Paramjit Singh v. Trishan Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CR N. 8414 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14.12.2016 Paramjit Singh ..........Petitioner

VERSUS

Trishan Singh ........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Pardeep Bajaj, Advocate for the petitioner.

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) Heard.

Plaintiff filed suit for redemption of mortgaged house as fully defined in headnote of the plaint and the trial Court framed issues no. 1 and 2 as per relief sought by him. In order to succeed, plaintiff may be required to prove that the mortgage pertained to suit property i.e. house as defined in headnote of the plaint.

Revision-petitioner by moving application under Order XIV Rule 5 CPC has sought framing of additional issue to the effect that the suit property is different from the mortgaged property. The onus is on plaintiff to connect the suit property with the mortgage deed. As to whether he succeeds in proving the plea raised by him is a matter to be decided at the time of final decision of the case. The fact sought to be raised by revision-petitioner is already covered under issues no. 1 and 2, as such, I find no reason to interfere with the order under revision.

This revision-petition has no merit.

Dismissed.

December 14, 2016 ( SURINDER GUPTA ) jk JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Jitender Kumar 2016.12.16 10:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document