Redemption of mortgage
Conditional mortgage–Redemption of–Refusal of–Challenge to–Property was given in mortgage with condition that if not redeemed within 5 years, deed would operate as a complete sale–Transacticin is essentially a mortgage and condition imposed thereon is nothing but a clog on equity of redemption which is not at all allowed under law–Despite being conditional mortgage, transaction would operate as mortgage while clog on equity of redemption shall disappear–Held: All three Courts functioning under PA.TA. Regulation have utterly misconstrued document and their orders are liable to be set aside because wrong interpretation of a document has infringed vested legal right of petitioners Petition accepted. PLJ 1994 Peshawar 59
Declaration–Suit for–Decree passed in and affirmed in appeal and revision–Challenge to–Period fixed in mortgage deed was 40 years prior to which respondent lady could not have sought redemption–It appears as if she must have been inveigled into such an unfair agreement–Possibility cannot be excluded that period so fixed in 1960 was so fixed to visualise that respondent lady may not be able to survive–Appeal dismissed. PLJ 1991 SC 532 PLJ 1990 SC 13 rel.
Evacuee property–Mortgage of–Redemption of–Prayer for—Whether transactions taking place in 1931 and 1935 could be considered as acknowledgments to save limitation–Question of–Impugned order is based on main ground that limitation for redemption was extended by acknowledgments dated 4.7.1931 and 5.1.1935–Property once treated as evacuee, could not have been declared as non-evacuee by civil or revenue court–Respondent claims to have purchased land in dispute in 1956, yet he slept over entire issue for more than 30 years–Meanwhile, proprietary rights were conferred on Petitioners- Held: Transactions taking place in 1931 and 1935 cannot be considered as acknowledgments (of mortgage) in legal sense, and limitation for redemption had expired in 1941–Petition accepted. PLJ 1992 Revenue 41 PLJ 1986 Lahore 299, 1986 Law Notes Lah.721, 1988 SCMR 1289 and 1990 SCMR 951 rel.
Mortgage executed in 1894–Renewed in 1906–Redemption of–Challenge to–Acknowledgment of liability in respect of property or right, has necessarily to be made in writing signed by party against whom such property or right is claimed–Admittedly in this case, no such writing duly signed is available–Held: Contention that under section 8 of NWFP Restitution of Mortgaged Lands Act, 1950, period for redemption is necessarily extended upto 15 years, is erroneous–Appeal accepted and judgment of trial court restored. PLJ 1991 SC 390