The suit was accordingly decreed in favour of the appellant No.1 on 28th April 1977 and he was given the right to redeem the first mortgage and obtain possession of the land upon payment of Rs.18,000/ on or before 28th April 1977.
The respondents 1 and 2, therefore, became the mortgagees of the entirety of the disputed land by 1966.
The respondents 1 and 2 filed an application claiming redemption against Puran Chand in respect of 1/4th of the land sold to them by Dayawanti before the Collector.
After Labhu Rams death, his son Sat Paul sold his rights as a mortgagee which he had inherited from Labhu Ram to the respondents 1 and 2 by two deeds dated 14th January 1963 and 5th December 1966.
The Appellant No.1 is the erstwhile second mortgagee of the land.
The Appellant No.1 duly deposited Rs.18,000/ in Court pursuant to the decree.
The second appeal was disposed of by the High Court on 25th January 1983.
The second event was that Dayawanti, the respondent No.5 before us, the fourth daughter of Raunaq Ram , sold her share of the equity of redemption in the land in favour of the respondents 1 and 2 by two separate deeds dated 8th September 1977 and 11th January 1978.
The Collector dismissed the application.
The respondents 1 and 2 preferred an appeal but their appeal was dismissed.
In the meanwhile, Raunaq Ram had died leaving behind him his widow, Ram Piari respondent No.6 and four daughters, namely, Purni, Lachhmi, Sheela the appellants 2 to 4 and Dayawanti respondent No.5 .
Raunaq Ram had executed a will in favour of his four daughters by which he bequeathed the land to them.
All four daughters executed a second mortgage with possession of the land in favour of Puran Chand appellant No.1 .
Labhu Ram inducted Bir Singh, the father of the respondents 1 and 2, as a tenant in respect of the land in November 1953.
The defence of the respondents 1 and 2 that they were entitled to companytinue in possession of the land as tenants of Labhu Ram was negatived on the ground that since the respondents had purchased Labhu Rams interest as mortgagee with possession of the land before their father expired, they did number inherit any tenancy rights as they companyld number be their own tenants.
Raunaq Ram mortgaged the land with possession to Amar Singh the respondent No.3 before us on 22nd March 1950.
On 26th August 1971, the four appellants filed a suit for redemption of the prior mortgage against the respondents 1 and 2.
The land was owned by Raunaq Ram, predecessor in interest of the appellants.
During the year 1951 52, Amar Singh sold his interest in the land to Labhu Ram.
The respondents then filed two applications in the pending second appeal before the High Court the first application was to bring on record the fact of the purchase of 1/4th share of the land from Dayawanti and the second for being allowed to redeem the mortgage of Puran Chand in respect of such 1/4th interest.
During the pendency of the second appeal, two significant events took place.
The High Court held that despite the fact that the decree had been passed in favour of Puran Chand, because the appellants 2 to 4 had redeemed his mortgage, they were entitled to the benefit of the decree.
In 1971, Bir Singh died.
The respondents 1 and 2 then preferred a second appeal before the High Court.
The Respondents Nos.1 and 2 were the erstwhile prior mortgagees of the land and also claim to be tenants of the land.
First, Puran Chands mortgage was wholly redeemed by the appellants 2 to 4 so that they resumed full ownership of the land.
The respondents 1 and 2, as his sons, claim to have inherited his tenancy rights to the land.
RUMA PAL, J. LITTTTTTJ The Appellants Nos.
2 to 4 are the owners of 247 Kanals and 15 marlas of agricultural land situated in the district of Patiala.
