LILA DHAR Vs. CHUNNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a pltf's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 139/6/-by sale of the mtged property.

(2.) Jagan, father of defts respondents 1 to 3, executed a simple mtge in favour of the predecessor-in-interest of the pltf applt on 8-2-1933 for a sum of Rs. 50/-. The rate of interests was Rs. 1/4/- per cent per mensem simple. The mtged property was an ancestral house; The pltf alleged that this amount was borrowed for a valid family purpose or necessity & that it was binding on the defts resps. The defts case was that the debt was incurred for a new business & not for an ancestral business & hence it was not binding on them.

(3.) The facts found are that Jagan was a teli (oilman). His father used to carry on the business of an oilman but he himself carried on the business not of an oilman but of an itinerant grocer. He borrowed a sum of Rs. 50/- in order to purchase an oil-crushing machine & a bullock to enable him to carry on the trade of an oilman, presumably with the object of augmenting his income. The Cts below held that since this was a new business, an alienation for its purpose was not binding upon the sons. The suit was, therefore, dismissed.