VORA AMINBAI IBRAHIM Vs. VORA TAHERALI MOHMEDALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Second Appeal under S.100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has arisen from the suit brought by respondents for redemption of property which was mortgaged to the deceased appellant.

(2.) The suit property is a building situated in Jamnagar City and is described in detail in list "A" appended to the plaint. The suit property originally belonged to deceased Sugrabai. She was owner and in possession of the suit property since long. The suit property was mortgaged by deceased Sugrabai for Rs. 2,000.00 to the deceased appellant by executing an unregistered deed dated April 21, 1965. The period of mortgage was stipulated to be of 5 years in the said deed. On the date of execution of the unregistered mortgage deed, possession of the property was handed over to the deceased appellant. It may be stated that during the pendency of the Second Appeal, the original appellant, i.e., Vora Aminabai Ibrahim expired on May 10, 1995, and her heirs and legal representatives have been brought on the record of the case by allowing Civil Application No. 1531 of 1995. Deceased Sugrabai had instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 307 of 1972 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Jamnagar for redemption of mortgage. During the pendency of the said suit Sugrabai expired on January 19, 1974. As her heirs and legal representatives were not brought on record of Regular Civil Suit No. 307 of 1972, the suit was disposed of as having abated. Thereafter, the present respondents as heirs and legal representatives of deceased Sugrabai instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 488 of 1976 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Jamnagar, for redemption of mortgage. It may be stated that this suit was instituted by the respondents on August 27, 1975.

(3.) The suit was contested by the deceased appellant. In view of the pleadings of the parties, the Court had framed necessary issues for determination. The parties had led oral as well documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. On appreciation of the evidence, suit for redemption of mortgaged property was decreed by the trial Court and a preliminary decree was ordered to be drawn in terms of the judgment.