ROOP SINGH Vs. AMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 15.6.2002 passed by learned District Judge, Shimla in Civil Appeal No.96-S/13 of 1999, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant'), has assailed the legality and validity thereof on the ground, inter alia, that the same being result of mis-appreciation and mis-reading of evidence available on record is perverse and is neither legally nor factually sustainable.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff'), has filed a suit for possession of land bearing khasra No.310 measuring 17 biswas situated in Chak Mool-Matiana by way of redemption of mortgage and for rendition of accounts under H.P. Debt Reduction Act, on the ground that the same was mortgaged with possession by his predecessor-ininterest with one Chimna Ram, father of defendant in the year 1965, for a sum of Rs. 200/-, which was usufructuary mortgage. The defendant had resisted and contested the suit on several grounds, however, mainly that the same is time barred. Learned trial Judge after holding full trial had dismissed the suit. Learned lower Appellate Court on reversal of the judgment and decree passed by learned trial Judge had decreed the suit vide judgment and decree impugned before this Court in the present appeal, the operative part whereof reads as follows:-

(3.) When the appeal came to be listed for hearing, learned Senior Advocate representing the appellant has pointed out that since the respondent-plaintiff has not paid the redemption money, i.e. Rs. 200/- to the appellantdefendant within six moths from the date of judgment and decree impugned in the present appeal, therefore, on expiry of the time so granted by learned lower appellate Court, the suit stands already dismissed.