GOPALA CHETTIAR Vs. ARASAPPA PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellants to redeem an usufructuary mortgage executed by their father in favour of one Madasami Pillai on 21 March, 1877. The respondents 1 to 5 and 7 are the heirs of Madasami Pillai and the 6 respondent is the purchaser of the property from them. Both the Courts below have dismissed theisuit on the ground firstly that the mortgagor's title was extinguished by the adverse possession of Madasmi and his successors for over the statutory period, and secondly, that, in any case, the 6 respondent acquired a valid title by estoppel as against the appellants under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act as a bona fide purchaser for value. Mr. Sitarama Rao, the learned Counsel for the appellants, contests the validity of both these conclusions in this appeal.

(2.) The facts so far as they are material for the purpose of the appeal may be briefly stated. The mortgage deed, marked as Ex. A in the case, provided that- Before 30 Vaigasi of Bahudanya year (11 June, 1878), I shall pay the amount and redeem the land. In case of failure to make payment on that, due date, I shall present a petition for relinquishment and get patta entered in your name, in respect of the aforesaid land.

(3.) The mortgagor did not redeem by the due date and it appears from Ex. IX, a copy of a statement made by Madasami in 1897, that the mortgagor sold the property to him and filed a patta transfer petition for the issue of patta in Madasami's name, in respect of the property. It has been found by both the lower Courts that pattas had stood in the names of Madasami and his heirs at least from 1897 and that these persons had been in possession and enjoyment throughout, dealing with the property as if it was their own by mortgaging or leasing out the same from time to time till they sold it to the 6 respondent under Ex. II on 27 May, 1918.