BIKKER SINGH Vs. DIAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a defendants' appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30.4.1982 passed by learned District Judge, Faridkot, whereby he accepted the appeal and set-aside the judgment and decree dated 25.5.1981 passed by learned Sub-Judge Ist Class, Moga, and held that the plaintiffs have become owners of the suit land by lapse of time as the mortgage was not redeemed and restrained the defendants not to dispossess the plaintiffs.

(2.) THE relevant facts for disposal of this appeal are that Gurdit Singh son of Sham Singh was owner of the land as mentioned in Para No. 1 of the plaint. He mortgaged that said land in favour of Roada Singh vide registered mortgage deed dated 11.10.1913 for a sum of Rs. 500/-. The possession of the said land was also delivered to the mortgagee. Gurdit Singh, however, again mortgaged the same land for a sum of Rs. 1100/- with the same mortgagee vide registered mortgage deed dated 16.12.1920. Roada Singh, mortgagee, died and the plaintiffs, being the successors-in-interest, became the morgagees.

(3.) THE defendants contested the suit and admitted that Gurdit Singh was the owner of the property, which was inherited by Harnam Kaur. They also admitted that the suit was filed by the proprietors of Thola Kharak Singh, who became the owners of the property in dispute. It is also admitted that the plaintiffs were the sons of the mortgagee and successor-in-interest. The case of the defendants was that defendant Nos. 1 to 6 filed a suit for possession by way of redemption. The said suit was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 27.3.1974 for redemption of 1070/2072 share of the land on payment of Rs. 250/-. The plaintiffs filed an appeal against the said judgment and decree, which was dismissed on 16.1.1978. The defendants also took the objection that the present suit of the plaintiffs was barred by the principle of res judicata and that they were debarred from filing the suit by their act and conduct. On the pleadings of the parties various issues were framed. The learned trial Court, after appreciating the evidence and hearing counsel for the parties, decided issue No. 1 in favour of the plaintiffs and held that the suit land was allotted in consideration for the land mortgaged by Gurdit Singh. Under Issue No. 2, it was held that the plaintiffs had not acquired ownership rights. Issue No. 3 was decided in favour of the defendants and it was held that the suit was barred by the principle of res judicata. Under issue No. 4, it was held that they had complied with the earlier decree for redemption. Issue No. 5 was also decided in favour of the defendants in view of the decision given on Issue No. 3 and ultimately the suit was dismissed vide judgment and decreed dated 25.5.1981.