RAMKISAN SINGH Vs. MAHAMMAD ABDUL SATTAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Their Lordships have given full consideration to the various points which have been raised in this case; some of them are points of small importance; others are, no doubt, of considerable weight, having regard to the interest of the parties; but their Lordships are prepared to deal with them shortly as, indeed, the considerations which lead them to their conclusion are not many or very involved.

(2.) First of all, dealing with the respondents who are represented Singh by Mr. Dunne, the respondents Mathuradas and Gopaldas, they are no doubt made respondents by the appellants, the Singhs, Abdul in their appeal, because they were parties to the suit, having been made parses to the suit by the plaintiff, and, therefore, they had to be made parties to the appeal; but they would obviously not have required to come here if it had not been for the application made in the cross-appeal or for fear of some application. As against them there is no case.

(3.) It has been argued by the plaintiff, cross-appellant, that be could support the mortgage to him of the attached properties, though the properties were under attachment, because he could ask the Board to accept the view that there had been permission given by the Collector; but it is clear that there was no such permission and, indeed, it is a matter of fact which has been found by both Courts in India. Therefore, the mortgage, being a mortgage of the attached properties, was a bad mortgage and the plaintiff's title cannot prevail against those respondents.