On April 14, 1903 the said Hira Singh and Ganga Sahai, the predecessors in title of the respondents, filed a suit being Suit No.
In appeal, however, the appellate Court reversed the said judgment and decree and passed a decree for redemption and possession on payment of Rs.
31 of 1903 against the said Badam and others for redemption and for possession of the said lands.
On December 4, 1951, the appellants applied for redemption of their 3/4th share in the said lands under the Punjab Redemption of Mortgages Act, II of 1913 before the Additional Collector, Delhi, who, however, referred the parties to a civil Court.
The said Badam, Teja and others, the predecessors in title of the appellants, thereupon brought a suit being Suit No.
On January 8, 1958 the learned District Judge dismissed the said appeal and companyfirmed the preliminary decree holding that the suit was within time as the statements in the aforesaid documents companystituted acknowledgments within the meaning of Section 19.
The Trial Court passed a preliminary decree, dated March 29, 1957 for possession on companydition that the appellants paid Rs.
Dharamdas died leaving him surviving his son Parmeshwardas.
Executed by Parmeshwardas in 1902.
1,290.
The respondents then took the matter to the High Court by way of second appeal.
The said Teja migrated to Pakistan in 1947 whereupon with share in the said lands vested in the Custodian of Evacuee Property.
By a deed of sale, dated March 9, 1903 the said Teja sold equity of redemption in his 3/4th share in the said mortgaged lands for Rs.
As a result of these transactions the position in 1903 was that the predecessors in title of the respondents stood in the position of mortgagors subject to the said sub mortgage and the predecessors in title of the appellants stood in the position of mortgagors of the said lands to the extent of the 3/4th share therein and the rest of the Vdh share therein remained with the said Teja.
These statements were in the following documents The written statement, Ex.
In answer to that suit the respondents pleaded that as sixty years had already expired since the dates of the said mortgages the suit was barred by limitation and the appellants were number entitled to redeem the said lands.
The Trial Judge by his judgment, dated August 31, 1903 decreed Suit No.
the ancestors of the appellants for Rs.
856 and odd.
P. 14, in Suit No.
The appellants relied on four statements for the purpose of saving limitation which they alleged were acknowledgments within the meaning of Section 19 of the Limitation Act, IX of 1908.
50 of 1903 which companytained a statement that Parmeshwardas held the said lands as the mortgagee thereof under the said seven mortgages.
31 of 1903 wherein reference was made of Parmeshwardas having executed the said sub mortgage.
1,290 advanced by him.
50 of 1903 for redemption against the said Hira Singh and others on payment of Rs.
On May 15, 1954 the appellants filed the present suit for a declaration that the said seven mortgages still subsisted and for redemption and possession of their 3/4th share in the suit lands.
8,839 13 0 in favour of the predecessors in title of the appellants and the said Teja and against the predecessors in title of the respondents.
Sale deed, Ex.
In the last document the statement relied on was with regard to only the first of the said seven mortgages, dated August 16, 1861.
650 by mortgage deeds, dated February 21, 1902 and April 8, 1902.
8,839 13 0 within four months.
The respondents filed an appeal challenging the said judgment and decree.
P. 15, in Suit No.
Deed of sub mortgage Ex.
Accordingly the appellants deposited the said amount in Court.
50 of 1903.
This appeal by certificate challenges the companyrectness of the said judgment and decree passed by the High Court.
The said Parmeshwardas sub mortgaged the suit lands in favour of one Badam, Chunder and Ganga Sahai.
1,900 in favour of Badam Jaishi, Chunder Bapal, Kalu Harnam and Badam Gulab, the predecessors in title of the appellants.
Thereupon the appellants filed a Letters Patent appeal which met the same fate.
Thereafter he sold his mortgage rights to Ganga Sahai and Hira Singh, the predecessors in title of the respondents for Rs.
The plaint, Ex.
X, executed by Parmeshwardas thereby selling his mortgage rights in favour of the predecessors in title of the respondents.
M. Shelat, J. The predecessors of one Teja Hazari were the owners of lands admeasuring 155 bighas situate in the village Naraina near Delhi.
Between August 1801 and October 1869 they executed seven usufructuary mortgages in favour of one Dharamdas to secure repayment of an aggregate sum of Rs.
