DALIP KUMAR Vs. DES RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The mortgagees/plaintiffs' suit, bearing No. 321-1 of 99, for, rendition of a decree, for, foreclosure, vis-a-vis, the suit land, and, against the defendants, hence stood dismissed, by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. (V), Shimla, H.P. In an appeal bearing No. 114-S/13 of 2005, as, carried therefrom by the aggrieved plaintiffs, hence, before the learned District Judge, Shimla, the latter Court hence dismissed, the, afore appeal, and, affirmed, the, verdict recorded, by, the learned trial Court.

(2.) The aggrieved therefrom, the, plaintiffs/appellants herein (for short "the plaintiffs/mortgagees"), through, the instant RSA preferred before this Court, hence strive, to, beget reversal, of, concurrently recorded verdicts, as, pronounced, by both, the learned Courts below.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that Shri Matru was owner in possession of land of Khata Khatauni No. 2/2 and 3 situated in Mauja Bhariyal, Tehsil Kandaghat, District Koshitan (for short "the suit land"). He had mortgaged his share measuring 4-6 bighas with possession in favour of Sh. Kanku and the same was redeemed by him vide mutation No. 141 dated 28.9.2006 BK. He also took possession of the mortgaged land. On same day, vide mutation No. 142 an area of 2-9 bighas was again mortgaged with possession in favour of Sh. Kanku by said owner Shri Mathru for a sum of Rs. 100/- the mortgagee Shri Kanku was put in possession. Shri Kanku on death was succeeded by his son Sh. Parsu who possessed the mortgaged land and he on death was succeeded by Ganga Ram alongwith Shri Ananat Ram and Shri Janki. As such, the plaintiffs are mortgagees in possession of the suit land since the date of mortgage 28.9.2006. The plaintiffs and their predecessor-in-interest, are, possessing the suit land. It has not been redeemed by the defendants, or, their predecessor-ininterest/mortgagor. Limitation to redeem has expired and defendants have lost right, title and interest in the suit land by way of efflux of time. Hence, the plaintiffs have become absolute owners in possession of the mortgaged suit land.