BASANT LAL Vs. JAGDISH NARAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an execution first appeal. The Appellant held a decree against the Respondent. In satisfaction of that decree he was granted a self -liquidating mortgage under Section 17 of the U.P. Debt Redemption Act in 1944. Before this mortgage could in terms be fully satisfied on account of the lapse of time the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act came into force on the 1st of July, 1952, and the persons who were usufructuary mortgagees on that date became simple mortgagees. The Appellant thereafter applied to the execution court for the execution of the decree for such amount which was considered due on the 1st of July, 1952, and which probably amounted to what the Appellant would have realised in the remaining period of the self -liquidating mortgage granted to him. The execution court rejected his application holding that there was no decree to be executed, the decree having been satisfied fully by the execution of the self -liquidating mortgage in 1944. It, therefore rejected the application.

(2.) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant and are of opinion that the view taken by the court below is perfectly correct. The decree came to an end when the self -liquidating usufructuary mortgage was executed in 1944. If the rights which the Appellant got under that mortgage are affected by the provisions of law coming into force subsequently, the judgment -debtor is not to blame for it and the Appellant like all other persons in similar position and whose rights have been effected by the new, enactment will have such remedies as be open to him in view of the changed position in law. As already mentioned, the Appellant becomes a simple mortgagee in respect of the amount due to him. Whatever remedies be open to him as a simple mortgagee he can have recourse to them, but surely he cannot go to the execution court for the reopening of the execution proceedings treating a fully satisfied decree as a decree which had not been so satisfied.