TUNDAL Vs. MUNSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of Regular Second Appeal Nos. 724, 725 of 1985 and 1740 of 1990 and 307 of 1991 as common questions of law and fact are involved in these appeals.

(2.) Facts are being taken from Regular Second Appeal No. 724 of 1985. This is defendants' regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge whereby the appeal filed by them against the judgment and decree of the trial Court was dismissed.

(3.) Briefly put, plaintiffs filed a suit for possession by way of redemption on payment of Rs. 825/- as mortgage amount against defendant No. 1 on the ground that Smt. Mohori widow of Dan Sahai was owner in possession of agricultural land as detailed in para No. 1 of the plaint. It was further stated in the plaint that during the consolidation proceedings, the land measuring 45 Kanals 8 marlas described in para No. 2 of the plaint was allotted to her in lieu of old Khasra Nos. The aforesaid land was mortgaged by her with possession with defendant No. 1 vide registered mortgage deed dated 25.9.1991 for an ostensible consideration of Rs. 2200/- which amount was reduced to Rs. 825/- in view of the civil Court decree. Mutation was sanctioned on the basis of civil Court decree on 2.4.1957. Smt. Mohari died in or about the year 1967. Mutation of inheritance was sanctioned in favour of persons mentioned in pedigree table as given in para No. 5 of the plaint. Hukam Singh plaintiff No. 6 and Dal Chand plaintiff No. 7 acquired rights in the suit land on the basis of decree of Civil Court dated 30.3.1974 with regard to the share of Khillu, Rumali widow, Ramwati daughter and Pitambar son of Giasi. It has been further mentioned in the plaint that plaintiff Nos. 6 and 7, namely, Hukam Singh and Dal Chand filed a suit for redemption (Suit No. 565 of 1974) which was dismissed on 13.12.1976. Since defendant No. 1 was reluctant to release the suit land after the receipt of the amount of mortgage, so the present suit was brought impleading defendants No. 2 to 9 as proforma defendants.