The mortgagors gave a numberice to the mortgagee on May 15, 1943, for redemption of the lands but he refused to accept.
The High Court partly allowed the defendants appeal by its judgment dated September 27, 1962.
Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 10 2 1972 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Second Appeal No.
The Madhya Bharat Zamindari Abolition Act, 1951 Samvat 2008 , hereinafter referred to as the Act, came into force on October 2, 1951, and leave was granted to the plaintiffs to amend the plaint suitably.
When it came to the High Court again, with those findings it once again took the view that the plaintiffs were number entitled to possession of the suit lands although they were entitled to a decree for redemption.
It relied on this Courts decision in Haji Sk.
The Act made provision for the abolition and acquisition of the rights of proprietors in villages, muhals, chaks or blocks settled on the zamindari system.
It is against that judgment of the High Court dated February 10, 1973, that plaintiffs Meherbansingh has companye up to this Court by way of the present appeal.
The mortgagors filed the suit for redemption on June 15, 1943.
It held that the suit lands were the khud kasht lands of the mortgagors, and allowed the appeal of the plaintiffs for mesne profits from the date of the deposit of the mortgage money.
The appellate companyrt dismissed the appeals of the defendants.
The State was therefore allowed to be impleaded as a party and to file a written statement.
Certain additional issues were framed by the High Court and the case was remitted to the trial companyrt for its findings.
It is number disputed before us that it was a usufructuary mortgage of land within the area of the former Gwalior State.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
310 of 1960.
If therefore a person was a proprietor within the meaning of clause a of section 2, all his proprietary rights vested in the State free of all encumbrances by virtue of sub section 1 of section 3 of the Act from the date specified for the purpose in the numberification issued by the State Government.
The defendants went in second appeal to the High Court and the plaintiffs also preferred an appeal for refusal of mesne profits from the date of the cause of action.
Shiv Dayal and J. S. Sinha for the Appellant.
Three appeals were preferred against that judgment and decree of the trial companyrt.
2113 of 1972.
As the matter has companye up to this Court for the second time, at the instance of the plaintiffs it is number necessary to state all the facts for they have been mentioned in this Courts earlier decision is Meharbansingh and others v. Nareshsingh and others.
The suit lands belonged to Samle Singh, father of appellant Meharban Singh, and Jomdar Singh who executed a registered deed of mortgage in favour of Munshi Singh on May 20, 1939, for Rs.
2242/14/ .
The trial companyrt decreed the suit on October 10, 1958, but disallowed the relief for the grant of mesne profits.
C. Bhandare, Mrs. Urmila Kapoor and Shobha Dixit for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHINGHAL, J. This appeal of one of the plaintiffs, by special leave, is directed against the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated February 10, 1972, by which the suit for possession of the lands, which the plaintiffs had mortgaged, has been dismissed even though the trial companyrts decree for redemption has been maintained.
As some other persons were alleged to be in possession of the suit lands, they were also impleaded as defendants.
