TUKARAM RANGRAO PATIL Vs. SUBHEDAR NANAJI PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Letters Patent appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice N. J. Wadia confirming the decree of the lower Courts dismissing the plaintiff-appellant's suit for redemption.

(2.) The material facts may be very briefly stated. The property in suit was mortgaged in July, 1871, by the father of the plaintiff to the father of the defendant. At the same time the father of the plaintiff executed a rent-note in favour of the mortgagee and remained in possession. He failed to pay the rent and the mortgagee filed a suit to recover it, and obtained a decree, in execution of which he brought the mortgaged property to sale. At the Court-sale he purchased it himself. The available records of this suit do not enable us to say whether this purchase was or was not with the permission of the Court.

(3.) The question for decision is whether under these circumstances the mortgagor is entitled to redeem. The case-law has been very fully considered in the judgment of Mr. Justice N. J. Wadia, and as we are in agreement with him we do not think it necessary to discuss the cases in great detail.