HARBANS versus OM PRAKASH AND ORS.
When there is no stipulation regarding period or limitation for redeeming the mortgage, the mortgagor's right of redemption cannot be extinguished and the property can be redeemed at any point of time. Period of possession, even for over 100 years, does not create ownership under foreclosure absent proper procedure.
- Parties
- Appellant: Harbans; Respondent: Om Prakash; Respondent: Defendant No.2; Respondent: Defendant No.3
- Jurisdiction
- India
- Judgment Date
- 10 November 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Second Appeal by High Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Mortgage, Redemption of Mortgage, Clogs on Equity of Redemption, Limitation, Adverse Possession
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Harbans
Appellant
Om Prakash
Respondent
Defendant No.2
Respondent
Defendant No.3
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Second Appeal by High Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a mortgagor is barred from redeeming the mortgage after lapse of the limitation period when no redemption period is fixed
- 2 Whether the rule against clogs on the equity of redemption applies to long-term mortgages
- 3 Whether possession for over 100 years without redemption creates ownership by foreclosure
Ratio Decidendi
When there is no stipulation regarding period or limitation for redeeming the mortgage, the mortgagor's right of redemption cannot be extinguished and the property can be redeemed at any point of time. Period of possession, even for over 100 years, does not create ownership under foreclosure absent proper procedure.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment