PREM SINGH Vs. PADAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT may be stated that one of the pleas taken by the plaintiffs was that at one point of time the suit land was mortgaged by the plaintiffs and the father of defendants No.1 to 3 acting jointly, in favour of one Sudame in Samvat year 2007 and was got redeemed in samvat year 2010 by all the co -owners jointly which fact too pointed out to the joint character of the land. On the contrary it was the case of the defendants that the land was got redeemed by late Moongaram alone which had the effect of vesting the title in late Moongaram (and thereafter his sons, defendants No. 1, 2 and 3) alone without regard to the earlier history of the title. However, the story as to mortgage and the plea taken by either party does not have any material bearing on the decision of the suit, in the opinion of this Court. The story of mortgage is sought to be substantiated by certain entries in revenue papers. There is no deed of mortgage, muchless of redemption produced or proved by either party. Assuming, if the property was joint of the plaintiffs and defendants 1, 2 and 3 and was mortgaged by all of them, merely because it was redeemed by the father of defendants, 1, 2 and 3, that would not vest the title exclusively in him, the title would revert back unencumbered, the defendants 1, 2 and 3 having only a right of contribution from the plaintiffs.

(2.) IN Phoolchand v. Daulal (1962 JLJ Short -Note 51) a Division Bench of this Court has held;