Right of redemption ends after a final decree for sale; relief must be sought under Order 34 Rule 5 CPC.

After a final decree for sale is passed in a mortgage suit, the mortgagor's statutory right of redemption under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 is extinguished because the mortgage debt merges in the decretal debt and the mortgage security merges in the decree. The relationship then becomes that of judgment-debtor and judgment-creditor, so redemption under Section 60, including partial redemption, is no longer available. The proper course after the final decree is the procedure under Order 34, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. A redemption suit cannot be maintained as a simple suit for possession when it depends on a subsisting right of redemption that has already ceased.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after a final decree for sale has been passed in a mortgage suit, the mortgagor can maintain a suit for redemption under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, or must seek relief only under Order 34, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Analysis: The mortgagor's right of redemption is a statutory right under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, but once a final decree for sale is passed in a mortgage suit, the mortgage debt merges in the decretal debt and the mortgage security merges in the decree. In that situation, the relationship of mortgagor and mortgagee is replaced by that of judgment-debtor and judgment-creditor, and the right to redeem under Section 60, including the corresponding right of partial redemption, is extinguished. The proper remedy thereafter is the procedure provided by Order 34, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. A redemption suit cannot be treated as a simple suit for possession when its very foundation is the subsisting right of redemption, which no longer survives after the final decree.

Conclusion: A mortgagor cannot maintain a suit for redemption after a final decree for sale in the mortgage suit; the remedy lies under Order 34, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The dismissal of the plaintiffs' suit was therefore warranted.

---