PANCHOOLAL Vs. KESHARIMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a second appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit for redemption of the mortgaged property in question, situated in Ajmer has been dismissed by the courts below on the ground that the suit is premature.

(2.) IT is the common case of the parties that Baldeo, (grand-father of the plaintiffs and defendant No. 8 Ramdas) mortgaged the house with Surajkaran and his son chhaganlal, ancestors of the defendant-mortgagees in consideration of a sum of rs. 700/- by a registered mortgage deed dated 14-6-1900. It is provided in the mortgage deed that the mortgagors would not be entitled to redeem the mortgage for a period of 90 years, and even after 90 years, it should be redeemed only within six months and if the mortgagors failed to redeem the property within six months after the expiry of 90 years, the right of redemption would be lost. The present suit was filed on 4-7-1960 before the expiry of the stipulated period of 90 years and consequently the defendant-mortgagees pleaded inter alia that the suit was premature and liable to be dismissed as such. It was also pleaded by them that in case the suit was held to be maintainable, they were entitled to get Rs. 10,000/- on account of cost of improvements carried out by them in the mortgaged property as stipulated in the mortgage deed. They also pleaded that some property over and above what had been mortgaged had been wrongly claimed by the plaintiffs.

(3.) AFTER recording the evidence produced by the parties the Munsiff, Ajmer City (West), Ajmer by his Judgment dated 18-4-64 dismissed the suit as being premature. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree by the trial Court the plaintiffs filed appeal but the same was dismissed by the Additional Civil Judge, Ajmer by his Judgment dated 28-9-1964. Consequently, the plaintiffs have filed this second appeal.