BYRAMJI JAMSETJI Vs. CHUNILAL LALCHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaint house belonged to one Sitabai, who mort gaged it to respondents in April, 1891. The respondents on 31 May, 1898, obtained, in Suit No. 612 of 1897, a decree against their mortgagor Sitabai for sale of the mortgaged house, and at the Court-sale held in execution of the said decree they purchased the right, title and interest of Sitabai in the said house.

(2.) Meanwhile during the pendency of the respondent's mortgage suit No. 612 of 1897 against Sitabai, the appellant had at a Court-sale held in execution of a money decree obtained by a creditor against Sitabai, purchased the right, title and interest of Sitabai in the said house as existing at the date of the attachment of the said house in the creditor's suit in which the money decree was passed.

(3.) There is no express finding by the lower Courts whether this attachment in the money suit was placed soon after, or just before, the institution of the mortgage suit No. 612, but it is not in dispute that the attachment was long after the house had been mortgaged by Sitabai to the respondents.