BASAKHI RAM Vs. KALU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff is the appellant and is aggrieved by the concurrent findings recorded by the learned Courts below. The plaintiff/appellant had filed a suit for declaration and injunction on the allegations that the land comprised in Khasra No. 1528, Khata Khatauni No. 245/513, measuring 2 -18 -0 bighas, situate at Phati Fozal, Kothi Hurang Tehsil and District, Kullu is recorded in the revenue record in co -ownership and joint possession of S/Shri Chande Ram and Khimi Ram in equal shares. On 27.2.1955, the above named owners created a mortgage over the suit land to the extent of 1/2 share in favour of Shri Jhabu for a consideration of Rs. 900/ - and on this basis mutation No. 328 to this effect was attested by the Revenue Officer on 22.5.1955. After the death of Chande Ram mortgagor his estate was inherited by his widow Smt. Ailu, who gifted her half share to the appellant and ¼ share remained with Jhabu as mortgagee which was also redeemed by the appellant.

(2.) IT was further alleged that that Mortgagee Jhabu sold his mortgage rights in favour of the appellant for mortgage debt of Rs. 450/ - and the possession was also delivered. After the death of Khimi Ram his entire property was inherited by his widow Ghinu Devi and after her death the same has been inherited by defendant/respondent No. 1 and Chilku Devi. Chilku Devi transferred her rights to Ishru the predecessor -in -interest of defendants No. 2 -A to 2 -C (hereinafter referred to respondents). On such allegations, the appellant prayed for declaration since defendants/respondents No. 1 and 2 had failed to redeem the mortgage to the extent of ¼ share of said Khimi Ram in the suit land and the appellant is coming in possession of this mortgaged land for the last more than 30 years and is therefore, become owner of this land by afflux of time.

(3.) WHETHER the defendant No. 1 is a marginal farmer, as alleged, if so, its effect? OPD