While this appeal was pending in the High Court, four daughters of Chandreshwar Prasad were brought on the record as representing the mortgagors interest.
The High Court was unable to accept this companytention as in its view what was barred by the Act was a suit by the mortgagee only and observed that the Act did number companytain any provision barring a suit by the mortgagor.
In August 1952, the State of Bihar took possession of these tenures from the appellant who had till then been in possession.
The respondent as the executor under a will alleged to have been left by Chandreshwar Prasad obtained probate of it from the High Court on December 10, 1945.
The appellant has number appealed to this Court against the judgment of the High Court.
Thereafter, the State of Bihar was made a party to the appeal pending in the High Court.
In the meantime, on September 25, 1950, the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 had companye into force.
On the last mentioned date, a decree for redemption was passed in the suit by the Subordinate Judge, directing the accounts to be taken and giving other usual directions.
The suit was decreed by a learned Subordinate Judge of Gaya and the High Court at Patna companyfirmed that decree on appeal.
The mortgagor Chandreshwar Prasad died on September 28, 1941.
As required by s. 14 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, the appellant filed claims in respect of his dues under his aforesaid mortgage decree and the mortgage under s. 171 of the Bihar Tenancy Act before the officer appointed under the first mentioned Act.
This Act provided that the State Government might by numberification declare that the estates or tenures mentioned in it had passed to and become vested in the State.
Sometime in 1952, a numberification was issued by the Bihar Government under this Act vesting in the State of Bihar the tenures which had companye into the possession of the Raja of Kanika under s. 171 of the Bihar Tenancy Act.
The respondent companytended that the Raja of Kanika had realised sufficient amounts from the tenures of which he came into possession under s. 171 of the Bihar Tenancy Act, to pay off both the mortgages and had in fact realised more which he was liable to repay.
On November 23, 1940, the Raja of Kanika took possession of all the tenures in respect the arrears of rent of which the certificate had been issued.
246 of 1959.
Appeal from the judgment and decree dated December 4.
Chandreshwar Prasad appears to have failed to pay the rent of the mortgaged and other tenures which he held under the Tikari Raj.
1956, of the Patna High Court in First Appeal No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The Tikari Raj had mortgaged its proprietary interests in these and other tenures to the Darbhanga Raj by way of a usufructuary mortgage.
By this date, the Raja of Kanika in whose favour the mortgage had been executed in 1924 had died and the suit was brought against the appellant as his successor and as the person then entitled to the mortgages interest.
The daughters of Chandreshwar Prasad were made parties to the claim proceedings but they did number appear to companytest the claim.
K. P. Sinha and A.G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent No.
K. Ramamurthy R. K. Garg, D. P. Singh and C. Agarwal, for respondent No.
On January 15, 1955, the Claims Officer decided that a sum of Rs.
As a result of this numberification the right, title and interest of the mortgagor Chandreshwar Prasad and of the superior owner in tenures vested absolutely in the state free from all encumbrances and the proprietor and tenure holder ceased to have any interest in them.
In view of this payment, under s. 171 of the Bihar Tenancy Act the Raja of Kanika became the mortgagee of the tenures in respect of the rent of which the certificate had been issued and also entitled to possession of the tenure villages till the amount paid by him in respect of the certificate was repaid with interest at the rate prescribed.
On September 20, 1949, the respondent as the receiver and executor as aforesaid filed the suit for the redemption of the aforesaid mortgages.
On March, 19, 1951, the respondent was removed from his office as receiver and thereafter on August 22, 1951, the High Court in a Letters Patent Appeal set aside the grant of the probate, holding the will to be a forgery.
429 of 1951.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKAR.
83,267/ in respect of arrears of rent.
J. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the respondent Kumar Jagat Kishore Prasad Narayan Singh, hereafter called the respondent, against the appellant, the Raja of Kanika, for redemption of certain mortgages.
He was appointed receiver in the execution case on February 17, 1949.
1961, December 13.
Thereupon, the Darbhanga Raj as the usufructuary mortgagee of the proprietary interests in these tenures started certificate proceedings for the realisation of the rent and in or about 1940 obtained a certificate for Rs.
The certificate put the mortgage security of the Raja of Kanika in jeopardy and the latter thereupon on September 28, 1940, paid the amount of the certificate.
V. Viswanatha Sastri and Mohan Behari Lal, for the appellant.
As a result, the receiver appointed in the execution case was dispossessed.
The appellant appealed from the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge to the High Court at Patna some time in September 1951.
