LAWS(P&H)-1966-12-17

JUGRAJ SINGH Vs. JASWANT SINGH

Decided On December 14, 1966
JUGRAJ SINGH Appellant
V/S
JASWANT SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONE Bagh Singh was the owner of the land in dispute, measuring about 371 kanals and situate in village Sangrana, district Ferozepore. In 1923, he mortgaged the same with possession for Rs. 5,500/- in favour of Ran Jang Singh. Later on, he migrated to America and died there. According to Jug Raj Singh and his brother balbir Singh sons of Ran Jang Singh, plaintiffs, he was succeeded by his widow and two sons including Vernon Seth Chotia. On 30-5-1968, the said Chotia sold this land through his mukhtiar khas Shri Kartar Singh Chawla to Jaswamt Singh and 7 others, defendants, for Rs. 24,000, Subsequently Ran Jang Singh also died and he was succeeded by his two sons, Jugraj Singh and Balbir Singh. In June 1963, Jaswant Singh and others made an application for the redemption of this land under Section 4 of the Punjab Redemption of Mortgages Act, 1913. On 5th of August, 1968, the Collector granted this application and ordered redemption on payment of Rs. 5,500/- to the plaintiffs. On 7th of August, 1963, the plaintiffs instituted a suit under Section 1,2 of the Punjab Redemption of mortgages Act, 1913, for a declaration that the defendants were not competent to redeem the land and the order of the Collector dated 5th of August 1963 was void and illegal. Their allegations were that the sale effected on 30th of May 1963 in favour of the defendants was not valid, inasmuch as it was not made through a properly authorised agent of Vernon Seth Chotia and, consequently they had no right to redeem the land with the result that the order passed by the Collector on 5th of August 1963 was illegal. It was claimed by them that they were still the mortgagees of the land and the defendants were not entitled to get possession from them under the order of the Collector According to them, the defendants were liable to pay them certain amounts on account of taxes including land revenue, etc. , in the event of the redemption of the land.

(2.) THE suit was contested by the defendants, inter-alia, on the ground that Vernon seth Chotia had sold the land to them through his duly authorised attorney, Shri kartar Singh Chawla, that the said sale was valid and for consideration and that the order of the Collector was in accordance with law. It was also averred by them that the plaintiffs had not paid any taxes to the Government at any rate, they were not entitled to recover anything more thans the mortgage amount from them under the conditions of the mortgage.

(3.) THE trial Judge came to the conclusion that Shri Kartar Singh Chawla was the duly authorised agent of Vernon Seth Chotia and had validly sold the land to the defendants. That being so, the order of the Collector dated 5th of August 1963 was legal and binding on the plaintiffs. It was also found by him that there was nothing on the record to show that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the taxes etc. , paid by them from the defendants. The plaintiffs could withdraw the mortgage amount of Rs, 5,500/- already deposited by the defendants in the Court of the Collector, Muktsar. The plaintiffs, were not still the mortgagees of the suit-land. On these findings, the suit was dismissed.