IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA First Appeal No.678 of 1995 Rita Lal & Ors Versus Allahabad Bank & Ors ---------------------------------- 27. 02.08.2011. Heard the learned counsel, Mr. Anil Kumar Upadhaya in First Appeal No.678 of 1995 on behalf of the appellant and also the learned counsel, Mr. Bhubneshwar Prasad appearing on behalf of the appellant in First Appeal No.669 of 1995. Heard the learned counsels, Sri Ajay Kumar Sinha appearing on behalf of the Allahabad Bank, respondent No.1 in both the First Appeals. It appears that against the impugned Judgment and Decree dated 24.06.1995 passed by Subordinate Judge 4th Patna in Title Mortgage suit No.244 of 1982 / 73 of 1987, two First Appeals have been filed by the defendants. One First Appeal is F.A. No.678 of 1995 and the other is First Appeal No.669 of 1995. In the First Appeal No.678 of 1995, the appellant of First Appeal No.669 of 1995 is respondent whereas in the First Appeal No.669 of 1995, the appellant of First Appeal No.678 of 1995 are respondent. Therefore, all the parties are present. The office note is ignored. The learned counsel for the appellant in - 2 - First Appeal No.678 of 1995 submitted that the suit was filed by Allahabad Bank against the loanee, Kali Shanker Verma, and the husband of the appellant No.1 in First Appeal No.678 of 1995 was the mortgager and, therefore, the document of title were pledged before the Allahabad Bank. In the said property, which was pledged by the husband of appellant No.1, the appellant of First Appeal No.669 of 1995 has also got half share which is evidenced from paragraph 19 of the impugned Judgment and decree. It is submitted that by the appellants which is admitted by the Allahabad Bank that all the dues have already paid by the appellant of First Appeal No.678 of 1995 and no dues certificate has already been granted by the respondent No.1, Allahabad Bank. In such circumstances, the property which was pledged to the Bank-respondent No.1 which is in possession of the defendant No.3 goes without saying howing that it is now released from the security of the loan from the Bank wherein appellants of both the appeals have got half share. Now, therefore, since there is no dispute between the parties and the loans which was advanced by the respondent No.1 - 3 - has been paid by the appellant of First Appeal No.678 of 1995 with full satisfaction and no dues certificate has been granted which is admitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Allahabad Bank, no purpose will be served by keeping pending these First Appeals before the High Court. Accordingly, both these First Appeals are disposed of with observation that now the property, i.e., Schedule ‘B’ with construction made by defendant No.3 according to contract will be exclusively owned by the appellants of both the appellants as co owner having half and half share as per the development agreement with the defendant No.3-respodnetn No.3. Both the First Appeals are accordingly disposed of. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)