BHAGWAT BHASKAR KORANNE Vs. NIVRATTI SAKHARAM BHADULE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The material facts are that in 1869 Appa, the original owner of this property, sold it to Ramchandra and Ramchandra passed a contemporaneous agreement, Exhibit 87, in the case, under which he agreed that if the vendor Appa paid him Rs. 100 every year for six years he would reconvey the land. So matters stood till after the death of Ramchandra. His son Dattatraya was sued in 1883 by the representatives in interest of the original owner Appa. The suit took the form of a redemption suit, because had it been upon the agreement, merely as an agreement, it is obvious that it would have been time-barred. Dattatraya resisted this suit. His written statement shows that he denied that the agreement had been complied with or could now be enforced, and at the same time alleged that the transaction was not a mortgage. The defence succeeded and the suit was dismissed.

(2.) In 1894 after the death of Dattatraya, Jankibai, who as a widow of Ramchandra and mother of the last male holder Dattatraya was in life enjoyment of the estate, was again sued by the representatives in interest of Appa for the redemption of this mortgage. The suit again failed on the very obvious ground that the claim was res judicata.

(3.) Immediately after this the widow Jankibai appears to have entered into what is called a compromise before the conciliator and allowed a consent-decree against herself for the sale of this land to the representatives of Appa for the sum of Rs. 650. It is this transaction which the plaintiff, who is the reversioner of Dattatraya s estate, seeks to have set aside.