S. PARTHASARATHY Vs. PARASPARA SAHAYA NIDHI (PERAMBUR) LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is by the plaintiff in the original suit. Having suffered dismissal at the hand of trial Court as well by the first appellate Court, the second appeal is filed against the concurrent findings.

(2.) Suit filed for a preliminary decree to order the first defendant to cancel the two mortgage deeds vide, document No.3623 of 1989, dated 02/09/1989 and document No.2998 of 1990 dated 11/10/1990 and permanent injunction restraining the first defendant from claiming any amount from the plaintiff towards the loan account of L.P. No.134 and L.PNo.144.

(3.) The case of the plaintiff: The plaintiff mortgaged his self-acquired property at No.C.363, III Cross Road, Jawahar Nagar, Chennai 600 082 with the 1st defendant Nidhi and raised loan of Rs.50,000/- on 02/09/1989 and executed a simple mortgage deed duly registered. He re-paid Rs.40,000/-along with accrued interest towards his first loan of Rs.50,000/-. Again, he raised loan of Rs.30,000/- on 11/10/1990 and executed second simple mortgage deed. So far he has paid more than Rs.2,00,000/-. The first defendant has not issued any receipts for the payment. Surprisingly, a registered notice was received from the first defendant on 10/07/2006 claiming a sum of Rs.84,653.20 towards the first loan and Rs.5,07,365.75 for the second loan. When he rushed to the first defendant office and enquired, they agreed to settle the both the loans for Rs.1,30,000/- . Accordingly, the plaintiff paid Rs.50,000 on 31/07/2006, Rs.30,000/- on 30/08/2006 and Rs.50,000/- on 25/03/2007. After receiving the said amount, the first defendant failed to discharge the mortgage. The 1 st defendant also failed to give receipt for these payments. The plaintiff is not liable to pay any amount to the 1 st defendant towards the L.P account No.134 and L.P account No.144. So, the first defendant has to cancel the two mortgage and release the title documents. Further more, any claim of the first defendant is barred by limitation.