, bequeathing all his properties described in
Schedules-I, II and III of the plaint to defendant-Baleshwar
Mishra. Upon Mahendra Missir’s demise, Baleshwar Mishra
inherited his property by virtue of this will, which was duly
probated by the court on 29.05.1965. Thereafter, Baleshwar
Mishra executed an agreement to sell for entire 11.26 acres to
the defendants under a registered agreement to sale. The
defendants further contended that the right to redeem the
mortgage was lost due to the statutory limitation period, as no
steps were taken by the plaintiffs to redeem the mortgage within
the prescribed time. They contended that the sale deeds relied
upon by the plaintiffs were illegal, forged, without consideration
and were executed by individuals without any valid title and
thus were void in the eyes of law. Therefore, the plaintiffs had
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1411 of 2024 dt.09-04-2025
no equity of redemption, nor was there any relationship of
mortgagor and mortgagee. The said Title Suit No. 53 of 1968
was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 21.09.1987.
Aggrieved by the dismissal, the plaintiffs/respondents filed Title
Appeal No. 147 of 1987 before the learned District Judge,
Buxar, challenging the judgment and decree dated 21.09.1987
passed in Title Suit No. 53 of 1968. The Title Appeal No. 147 of
1987 was allowed by a judgment dated 25.08.2000, wherein the
trial court’s judgment and decree were reversed. Against the said
appellate judgment, the defendants preferred Second Appeal No.
400 of 2000, which is still pending. It further transpires that
during the pendency of Second Appeal No. 400 of 2000, the
respondents attempted to negotiate the sale of the suit land and
I.A. No. 2134 of 2001 under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short ‘the Code’) was filed and
this Court directed for maintenance of status quo. During the
pendency of the said Second Appeal, the plaintiffs-respondents
moved an application for the preparation of a final decree,
which was allowed by the trial court vide order dated
25.07.2008 passed in Title Suit No. 53 of 1968 and a final
decree was prepared. Aggrieved by the preparation of the final
decree, the defendant-petitioners filed Title Appeal No. 44 of
Patna High Court C.Misc. No.1411 of 2024 dt.09-04-2025
2008 before the learned appellate court. However, the said
appeal was dismissed for default and an application for
restoration of the same is pending. In the meantime, the
plaintiffs/respondents instituted Execution Case No. 05 of 2008
for the execution of the judgment and decree dated 25.08.2000
before the court of the learned Sub-Judge-II, Dumraon, Buxar.
The final decree in Suit No. 53 of 1968 was passed on
12.08.2008, in which names of multiple individuals were
included, some of whom were listed as minors. The decree
holders through an application dated 30.05.2024 sought to
amend the execution list by substituting certain names, however
the said application was rejected vide order dated 01.08.2024,
passed by learned Sub Judge II, Dumraon, Buxar. Thereafter,
the decree holder, through an application dated 14.08.2024,
sought to amend the execution list by substituting certain names,
including minors with other individuals. This application was
allowed vide order dated 02.09.2024 and the same is under
challenge before this Court.
[ad_1]
Source link