(1.) The story out of which the points involved in this appeal arise is rather intricate. On the 5 March, 1898, the appellant and two persons named Kishori Lal and Sri Ram instituted a suit against the predecessor-in-title of the respondent before the Subordinate Judge of Moradabad, for the recovery of more than a lakhe of rupees with future interest, by sale of property mortgaged under two documents dated respectively the n May, and the 13 December, 1894. On the 6 May, 1898, the claim was decreed by the first Court, but on appeal to the High Court at Allahabad that Court took the view that the learned Judge had placed undue pressure upon the defendant, who had asked for a postponement, on the ground of illness, to go on with the case, and accordingly set aside the decree which he had made and remanded the case for determination according to law.
(2.) On the 30 January, 1901, the case came again before the Subordinate Judge of Moradabad and resulted in a decree for Rs. 70,257-14-0, with future interest. Meanwhile Kishori Lal and Sri Ram had sold the whole of their interest in the decree to one Lachman Das, to whom the present appellant also transferred a part of his interest as a decree holder, and the name of Lachman Das was added to the record. From the decree both parties appealed to the High Court. The High Court dismissed the defendant's appeal, and with a slight modification affirmed the decree of the first Court on the cross appeal.
(3.) On the 5 October, 1901, on the application of the original decree-holders, the first Court made an order absolute for sale of the mortgaged property under Secs.89 and 93 of the Transfer of Property Act for the amount decreed together with future interest. Thereafter the present appellant applied to the first Court for execution of the said decree, and after certain intermediate proceedings, which it is not necessary to refer to in detail, the judgment debtor on the 21st November, 1903, deposited the entire amount due under The decree, with future interest.