JIWAN KUMAR Vs. MOHINDER PAL KAUR AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Defendant-appellant who claims to be tenant in the shop in question, is in regular second appeal against the concurrent finding of fact arrived at by the Courts below while decreeing the suit for possession by way of redemption of the mortgage. At this stage, it must be noted that the plaintiff mortgagor-Mohinder Pal Kaur is mother whereas the mortgagee is Paramjit Kaur, her daughter.

(2.) In these circumstances, the question which needs consideration is "whether in the facts of the present case, a tenant inducted by the alleged mortgagee (daughter of the mortgagor) shall be liable to deliver possession of the property on redemption of the mortgage or the tenant shall be entitled to continue in possession under the owner having protection against eviction as per the provisions of Rent Act applicable."

(3.) Some facts are required to be noticed. Mohinder Pal Kaur was owner of 7 shops. All the 7 shops were mortgaged by three mortgage deeds. Two shops were mortgaged in favour of Paramjit Kaur-defendant No.1, her daughter for a sum of Rs.20,000/-. Second mortgage was with respect to three shops in favour of nephew-Harjit Singh in the year 1990 for a sum of Rs.30,000/- and the remaining two shops were on mortgage with Sarabjit Kaur w/o Jarnail Singh. Thus, all the 7 shops were mortgaged for Rs.70,000/-. The plaintiff filed this suit for possession by way of redemption of the mortgage. Defendant No.3 contested the suit and pleaded that he is a tenant in the shop and therefore, no decree for possession can be passed against him.