Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Bir Singh vs Ram Kanwar Singh(D) Th. Lrs

Supreme Court28 August 2018Vineet Saran · R. Banumathi

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A usufructuary mortgagee cannot acquire ownership of the mortgaged property by prescription or by claiming that the mortgagor's right has been foreclosed merely upon the expiry of the statutory period; the mortgagee's right is limited to the usufruct and does not extend to ownership of the property.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 8994 of 2018 (Arising out of SLP(C)No.37997 of 2013)

BIR SINGH Appellant(s)

VERSUS

RAM KANWAR SINGH(D) TH. LRS & ORS. Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

BANUMATHI, J.:

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant claims through the original mortgagee under

the usufructuary mortgage. The appellant-mortgagee filed a

suit claiming ownership of the property in-question by

prescription and also sought for permanent injunction in favour

of the appellant. The trial court decreed the suit and granted

permanent injunction. On appeal, the first appellate court

partly allowed the appeal holding that the appellant, claiming

through the mortgagee, cannot claim right to ownership over the

property in-question. However, the first appellate court

affirmed the permanent injunction in favour of the appellant in

the capacity of the appellant as a mortgagee. The same view

was affirmed by the High Court. However, the High Court

granted liberty to the respondents to work out their remedy for Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MAHABIR SINGH Date: 2018.08.30

right to redemption in separate proceedings.

17:56:36 IST Reason: While doing so

the High Court affirmed the grant of injunction in favour of

the appellant.

2

3. The short question involved in this appeal is whether the

appellant, being the mortgagee, can claim grant of ownership by

contending that the right of morgagor has been foreclosed.

4. This issue is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court

in Singh Ram (Dead) Thr. Legal Representatives v. Sheo Ram and

Others, (2014) 9 SCC 185 where this Court held that “A

usufructuary mortgagee is not entitled to file a suit for

declaration that he had become an owner merely on the expiry of

30 years from the date of the mortgage”.

5. In view of above, this appeal is dismissed.

..........................J. (R. BANUMATHI)

..........................J. (VINEET SARAN) NEW DELHI, AUGUST 28, 2018.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free