(1.) I have listened with pleasure to the clear and forcible argument of Mr. Desai to induce me to come to the conclusion that in this appeal there is a question of law on which the lower Appellate Court has given a wrong decision.
(2.) The question is, whether the document, Ex. 87, dated March 17, 1917, is a sale out and out, or whether it comes within the terms of Section 58, Clause (c), of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and is to be treated as a mortgage by conditional sale.
(3.) The question arises in a suit for possession, brought on November 25, 1926, nine years and eight months after the document in question was executed. The defendant, the executants of the deed, resists the suit for possession, alleging that there was only a mortgage intended.