BABU RAM Vs. LALA RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant on a mortgage dated 7 November 1910 executed by one Ganga Ram to Mt. Lachho and Ram Narain. The successors-in-interest of the mortgagor are defendants 1 and 2. Defendants 13 and 18 are said to be transferees of the mortgagee Ram Narain. The plaintiff sues as the successor-in-interest of Mt. Lachho. The suit was resisted only by defendants 13 and 14 as successor-in-interest of Ram Narain, the co-mortgages of Mt. Lachho.

(2.) The plaintiff based his claim to represent Mt. Lachho on the following facts. He produced an award dated 1 August 1912 which appears to have awarded the interest of Mt. Lachho in this deed to one Anrudh Prasad. He says that when Anrudh Prasad died, his interest devolved on his widow Mt. Sheorani and his adopted son Ambika Prasad. They sold him that interest by a deed dated 22nd October 1925. As noted above, the only persons to resist this suit were the successors-in-interest of Mt. Lachho's co-mortgagee Ram Narain.

(3.) The trial Court dismissed the suit because the plaintiff did not manage to procure the attendance of the arbitrator who gave the award, namely Chaudhri Surajpal Singh, and held consequently that the award had not been proved It also held that Ambika Prasad was not the adopted son of Anrudh Prasad.