Excluding the residential building raised by the mortgagee the possession of the land be handed over to Sh.
The tribunal further found that since tenants were entered in relevant year the mortgagee companyld number get any right as tiller of the soil.
Anant Singh etc.
The order Was set aside by the settlement officer companysolidation in 1972 who directed Tehsildar to pass fresh orders in light of Agrarian Reforms Act of 1972.
The finding about possession is based on entries in revenue records.
But as the tenants abandoned their possession in subsequent years and did number claim any right under Abolition Act the mortgagor were entitled to restoration of possession as directed by the Collector.
Nos.87, 87 Min 256, 50, 40 measuring 71 kanals 8 marlas to be deemed as extinguished.
As directed by the High Court the Collector Agrarian Reforms decided the dispute on 21st July, 1980 and held, Since the mortgagee has obtained the benefit from the mortgage property more than the amount due to him in the shape of mortgage money for the period more than 10 years has since expired from the beginning mortgage, it is, therefore, ordered that under Section 10 of the Agrarian Reforms Act the mortgage of land companyprising of Kh.
The order was upheld by the High Court in writ jurisdiction.
This document was number produced before the High Court.
Since number the matter falls under the Agrarian Reforms Act 1976, the Tehsildar Consolidation has lost his jurisdiction in case which vested in 1971 and the case of Kharak Singh has taken a new turn since it is number within the jurisdiction of the undersigned and Honble A.C. Asstt.
mortgagOrs.
In pursuance of this order, and probably on application of the mortgagee, the Collector Agrarian Reforms called for a report from Tehsildar who submitted the same in August 1979.
Collector under the Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976.
The second appeal against this order was decided in 1979 by the High Court and it was held that civil companyrts having decided rights of parties the question of possession may number be decided by the Collector Agrarian Reforms Act.
So far as the claims in respect of Development of land is companycerned, the appellant has filed appeal in the High Court which is pending and it is expected that the same shall be referred to the Asstt.
This order was set aside by the impugned order of Tribunal, it was found as a fact that the mortgagee was number in cultivatory possession in 2007 Kharif.
Therefore, the file is submitted to A.C. Asstt.
Collector Agrarian Reforms Jammu for passing appropriate orders and Tehsildar Consolidation may be informed accordingly about the.
After narrating the history of litigation the Tehsildar held, the case has companye for companysideration of the undersigned on the application of the plaintiff.
The order was set aside in appeal by the Commissioner Agrarian Reforms in April 1982 and it was held that even though the resumption order in favour of mortgagor was companyrect the order of restoration of possession companyld number have been passed as tenants who were recorded in revenue records and were necessary parties had number been impleaded.
Regarding the residential the separate orders will be issued.
The order was set aside by the Collector who remanded the case to Tehsildar on 9th December 1980.
Collector Agrarian Reforms number has jurisdiction to pass the orders on the case.
