SUNEHRU Vs. RIKHI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of Regular Second Appeals Nos. 17 and 18 of 1961, which are directed, against the appellate decrees of the learned District Judge, Bilaspur. The parties, the facts and the questions of law, involved in both the appeals, are the same. It will, therefore, toe convenient to dispose them of toy one judgment.

(2.) THE facts, leading to the filing of the appeals, are simple and are not in dispute. The predecessors in interest of the appellant had effected three mortgages, with possession, in favour of the predecessors in interest of the respondents, in respect of three parcels of land, measuring 3 bighas and 9 biswas, 8 bighas and 16 biswas and 4 bighas and 13 biswas. The appellant had instituted three suits, Nos. 134, 135 and 136 of 1957, in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge Bilaspur, for the redemption of the three mortgages and for possession of the lands mortgaged. The suits were contested by the respondents. Their main plea was that their predecessors in interest were tenants of the lands, before the mortgages were effected, in their favour, and that even if it be held that the appellant was entitled to redeem the mortgages, she was not entitled to get actual possession of the lands and the respondents were entitled to remain In possession, as tenants.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by the orders of the learned District Judge, in appeals JNos. 21 and 22, the appellant filed appeals Nos. 17 and 18 of 1901 In this Court. The appellant has accepted the decision of the learned District Judge In appeal No. 20, granting Her actual possession of land, measuring 8 blghas and IB biswas. The main ground of attack, in both the appeals, is that Dittu 11am, Mukhtar I it has of the appellant, had no authority to compromise appeals Nos. 21 and 22, pending in the Court of the District Judge.