SK. RAFFIQUIDDIN Vs. SK. SAMSUDDIN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEFENDANT No. 1 is the Appellant against a confirming judgment in a suit for redemption.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are as follows:

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit on the following findings : (I) The suit transaction is a mortgage by conditional sale and not an out and out sale and (2) even if the lease in favour of Govind was invalid being in contravention of the provisions of Orissa Act 1 of 1948 and the property can be said to have vested in the State on abolition of the estate, Defendant so 1 as a mortgagee is estopped from questioning or repudiating the title of the mortgagor or his successor -in -interest. Therefore, the Plaintiff is entitled to the relief of redemption. The lower Appellate Court agreed with the finding of the trial Court that the suit trans Action is a mortgage by conditional sale and held that the mortgagor irrespective of the validity of the lease in favour of Govind had possessory interest in the property which he mortgaged to Defendant No. 1. Accordingly, it dismissed the appeal.