JAI NARAIN SINGH Vs. MUNNA LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this case is an unsuccessful plaintiff who brought a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Aligarh for the purpose of avoiding a certain sale in execution of a decree.

(2.) The decree under which this sale took place had been passed against a widow, Mt. Lachman Kuar, on the basis of two mortgages executed by her, and the case for the plaintiff, who claimed to be the reversioner, was that these two mortgages had been executed by Mt. Lachman Kuar without any legal necessity and that consequently neither they nor the decree which was obtained upon them bound the estate in his, the plaintiff s, hands. A number of defendants were impleaded, one of them being the auction-purchaser. The defendants second party are said to be persons who have taken transfers from the defendants first party.

(3.) The Subordinate Judge dismissed the plaintiff's suit, being of opinion that the mortgages just referred to had been executed for legal necessity and were binding upon the estate. This finding of the Subordinate Judge is challenged here in appeal and there has also been raised before us a question of law which, though not raised distinctly before the Subordinate Judge, has been allowed to be argued before us.