BEDI Vs. GIRDHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of the above appeal as well as R.S.A. No. 900 of 1977 Kanhar V. Girdhari as in both the appeals the facts and law point involved are practically similar.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to these appeals are that the ancestors of defendant Nos. 1 and 2 in both the suits had created two mortgages in favour of the ancestors of the plaintiffs and defendant Nos. 3 to 7 more than 60 years prior to the filing of the suit, which was filed on 3rd May, 1972. One mortgage related to land measuring 25 Kanals 11 Marlas and the other to 21 Kanals 4 Marlas. The plaintiffs filed two suits, one in respect of each mortgage for a declaration that they and the pro-forma defendants had become owners of the land involved in each suit as it had not been redeemed within time. In that alternative they prayed for a decree to the effect that in case they were not proved to have become owners by lapse of time, it be declared that they and pro-forma defendants were in possession of the land involved in each suit as mortgagees and were entitled to retain their possession. It was also averred by the plaintiffs that they had come to know that in their absence the Revenue Officer had sanctioned mutations on 29th March, 1967 redeeming the mortgages. They were not present at the time the said mutations were sanctioned nor the redemption money was received by them. They were still in possession of the land.

(3.) Both the learned Courts below have dismissed the suit of the plaintiffs in view of the observations made in Smt. Sharifan alias Shanti V. Ibrahim alias Dharam Vir, 1975 PunLJ 293. However, in Letters Patent Appeal that judgment was reversed. The judgment in the Letters Patent Appeal is reported as Ibrahim alias Dharam Vir V. Smt. Sharifan alias Shanti, 1979 PunLJ 469. The Letters Patent Bench remarked :-