C. KRISHNAMURTHY SETTY Vs. ABDUL KHSDAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT was Defendant 1 in a suit for redemption of a sumptuary mortgage of two, items of immovable property situated to Bangalore. Exhibit v. is the deed of more gage dated 10 -40 -1929 consideration for which was Rs. 12,500/ -. It was executed by Plaintiff 1 on his behalf and as guardian of his minor sons Plaintiffs 3 and 4 as well as by his adult sons Plaintiff 2 and Defendant 2. Of these the 1st Plaintiff and 2nd Defendant died after the institution of the suit. Defendant 1 is the assignee of the mortgage from Malleshiah the original mortgagee under a registered deed Ex. XII dated 14 -6 -1937 and is in possession of the properties. He claims to be the full owner of both the properties as result of certain proceedings and transactions which are:

(2.) ONE Syed Mahamad filed a suit against the first Plaintiff for recovery of money due under a pronote and in execution of the decree passed therein purchased item I. Exhibit XXIV is the copy of the entry in the register of civil suits and Ex. XXV is the copy of the application for execution and orders thereon and Ex. XV copy of the sale certificate. Exhibit XXVIII shows that the purchaser could not obtain delivery of item I owing to obstruction of the 1st Defendant as noted on the warrant by Syed Mohammad on 31 -7 -1937. The 1st Defendant purchased item 1 from Syed Mohammad on 28 -8 -1937 under Ex. XIII and item No. II on 18 -10 -1937 under Ex. I from Defendant 2.

(3.) SRI Somasekhara Rao learned Counsel for the Appellant contended that the theory of joint ness is inapplicable to the case as the Plaintiffs are Muhammadans, that only Plaintiff 1 and Defendant 2 must be regarded as having been the sole owners of items 1 and 2 respectively and since their rights are vested in Defendant 1 the suit has to be dismissed.