18 years and 7 months at the rate of 1 per cent per month. Rs. 768.00Interest on Rs. 400.00 for 16 years at a rate of 1 per cent per month. Rs. 216.00interest on Rs. 225.00 for 8 years at the rate of 1 per cent per month. Rs. 714.00Interest on Rs. 853.00 for 7 years at the rate Rs. 8062.00 of 1 per cent per month. ----------- Rs. 3621.00 Less amount being rent received by the defendant No. 1 for suit property. --------- Rs. 5441.00 Total amount payable to the defendant by the plaintiff for redemption of mortgage property. Both the sides went in appeal to the lower appellate court. The appeal of the mortgagee was dismissed and the appeal of the mortgagor-plaintiff was partly allowed and instead of a sum of Rs. 5441.00 the District Court reduced the sum of Rs. 3 95 and it worked out the figures in the following manner: Rs. 400.00 The principal amount. Rs. 2958.00 for the repairs improvements and other expenses. ----------- Rs. 3358.00 total. PLUS: Rs. 3358.00 The amount of interest equal to the principal amount. Rs. 6716.00 Total Rs. 3621.00 Less amount of rent recovered by the mortgage payable to the mortgager. _________ Rs. 3095.00 Net Amount. @@@

(2.) Because there were two appeals before the District Court and since the mortgagor (sic mortgagee) is aggrieved by the judgment and decree in hold these ageless. has pressured these two Second Appeals even though they arise from one suit and one decree. The mortgagor has also tiled cross-objections for further reducing this amount.

(3.) There is is scope for disputing these various amounts in the Second Appeals as they have been found proved. The trial Court on appreciation of the evidence and consideration of the report of the Commissioner has accepted these figures and the lower appellate court has also concurred with the same. I do not find that any question of law arises on the quantum of the different entries found to be proved.