D.S. Mathur, J. - (1.) This is a revision under Section 115, C.P.C. by Bhagwat Prasad and others against the order of the Judge Small Cause Court, Meerut, exercising appellate jurisdiction allowing the appeal of Raghunath Prasad and others, opposite-parties, and thereby dismissing the application under Section 144, C.P.C. of the applicants.
(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are that Bhagwat Prasad on behalf of all the applicants, made an application under Section 12 of the U.P. Agriculturalists Relief Act for redemption of the mortgage executed by their father in favour of the father of the opposite parties Nos. 1 to 3 and husband of No. 4. The learned Judge has observed as if according to the applicants a sum of Rs. 1, 209 and odd was due under the mortgage, but a perusal of the record makes it clear that according to the mortgagors the debt was fully paid up and no further amount was due. The application under Section 12 was allowed subject to a deposit of Rs. 1, 209-15-6 within two months. Thee applicants deposited the amount within this period. The opposite-parties predecessor-in-interest felt dissatisfied and preferred an appeal against the above order claiming that a higher amount was payable under the mortgage. The appellate court remitted an issue to the trial court for submission of finding. It was at this stage that the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act and also the U.P. Zamindar Debt Reduction Act came into force with effect from 1-7-1952. The applicants-mortgagors thereupon indicated their desire to withdraw the suit and the trial court sent back the papers to the appellate court where the applicants withdrew the suit. The result was that the appeal was allowed, the decree of the trial court was set aside and the redemption suit was dismissed. It has not come on the record whether the suit was withdrawn with or without the permission of the Court, but for the disposal of the matter in issue this point is of no importance.
(3.) Thereafter the opposite-parties instituted a suit for the recovery of the mortgage-money still due and in the suit they gave credit of the sum of Rs. 1,209-15-6 which they had withdrawn from the Court. After reduction of such amount as was necessary under the U.P. Zamindar Debt Reduction Act, that suit was decreed. A perusal of the record of this case makes it clear that in the written statement the present applicants had challenged the credit of Rs. 1,209-15.6 saying that this amount was to be refunded by the opposite parties. In spite of this plea the opposite-parties adhered to their original case and obtained a decree for a smaller amount.;