SHAIKH RAMZAN ALI Vs. BABU LAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The suit out of which this Letters Patent appeal has arisen, and in which the defendant is the appellant before us, was brought by the plaintiff to enforce a mortgage bond to secure a sum of Rs. 200, and the question in dispute in this appeal is as to what was the nature of the property mortgaged. As translated, the mortgaged property was: The entire mukarrari rent of Rs. 100 per year payable by Shaikh Latif Hussain of Shahganj under a kabuliyat of June 1913 in respect of 11.31 acres of lakhraj jagir, naqdi kasht land and manhunda rice.

(2.) If the mortgaged property is to be considered merely as an actionable claim, then it is clear that a six years limitation lay in respect of the plaintiff's right of suit. If on the other hand it is the mortgage of an interest in immovable property, a 12 years limitation exists. The point therefore is one solely of the meaning of the words which described the mortgaged property. The learned Subordinate Judge from whom a second appeal was carried do a single Judge of this Court endeavoured to interpret these words by certain statements in the plaint which come into existence some years later. Needless to say, this process of construction is entirely erroneous.

(3.) The learned Judge, who heard the case in second appeal, interpreted the words and with his interpretation I entirely agree. Indeed the matter seems to me beyond any dispute whatever. The reference to the document giving the mortgagor the right to recover rent from the tenant, the reference to the area mortgaged and the amount of the rent make it perfectly dear that what was mortgaged was the mortgagor's right to recover the rent from the tenant. Bent is a first charge upon land.