Mithan Lal, J. - (1.) These are three Civil Revisions involving the same legal points and so they are being disposed of by the same judgment. In fact Civil Revision Nos. 294 and 295 of 1954 are connected Civil Revisions, which arise out of two connected suits disposed of by the same judgment by the courts below. They are also between the same parties. The third revision No. 531 of 1955 is between different parties and it is not connected with the other two revisions in the sense in which the other two are connected, yet as a common question of law arises, it has been considered convenient to dispose of this revision also by the same judgment.
(2.) In Civil Revisions Nos. 294 and 295, which have been filed on behalf of the mortgagees -Defendants, there were three mortgages of the year 1921 for Rs. 299 -13 -3 and Rs. 449 -13 -0. Admittedly the mortgages were on property which is covered by the definition of an 'Estate' in U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. Two applications for redemption under Sec. 12 of the Agriculturists Relief Act were filed before the repeal of that Act. The learned Judicial Officer, Jaunpur passed his order of redemption on 23 -5 -1953, that is, after the Agriculturists Relief Act had been repealed, ordering redemption of the mortgage in one case without any payment as the mortgage money had been paid up, while in the other case, he ordered redemption on payment of Rs. 72, which was found due. Defendants' plea that possession could not be given because of the provisions of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was over -ruled.
(3.) The matter was taken up in appeal and the learned District Judge, Jaunpur, found that the repeal of the Agriculturists Relief Act had no effect on the rights or remedies of the parties in view of the provisions of Sec. 6 of the General Clauses Act, and consequently both the appeals were dismissed;