LexSHRI PANCH NAGAR PARAKH MANDSAUR versus PURUSHOTTAM DAS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
SHRI PANCH NAGAR PARAKH MANDSAUR
v.
PURUSHOTT AM DAS
AUGUST 18, 1999
B
[M. JAGANNADHA RAO AND M.B. SHAH, JJ.]
Tenancy and Land Laws:
c
Madhya Bharat Land Revenue and Tenancy Act,_ 1950-Madhya
Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959-Qanoon Ryotwari Gwalior State Sambat
1974 (1917 AD), Section 275 Mortgage executed in year 1934 when Ryotwari
Act was in force-Suit for redemption of mortgage of agricultural lands-
Limitation/or-Held, the suit was barre_d under Section 275 of the Ryotwari
Act-Also the question whether the jurisdiction of civil court is expressly or
D impliedly barred under Ryotwari Act for any other relevant applicable laws
requires reconsideration-If filing of civil suit is not barred expressly or
impliedly, a civil suit would be maintainable and the limitation period for
redemption of the mortgage would depend on the Limitation Act applicable
in the State at the relevant time prior to 1950 and thereafter-Attention of
the High Court not focussed on this question-Matter remitted to High Court
E for decision on merits after verification of applicable local laws Bar of
jurisdiction of civil courts-Suit for redemption of mortgage-Civil Procedure
Code, 1908, Section 9-limitation Act, 1963, Article 61-Redemption of
mortgage 'of agricultural land
F
Qanoon Ryotwari Gwalior State Sambat 1974 (1917 AD), Section
275-Held, for redemption of mortgaged tenancy rights the procedure
prescribed under Section 275 to be followed and the martgage was required
to be redeemed within three years.
Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, Section 158-Mortgage
G executed in 1934 when Ryotwari Act was in force-Whether mortgagee can
become a bhumiswami under Section 158 of the 1959 Code-Held, matter
requires consideration of various provisions of the Madhya Bharat Land
Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1950 as well as 1950 Code-Matter remitted to
High Court for fresh consideration on merits after consideration of all
H applicable local laws.
546
~
,.-
t-
•,,
' t-
'~ ..
SHRI PANCH NAGAR PARAKH MANDSAUR v. PURUSHOTTAM DAS
547
Relying upon a registered mortgage deed executed in 1934 by one H A
who was the power of attorney holder of D, respondents-heirs of deceased D,
filed a suit in 1968 for redemption of I/3rd share in agricultural land. The
deed prescribed 11 years as the mortgage period with a specific condition
that the mortgage money was not to carry interest and the mortgage was
made in favour of appellant-Community. Trial court decreed the suit for B
redemption of possessory mortgage on payment of mortgage money and cost
and the same was confirmed in Appeal and Second Appeal. Hence this appeal.
It was contended by the appellant that the suit for redemption was not
to be governed by the Limitation Act, 1963 as under the Qanoon Ryotwari,
Gwalior State Sambat 1974 (1917AD) ("Ryotwari Act"), there was specific C
provision for redemption of mortgage of 'Pukhta Maurusi' (class of tenants);
that original mortgagor was 'Pukhta Maurusi' tenant and for redemption of
such mortgage, rights of the parties were governed by the Ryotwari Act; that
the three years' period of limitation for redemption of such mortgage w~s
provided under Section 275 of Ryotwari Act; that right to sue accrued after
eleven years from the date of execution of the mortgage deed, i.e. in July D
1945 and the limitation of three years under the Ryotwari Act was over in
July 1948; that under Ryotwari Act the tenancy rights of 'Pukhta Maurusi'
tenants were transferred to mortgagee in possession; and that under M.P.
Land Revenue, 1959, appellant had become 'Bhumi swami'.
Respondents did not dispute that the provisions of Ryotwari Act were
applicable to the lands in dispute. One year before the execution of the
mortgage, eight sections of Qanoon Mal, Gwalior State, Sam vat 1983 (1926
AD) were incorporated into the Ryotwari Act. In August 1950, Ryotwari Act
E
and some provisions of Act of 1926 were repealed by Madhya Bharat Land
Revenue and Tenancy Act, 1950 which was then repealed by M.P. Land F
Revenue Code, 1959.
Allowing the appeals and remanding the matter to High Court, the
Court.
HELD: 1. Suit for redemption of mortgage ex~cuted in July 1934 is G
obviously time barred on the basis of Section 275 of the Qanoon Ryotwari,
Gwalior State, 1974 (1917 A.D.). Still, however, the next question that would
require consideration is whether the jurisdiction of the civil court is expressly
or impliedly barred in view of Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.