LILACHAND TULJARAM GUJAR AND OTHERS versus MALLAPPA TUKARAM BORGAVI AND OTHERS

LILACHAND TULJARAM GUJAR AND OTHERS versus MALLAPPA TUKARAM BORGAVI AND OTHERS

A notice of relinquishment by the registered occupant under s. 74 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code does not, by itself, extinguish the interests or equity of redemption of co-occupants, absent clear authority. The Rajinama made by Shiddappa did not affect Annappa's rights, and the subsisting equity of redemption was unaffected by assertions of adverse title or adverse possession.

Parties
Appellants: Lilachand Tuljaram Gujar and Others; Respondents: Mallappa Tukaram Borgavi and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 September 1959
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Division Bench Judgment of the Bombay High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 22 of 1945, Arising Out of Second Appeal No. 754 of 1942
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Redemption of Mortgage, Occupancy Rights, Relinquishment of Occupancy, Adverse Possession
Property Law Land Revenue Redemption of Mortgage Occupancy Rights Relinquishment of Occupancy Adverse Possession

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lilachand Tuljaram Gujar and Others

Appellants

Mallappa Tukaram Borgavi and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Division Bench Judgment of the Bombay High Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 22 of 1945, Arising Out of Second Appeal No. 754 of 1942

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Rajinama (surrender) by the registered occupant extinguishes the occupancy and right of redemption of co-occupants under s. 74 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879
  2. 2 Whether adverse possession by mortgagees extinguished the rights of co-occupants

Ratio Decidendi

A notice of relinquishment by the registered occupant under s. 74 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code does not, by itself, extinguish the interests or equity of redemption of co-occupants, absent clear authority. The Rajinama made by Shiddappa did not affect Annappa's rights, and the subsisting equity of redemption was unaffected by assertions of adverse title or adverse possession.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs since respondents did not appear