Limitation for redemption of an oral mortgage runs from the mortgage date; a later acknowledgment cannot revive time-barred rights.

A valid oral mortgage starts the limitation period for redemption from the date of its creation, unless the mortgage itself postpones redemption. An acknowledgment in a sale deed executed after the limitation period had already expired could not revive the right to sue under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, because that provision applies only to acknowledgments made before expiry. The reliance on the Redemption of Mortgages (Punjab) Act, 1913, and on approbation and reprobation was rejected as not affecting limitation in this case. The suit for redemption was therefore barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suit for redemption of an oral mortgage was barred by limitation, and whether a subsequent acknowledgment in a sale deed could extend or revive the limitation period.

Analysis: The mortgage was held to be a valid oral mortgage from its execution, and the period for redemption therefore began to run from that date. The Court held that the right to redeem accrues when a valid mortgage comes into existence, unless the mortgage itself postpones redemption. The acknowledgment relied upon by the appellants was executed after the prescribed period had already expired, and Section 18 of the Limitation Act applies only where acknowledgment is made before expiry of limitation. The reliance on the Redemption of Mortgages (Punjab) Act, 1913 and on the doctrine of approbation and reprobation was found to be misplaced, as neither altered the running of limitation in the present case.

Conclusion: The suit for redemption was barred by limitation, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: In a valid mortgage, the limitation for redemption runs from the date of mortgage, and an acknowledgment made after the prescribed period has expired does not revive limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act.

---