PANDIT KHUB CHAND Vs. TODAR MAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a very clear case. One Sewa Ram, a mortgagee, left four sons who were entitled to his mortgagee rights on his death. These persons secured a decree for sale of the mortgaged property for a sum exceeding Rs. 1,200. This decree was put in exeoution in September 1916 by Khub Chand, defendant No. 6, alone. The learned District , Judge has found thab when Khub Chand applied for execution he expressly reserved the rights of his co-decree-holders, but for this reservation it is possible that the Court would have declined to execute the decree under Order XXI, Rule 15, Sub-clause, (2), Civil Procedure Code. The property of the judgment-debtors was put up for sale and was purchased for a sum of Rs. 5,562 in the name of the decree-holder Khub Chand. No money was paid in cash by him but the prioe was set off against part of the decretal amount. Khub Chand obtained a sale certificate as well as the delivery of possession and has admittedly remained in exclusive possession of the property ever since

(2.) One of the co-decree-holders has brought the suit for recovery of possesion of his one-fourth share in the property as well as mesne profits.

(3.) Both the Courts below have deoreed the suit, holding that the purchase must be deemed to have been made on behalf of and for the benefit of all the decree- holders.