(1.) THESE two appeals Nos. 4 and 3 of 1958 arise out of two several suits filed by plaintiff Sakinabai W/o Hatimbhai against Sakinabai and her husband Ibrahim for the enforcement of two different mortgages first dated 7-4-1952 and, the second dated 23-12-1952. Amount sought to be recovered under the first mortgage was rs. 6408-1-0 and that under the second was Rs. 8680/ -. Plaintiff sought to recover these amounts by the sale of mortgaged property.
(2.) PLAINTIFF alleged that the mortgage-deeds in question had been executed by the husband of the defendant Sakinabai in his capacity as her Am Mukhtyar. He also had got them registered. Controversy is as to the validity of registration at his instance. 'under the first deed dated 7-4-1952 Rs. 5500/- were borrowed at Annas 12 per cent per month as interest and under the second Rs. 7000/- were borrowed at Rupee one per cent per month. Both the deeds, according to the plaintiff, had been attested by two attesting witnesses.
(3.) PRINCIPAL defence set up by the defendant No. 1 Sakinabai was that her husband ibrahimbhai had not been conferred any authority to effect registration of the deeds in question. She also disclaimed any knowledge about their execution on her behalf. Defendant No. 2 Ibrahimbhai denied the execution of the two deeds and in the alternative contended with reference to the first suit No. 356 of 1955 on the basis of the earlier mortgage that he had executed a document on receiving rs. 4500/- only and not Rs. 5500/-, Rs. 1000/- having been deducted beforehand for interest, and with reference to Civil Suit No. 13 of 1956 on the basis of. the second mortgage that he had executed another deed for the same consideration as is alleged with regard to that mortgage namely Rs. 7000/ -. He alleged payment of Rs. 840/- towards interest in respect of the latter claim admitted by him.