SATAR Vs. MAHANTU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question that falls for the decision of the Full Bench is whether a mortgage effected by oral agreement or by an unregistered instrument prior to the year 1996 is a valid mortgage to which the provisions of the Restitution of Mortgaged Properties Act. 2006, will be attracted.

(2.) A Division Bench of this Court consisting of Kilam and Ali JJ. has referred this question to the Full Bench for an authoritative decision.

(3.) THE respondents who are the representatives -in -interest of the mortgagor presented a petition to the Dy. Commissioner Doda under S. 6 of the Restitution of Mortgaged Properties Act For restitution of the mortgaged property. The appellants who represent the mortgagees interest resisted the petition on the ground that the transaction was not a mortgage but only a lease. The Dy. Commissioner dismissed the petition on the ground that, the transaction did not constitute a valid mortgage. On appeal, the learned Addl. District Judge at Jammu came to the conclusion that the property in question was held under a mortgage, and directed restitution of the mortgaged property to the respondents. The appellants came up in second appeal to this court against this order of the Addl. District Judge. A Division Bench which heard the appeal made the reference stated above to the Full Bench.