9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 747X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 19.7.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in RSA No. 1340 of 1980. 3. A transaction of mortgage in respect of the suit property admeasuring 58 kanals 11 marlas was entered into by and between the predecessors in the interest of the parties herein. The actual date of execution of the deed of mortgage was not known to the plaintiffs-respondents. However, the said mortgaged properties were mutated in the name of the mortgagees on or about 19.3.1913. 4. A suit for redemption of the said mortgage was filed by the respondents on or about 30.12.1970. The learned trial court, as also the First Appellate Court, dismissed the said suit as being barred by limitation opining that the actual date of mortgage being not known, a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich, if taken into consideration, would clearly establish that the suit was within the prescribed period of limitation having been executed on 20.2.1913. The relationship between the parties is not in dispute. Respondents filed the aforementioned suit for a decree for redemption of mortgage on payment of a sum as may be found due to the appellants herein. The details of the mortgage were furnished but the actual date of mortgage being not known could not be furnished. Sohan Singh and Bahadur Singh were the original mortgagors. Sohan Singh is said to have been not seen 10 years prior to the institution of the suit and, thus, presumed to be dead. Respondents are said to have inherited the properties of the said mortgagors and, thus, ste ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he year 1913 in the District of Lahore. As it is a registered document, this Court in a situation of this nature, keeping in view the findings of the courts below, should allow the said application. 11. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the court should be loathed to entertain such an application but the respondents have herein made out adequate grounds therefor. The jurisdiction of the Appellate Court is to be exercised not only when Clause (a) or Clause (aa) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 27 of Order 41 of the Code is attracted but also when such a document is required by the appellate Court itself to pronounce judgment or for any other substantial cause. If what the respondents contended is correct, namely, the mortgage was execut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
