Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1502 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD HAYAT vs MUHAMMAD ZAMAN Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1502 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD HAYAT VS MUHAMMAD ZAMAN Ss. 58(d) & 60---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S. 20 & Art.148---Suit for redemption---Limitation---Usufractuary mortgage---Scope---Cause of action---Scope---Suit instituted by the petitioners/plaintiffs for the redemption of property mortgaged more than a century ago was dismissed by the Civil Court on the ground of limitation as the same was not filed within sixty years of mortgage---Appellate Court maintained the decree and judgment passed by the Trial Court---Validity---Record revealed that the predecessor of the petitioners/ plaintiffs had mortgaged the suit-property through mutation in the year 1895 in favour of the predecessor of the respondents/defendants---Suit-property was in possession of the respondents /defendants through inheritance, however, the revenue record had confirmed the ownership of the petitioners/plaintiffs while the respondents/defendants were recorded as mortgagee in the column of cultivation throughout---Suit of petitioners/plaintiffs had been concurrently dismissed on the ground that the same was instituted after about 111 years and thus, was hopelessly barred by time in view of S. 148 of the Limitation Act which provided sixty years for institution of redemption suit---Respondents/ defendants were enjoying the possession of the suit-property since inception of the mortgage and such mortgage, legally speaking, was usufractuary mortgage in terms of clause (d) of the S. 58 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882---Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 provided right of mortgagor to redeem the mortgaged property, however, S. 20 of the Limitation Act, 1908 stipulated that the receipt of produce during the subsistence of mortgage gave a fresh cause of action to the mortgagor on the receipt of produce of every harvest and the same was deemed acknowledgment---High Court observed that the claim of the petitioners/plaintiffs for redemption was well maintainable, as they (petitioners/plaintiffs )were owners of the suit property while the respondents/ defendants were in possession of the same as mortgagee---High Court set aside decrees and judgments passed by both the Courts below; passed a preliminary decree in favour of the petitioners/plaintiffs and against the respondents/defendants for redemption of mortgaged property---Civil revision was allowed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 MLD 1502 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD HAYAT vs MUHAMMAD ZAMAN Ss — 2023 MLD 1502 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 MLD