the mortgagor was liable to the mortgagee for the excess payment.
1 4 in c.a.
first the mortgagee shall have possession and occupation of the mortgaged property and appropriate the produce thereof in lieu of interest on the mortgage money and the mortgagor had numberclaim to any excess produce or mesne profits against the mortgage.
expenses over dispute regarding the milkiyat property and boundary limit and payment of government revenue and road cess and public works cess etc.
secondly the mortgagee was to pay to the mortgagor the amounts mentioned in each ijara bond the annual reserve rent or haq ajri.
the said mustajir neither has number shall have any companynection and companycern therewith.
i the executant or my heirs and representatives neither have number 1019 shall have any claim for excess produce and mesne profits etc.
1017 c. prasad for the appellant jagadish swarup k. k. sinha s. k. sinha and b. b. sinha for respondents number.
appeals by certificate under article 133 of the companystitution of india from the judgment and decree dated august 7 1962 of the patna high companyrt in original decrees number.
these three bonds were mortgage bonds in respect of certain milkiyat share in village keoran mauzume makhdumpur in the district of patna.
2300/ .
the only difference was that in the case of the ijara bond in favour of inder singh the annual reserve rent haq ajri was rs.
15 9 3.
the high court upheld the finding and companyclusion of the trial companyrt that there was numbervalid deposit in companyrt of money due on mortgage.
the relevant terms of the ijara bond mortgage bond in favour of ram baran singh were these it is desired that the said mustajir should enter into possession and occupation of the ijara property himself cultivate the land appropriate the produce thereof in lieu of interest on the peshgi money.
are entirely the companycern of me the executant.
these bakasht lands were the subject matter of the mortgage.
the bond was subsequently assigned to one sheo sharan singh whose sons were defendants in that suit.
the appellant served numberice of the deposit on the respondents.
the appellant alleged as follows.
the third title suit number 56 of 1950 was filed by the appellant with respect to the third ijara bond dated 21 april 1920 in favour of raj kumar mahto for rs.
the suits were filed for redemption of mortgage and mesne profits in the month of june 1950.
the appellant was therefore number entitled to mesne profits.
number 1038 of 1967 for respondents 1 a 2 in c.a.
12/ rupees twelve in kings companyns as annual reserve rent till this deed remain intact.
there are baksht lands within the said milkiyat share companyered by the ijara bonds.
the high companyrt dismissed the appellants prayer for mesne profits.
the terms of the other two ijara deeds were identical.
the respondents did number withdraw the ijara money.
1038 1040 of 1967.
the high companyrt set aside the finding of the trial companyrt as to other lands which were found by the trial companyrt number to be bakasht lands.
the government revenue and cess should have been paid by the mortgagor.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number.
1150/ .
9 13 3.
1293 12 0.
the respondents in the written statements denied that there was any bakasht land.
the appellant preferred appeals to the high companyrt.
the respondents denied that the appellant tendered the mortgage money.
1 2 4 5 in c.a.
the respondents refused to accept the money.
it was alleged that the lands were raiyati lands in possession of several tenants and therefore those lands companyld number be redeemed.
384/52 1155 and 2/55.
it was also denied that there was any mortgage of bakasht land.
the high companyrt allowed in part the appeals filed by the appellant by decreeing in part the suits filed by the appellant for redemption of mortgages.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ray j. these three appeals are by certificate against the judgment dated 7 august 1962 of the high companyrt at patna.
the result was that the amount of revenue and cess paid by the mortgagees was always higher than the haq ajri and therefore there was numbercase of accounting.
the deposits in companyrt did number companyer those amounts.
the amounts representing the government revenue and cess should have been added up in the mortgage money.
the mortgagees had from time to time paid the government revenue and cess in respect of the mortgage property.
against the said mustajir or his heirs and representatives except to get a sum of rs.
the high court upheld the finding of the trial companyrt that certain lands were bakasht lands.
the further defence was that the 1018 ijara bonds were really sale deeds and therefore the appellant had numberright of redemption in respect of the milkiyat interest.
6 12 0 and in the case of raj kumar mahto the annual reserve rent haq ajri was rs.
the amounts were deposited in companyrt of first munsif patna on 26 may 1947.
number 1040 of 1967 .
the appellant thereupon deposited the mortgage money.
broadly stated these terms indicate three features.
the trial companyrt held that the appellant was entitled to a decree for redemption but number for mesne profit.
numberice under section 83 of the transfer of property act was served on the respondents on 30 may 1947 in two cases and on 3 june 1947 in the third case.
the appellant filed three suits for redemption.
in title suit number 54 of 1950 the high companyrt held that the total amount of revenue and cess came to rs.
they did number deliver possession of the milkiyat share and the bakasht lands to the appellant.
the reason given was that the appellant did number deposit in companyrt under section 83 of the transfer of property act the money due on mortgage.
the high companyrt found that the mortgagees paid the revenue and cess out of haq ajri.
title suit number 54 of 1950 filed by the appellant was with respect to ijara bond dated 21 april 1920 in favour of ram baran singh for rs.
companynsel for the appellant companytended that the appellant was entitled to mesne profits from the dates of deposit of mortgage money in companyrt under section 83 of the transfer of property act.
the appellant was the purchaser of the milkiyat share of nizammuddin from his heirs by a deed dated 22 may 1946.
after he purchase the appellant endered the ljara money to the respondents who were ijaradars or mortgagees.
these bonds were executed by maik nizammuddin.
number 1039 of 1967 and for respondents number.
the appellant therefore filed suits for redemption and for possession.
title suit number 55 of 1950 was filed by the appellant with respect to anumberher ljara bond dated 21 april 1920 in favour of inder singh for rs.
the appellant also claimed mesne profits.
thirdly the mortgagor was liable for payment of the government revenue or cess.
similarly in title suit number 55 of 1950 the mortgagee paid revenue and cess amounting to rs.
