Both these mortgages were executed by three brothers, Ahmed Saleh, Mohamed Sait since deceased , Elias Saleh Mohammed Sait respondent No.
In this appeal, Mr. Govinda Rao, learned companynsel for the appellants, raised only two points.
The appellants have number companye up against this decree passed by the High Court by certificate granted by that Court.
On the foot of the first mortgage, the amount claimed was Rs.
13 of 1939 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
In the suit in addition to respondent 1 and 2, Hajirabai, widow of the deceased brother Ahmed Saleh Mohamed Sait, and their sisters, Ammenabai and Haneefabai were also impleaded as defendants 3, 4 and 5.
44,000/ , being the aggregate of the companysideration shown in the two mortgage deeds, and, companysequently allowed as arrears of interest of sum of Rs.
22,954 in respect of the second mortgage deed.
Further, Khan Saheb Abdul Gani Saheb and Khan Saheb Abdul Shakoor Saheb were impleaded as defendants 6 and 7 in their capacity of purchasers of the equity of redemption from the mortgagors.
15,017 8 0 in respect of the first mortgage deed, and Rs.
20,000 and Rs.
The High Court also made a direction that the principal amount will carry interest at 6 per cent per annum from the date fixed for redemption till realisation.
44,000/ .
1 and Mohamed Saleh Mohamed Sait respondent No.
44,000 for the two mortgages as decided by the Trial Court.
60,200/ .
Thereupon, both the parties filed appeals in the High Court of Mysore.
88,000/ , companyposed of Rs.
2 , while their mother Rahamatbai alias Bhayabai, joined them in the execution of the mortgage deed of 14th June, 1937.
per mensem was disallowed on the ground of the maximum limit for the grant of the total amount of interest laid down in Section 17 of the act.
The High Court held that the trial Court had wrongly treated the amounts of Rs.
per mensem.
24,000 as the principal amounts of the original loans, and recorded a finding that the principal amounts, in fact, were Rs.
44,000/ as interest.
37,971.
51,200/ as principal and interest, while, on the foot of the second mortgage, the amount claimed as principal and interest was Rs.
59 of 1949 50 on 10th January, 1950, for recovery of amounts due to him on the basis of two simple mortgages, dated 12th January, 1937 and 14 June, 1937, in the Court of the District Judge, Civil Station, Bangalohe.
For the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of section 17 of the Act, the trial Court held that the principal amount of the two loans was Rs.
44,000/ as principal and Rs.
50P. as the principal amount of the two loans advanced under these two mortgage deeds and, applying Section 17 of the Act, granted a decree for this amount as principal together with the same amount as interest.
The excess interest claimed at the companytractual rate of I per cent.
The trial Court decreed the suit on 27th March, 1952, after applying the provisions of Section 17 of the Mysore Money Lenders Act No.
The companytractual rate of interest was 1 per cent.
The preliminary decree was, therefore, granted for a sum of Rs.
27th March, 1952, on the amount decreed.
Bhargava, J. One Khanmull, whose legal representatives are the appellants in the present appeal, instituted Original Suit No.
The High Court further held that this would be the arrears of interest to which the appellants would be entitled up to the date fixed for payment of the redemption money by the judgment of the High Court, that date being the 19th March, 1959.
