BALKISHAN Vs. BALDEO KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against an appellate decree of the learned Additional District Judge of amritsar varying the decree of the trial Court in a redemption suit.

(2.) PANDIT Rikhi Kesh on 22-10-1928 mortgaged the house in dispute in favour of Master Bodh raj for Rs. 2500/ -. The interest agreed upon was 12 per cent, per annum which was to be raised after two years to Rs. 1/4 per mensem, the mortgage being with possession. On 15-3-1945 the plaintiffs who are the sons and widow of the mortgagor brought a suit for redemption making the mortgagee and his tenants as party defendants. The plaintiffs relied on the rule of damdupat also. Several pleas were raised but it is not necessary to decide them. The trial Court decreed the plaintiffs' suit and allowed redemption on payment of Rs. 3,884/- being the principal amount plus interest, plus cost of improvements and interest thereon at 7 1/2 per cent, per annum. An appeal was taken-to the Additional District Judge and there the decree was only slightly varied and the amount on payment of which the redemption was allowed was reduced to Rs. 3,883/6/ -. It was also held that in this suit the tenants of the mortgagee could not be-ejected.

(3.) IN this appeal two points have been argued by Mr. Shamair Chand (1) that the rule of damdupat applies and (2) that there is no protection to the tenants of the mortgagee and the decree so far as it relates to the tenants is erroneous.