Jantari had mortgaged the said land with Suleman on October 4, 1929 and the mortgage, number it is admitted, usufructuary in nature.
26, 27, 29, 30 and 32.
From the last order the present appeal has been filed by special leave of this Court.
Both the statements alleged that the plaintiff was number an agriculturist and hence the suit was number maintainable under s. 12 of the U.P. Agriculturist Relief Act.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated October 9, 1961 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No.
All the above findings were companyfirmed by the Civil Judge, Allahabad who disposed of the appeal.
They also stated that the mortgage was number satisfied from the usufruct as the land was number productive.
Although the Abolition Act had companye into force from July 1, 1952 numberother claim was set up.
Nor was the suit challenged as incompetent by reason of any provisions of the Abolition Act.
In the result he passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff on November 24, 1953.
B. Agarwala, E. C. Agarwala and P. C. Agarwala, for the appellants.
P. Sinha and M. I. Khowaja, for respondents 2 to 7.
He held that there was a mortgage as alleged that the plaintiff and the original mortgagor were agriculturists and that the mortgage had been satisfied from the usufruct.
The land in dispute measures 5 bighas and 3 biswas Khata No.
The learned Munsif framed five issues which he decided in favour of the plaintiff before him.
Two written statements were filed on October 4, 1952 and March 31, 1953.
An application for revision was then filed in the High Court but it was dismissed by the order impugned in this appeal as the decree of the Munsif had already been executed and possession had been delivered on May 1, 1957 to the successors in interest of the original mortgagor.
2 situate in Bhagwatipura, pargana Kewai, district Allahabad and companysists of 5 plots Nos.
He also held that the defendants mortgagees had number become Sirdars and the suit was maintainable.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
1077 of 1957 dated October 9, 1961 in a suit in which a decree for redemption on an application under S. 12 of the U. P. Agriculturist Relief Act has been passed.
This companytention was number ac.
The defendants, who represented Suleman the mortgagee 1 7 opposed the application.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. This is an appeal by special leave against an order passed by the Allahabad High Court in Civil Revision No.
As required by the Agriculturist Relief Act the claim.
22 r. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure on their application in this behalf M.P. No.
It is also admitted number that the land was Sir Sankalap of Jantari.
Subsequently, Sat Narain sold his interest to others who have been ordered by us to be joined as respondents under 0.
962 of 1964.
was made in the prescribed form and set out the accounts by reason of which it was claimed that the mortgage was satisfied.
The original respondent in this appeal Sat Narain was the successor in interest of one Jantari who was the original mortgagor.
1077 of 1957.
The appellants are the successors in interest of one Suleman who was the original mortgagee.
Me defendants appealed to the District Court but by a judgment dated April 17, 1957 their appeal was dismissed.
2081 of 1965 .
AR the defendants claimed that they had become Sirdars by reason of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and that the suit was number, therefore, maintainable.
One of the written statements denied even the mortgage.
On May 27, 1952, Sat Narain filed an application under S. 12 of the U.P. Agriculturist Relief Act in the companyrt of the Munsif East Allahabad on the allegation that the mortgage had been paid off from the usufruct of the land and he was entitled to redeem it.
