GANPAT LAL Vs. BINDBASINI PRASAD NARAYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE facts leading up to the litigation out of which this appeal arises may be briefly stated as follows: On April 5, 1896, one Jehangir Prashad Singh, the father of the first respondent, mortgaged to the present appellant's grandfather, Ganpat Lal (hereinafter termed the mortgagee), certain immovable property forming part of the family property of an undivided Hindu family (of whom Jehangir Prashad Singh was the head) in order to secure the payment of a debt of Rs. 300. It is not now in controversy that this debt was rightfully incurred by him as head of the family in order to pay moneys due to the Government in respect of the family property, and that therefore he had full power to mortgage or sell the said property in order to raise the funds necessary for that purpose.

(2.) THE money due on the mortgage was not repaid, and on July 27, 1901, the mortgagee instituted a mortgage suit against the mortgagor and his two brothers, joining also as defendants the two sons of the mortgagor, the elder of whom was one of the plaintiffs in the present action, Bindbasini Prashad Narayan Singh. The other defendant was his younger brother, who has since died, and whose interest is now represented by the plaintiff. These two sons were joined by reason of their being interested in the family property inasmuch as the joint family was governed by the Mitakshara law.

(3.) ON April 6, 1909, the first respondent and his brother instituted the present suit against the mortgagee, joining as defendants the mortgagor, and their uncles, Mahindar Prashad Singh and Partangir Prashad Singh, who were the two brothers of the mortgagor who had been joined as defendants in the original mortgage suit.