GANAPPA PUTTA HEGDE Vs. HAMMAD SAIBA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There were five cousins, Bomrnanna, Tim-rnanna, Puttayya and Subbayya, sous of Bomma Hegde, and Glanapa Manj Hegde, living separate. Ganapa died leaving a widow Venkamma as heir to his property. Puttayya and Subbayya died during her life-time, so that on the death of Venkamma Bommanna and Timraanna succeeded to her property as reversioners, Puttayya's son representing that he was p entitled to half the property of Ganappa sold it to the plaintiff in this suit for Rs. 400 on April 4, 1915, Rs. 150 were paid in cash, and for the balance the plaintiff passed a mortgage on certain of his properties. The plaintiff, when he was unable to get possession owing to the obstruction of Bommanna and Timmanna, purchased the land from them and obtained possession on April 4, 1&21. He sued Puttayya's son to recover the Rs. 150 and to obtain a declaration that the mortgage bond was satisfied, The defendant pleaded that he did not make any representation to the plaintiff, that the plaintiff bought agreeing to take all risks, and that the suit was not in time.

(2.) As the plaintiff had not paid the necessary Court fees with regard to the declaration sought for that the mortgage bond had been satisfied, he gave up his claim for the declaration.

(3.) The trial Judge held that the defendant had no title to the land sold by him, that he was not induced to sell on the representation alleged to have been made by the plaintiff, that the suit was filed in time, and passed a decree for Rs. 150 with costs and future interest at six per cent.