RAJ BALA Vs. NEPAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby suit for recovery of Rs.1,78,014/- under Order XXXIV of the Code of Civil Procedure by sale of mortgaged immovable property, was dismissed.

(2.) AS per the plaintiff, Abhay Ram, father of the defendant borrowed a sum of Rs.45,880/- on 8.6.1990 at 2% per month rate of interest, against the collateral security of agricultural land by a simple mortgage deed, duly executed and registered on 8.6.1990. Abhay Ram suffered a civil court decree in favour of defendant on 28.7.1995.

(3.) THE defendant averred that no amount is due to the plaintiff as the amount stands paid to plaintiff against a receipt. The plaintiff denied her signatures on the said receipt in replication. The learned trial Court decreed the suit holding that the testimony of DW-1 Naresh Kataria, Hand Writing and Finger Print Expert and testimony of PW-2 Puran Lal and DW-2 Jagan Nath, does not prove the document Exs.D-1 and D-2. It was also found that even if the amount has been paid to the plaintiff by the father of the defendant, then it was the duty of the defendant to redeem the mortgage property in the revenue record.