2500/ and received Rs.
Without, however, redeeming the mortgage, Telu Ram again mortgaged the said land in favour of Harjap Singh, Sohan Singh, Surjit Singh and Manjit Singh.
However, an appeal was preferred thereagainst by the appellant which by reason of a judgment and order dated 11.06.2002 was allowed.
425/ .
Some of the lands in the mean time were sold by the heirs and legal representatives of Telu Ram in favour of Bhagat Singh and others who filed an application before the Assistant Collector, 1st Grade, Anandpur Sahib, District Ropar for possession of the lands in terms of the order of the Collector dated 28.04.1992.
On companysolidation of the land, new Khasra Numbers 159, 160, 536, 538, 541, 545, 546, 547 and 549 were carved out in lieu of the old Khasra Numbers.
A decree was passed but an appeal thereagainst was filed by the heirs and legal representatives of Telu Ram before the District Judge, Ropar which was allowed by an order dated 03.03.1997.
By a judgment and order dated 28.04.1992, the Collector directed redemption of the said mortgaged property.
Indisputably, an application for redemption of mortgage was filed by the heirs and legal representatives of said Telu Ram before the Collector of the District on 17.06.1991.
A civil suit was filed by Harjap Singh and others questioning the said order of the Collector dated 28.04.1992.
A second appeal preferred by the said Harjap Singh and others has been dismissed by the High Court.
425/ from the mortgagees wherefor a receipt was allegedly granted on 20.02.1979.
It is number in dispute that the purported receipt dated 20.02.1979 had number been brought on records in the said proceedings.
5000/ the half of which is Rs.
Objections filed by the appellant in the said proceedings were rejected.
The companytention of the appellant that the same companyld number be done as he or his brother were number parties in the said proceedings, however, appears to be misplaced as it is stated at the bar that the endorsement was made in the deed of second mortgage itself.
The income of the land will be adjusted against the interest of the mortgage money.
The possession of the land is given today.
17736 of 2003 B. SINHA, J. Leave granted.
Arising out of SLP C No.
However, the mortgagors allegedly received the said sum of Rs.
In the said deed of mortgage dated 21.11.1978, it was stipulated I number mortgage 1/4th of the said land to Harjap Singh son of Shri Jagat Singh, of the said land to Sohan Singh son of Shri Lachman Singh Bakhtawar Singh adopted son of Chanan Singh and of the said land in equal shares to Surjit Singh and Manjit Singh sons of Mohinder Singh son of Shri Jagat Singh, residents of Badhal, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib for Rs.
500/ towards expenditure of registration and Rs.
A second appeal preferred by the respondents herein before the Financial Commissioner Revenue, as indicated hereinbefore, was accepted.
425/ is kept as Amanat with the mortgagees for being paid to Lachman Singh and Mohinder mortgagees which is to be paid to them and a receipt is to be obtained for the said payment.
4075/ and Rs.
Appellant herein claimed that he and his brother had been put in possession of the said mortgaged land.
Assailing an order dated 28.08.2002 passed by the Financial Commissioner Revenue , Punjab, the appellant herein filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court which by reason of the impugned judgment dated 10.04.2003 has been dismissed.
The fact of the matter is as under One Telu Ram s o Hira, resident of Kotla Power House, Tehsil Anandpur Sahib District Ropar, Punjab mortgaged 38 K 14 M of land with the appellant and his brother Lachman Singh in equal shares on receipt of a sum of Rs.
