JAMILA BEGUM (D) THR. LRS. versus SHAMI MOHD. (D) THR. LRS. & ANOTHER

JAMILA BEGUM (D) THR. LRS. versus SHAMI MOHD. (D) THR. LRS. & ANOTHER

The registered mortgage deed and sale deed were proved validly executed; oral gift was not proved, as essential elements under Mohammedan Law were lacking. Suit was barred by limitation as per Articles 58 and 59 of Limitation Act, 1963. Redemption relief could not be decreed as it merged with sale and correct Code of Civil Procedure process was not followed.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Jamila Begum (D) Thr. LRs.; Respondent/plaintiff: Shami Mohd. (D) Thr. LRs.; Respondent: Another
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; suit dismissed.
Legal Topics
Mortgage, Redemption of Mortgage, Sale Deed, Oral Gift Under Mohammedan Law, Undue Influence, Fraud, Limitation, Deeds and Documents
Property Law Civil Procedure Limitation Law Mortgage Redemption of Mortgage Sale Deed Oral Gift Under Mohammedan Law Undue Influence +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jamila Begum (D) Thr. LRs.

Appellant/defendant

Shami Mohd. (D) Thr. LRs.

Respondent/plaintiff

Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mortgage deed and sale deed are void or vitiated by undue influence or fraud
  2. 2 Whether oral gift under Mohammedan Law was validly made and proved
  3. 3 Whether redemption of mortgage is available as relief

Ratio Decidendi

The registered mortgage deed and sale deed were proved validly executed; oral gift was not proved, as essential elements under Mohammedan Law were lacking. Suit was barred by limitation as per Articles 58 and 59 of Limitation Act, 1963. Redemption relief could not be decreed as it merged with sale and correct Code of Civil Procedure process was not followed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment set aside; suit dismissed.

Orders

  • Impugned High Court judgment dated 07.09.2007 in Second Appeal No.135 of 1998 is set aside.
  • Suit No. O.S. 130 of 1978 is dismissed; judgment and decree of trial court affirmed.