SOKKUTHAI ANIMAL Vs. PANDIARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is against the judgment and decree dated 2.8.1996, in A.S. No. 2 of 1993, on the file of Principal Sub -Judge, Srivilliputhur, confirming the judgment and decree dated 30.7.1983, made in O.S. No. 64 of 1993, on the file of District Munsif, Aruppukottai.

(2.) THE appellants are the defendants 2 and 3 in the suit in O.S. No. 64 of 1983, for a final decree for redemption by directing the defendants to receive a sum of Rs. 800 deposited in court and execute reconveyance. The respondents 1 to 3 are the 2nd plaintiff, 1st defendant and the legal representative of the deceased 1st plaintiff respectively. The plaintiffs executed a deed of mortgage by conditional sale on 27.7.1978 in favour of the defendants 2 and 3 for Rs. 800. The period fixed for repayment of money is three years. The defendants were put in possession of suit property, on the date of the execution of the document. Even before the expiry of the period of three years, i.e., in July, 1981, the plaintiffs requested the defendants to receive Rs. 800 and execute the document of reconveyance. Since the defendants were not amenable for the same, on 1.8.1981, plaintiffs issued a lawyer's notice. The defendants sent a reply on 8.8.1981, stating that the period three years has already expired. Hence the plaintiff filed a suit against the defendants.

(3.) ON consideration of the entire material produced by the plaintiffs and the defendants, the trial court, in the light of the provision in Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act, found that Ex. B -1 is a mortgage deed by conditional sale, and as such, the suit is not barred by limitation. In the first appeal filed by the appellants, the lower appellate court confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court, accepting the views of the trial court, apart from adding its own reasonings. To arrive at such a conclusion, the trial court, as also the lower appellate court, have given the following reasons: