SAMBU HANMANTA KOBAL Vs. NAMA NARAYAN NAIKDE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The pleadings and the facts found by the Court below may be shortly stated for the purpose of the question of law which has been very carefully argued by both the counsel before us.

(2.) The plaintiff brought the suit to redeem, alleging that he had mortgaged the property in dispute on the 4th of April, 1873, to defendant No. 1st father and that the mortgage was with possession for Rs. 601. Defendant No. 1 in his written statement pleaded that the mortgage had been redeemed, and that, therefore, the suit did not lie as against him. He alleged further that, ever since redemption, the property had been in the possession of defendants 2 to 4. These defendants are appellants before us. The contest, therefore, came really to be between the plaintiff and defendants 2 to 4. These defendants in their written statement alleged that, on the 25th of November 1878, at the request of the plaintiff himself they had paid off the amount of the mortgage to defendant 1 s father, and that, for the sum so paid on the plaintiff s account and a further sum of Rs. 50 paid by the defendants to the plaintiff, he had sold the land to the defendants. The defendants also alleged that ever since their purchase they had been in possession as owners.

(3.) Now, upon these pleadings, the Questions which arose for determination were these: (1) whet there defendants 2 to 4 had proved their. title by purchase from the plaintiff; (2) whether, if that purchase were not proved, the defendants had established their title by adverse possession.