A H PINTO Vs. V CHANIYAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) In a second appeal the High Court seems to have decided issues in a suit which were not ripe to be decided. The appellant herein is the 31st defendant in the suit who raised various contentions such as the right of the plaintiff to claim partition of the suit property, that plaintiff was not the member of the original mortgagor's family etc. etc. One of the keenly contested issues related to the question of limitation. That issue has been formulated in the following language: (6) Does the 31st defendant prove that the suit for redemption of mortgage of 1873 is barred by limitation

(3.) Two other issues were framed, namely, issue nos. 9 and 10 which could also be decided are the following: (9) Does the 31st defendant prove that suit is not valued properly (10) Whether the court fee paid, is sufficient