in appeal number 41 of 1943 arising out of decree dated 4th september 1942 of the companyrt of the first class subordinate judge at poona in civil suit number 808 of 1941.
the first was for a sum of rs 9500 the second for rs.
the companyrt appointing him required him to produce a surety in the sum of rs.
and even at that rate i have also been receiving the interest and i shall also receive hereafter as regards the transaction of the second mortgage deedif as agreed at that time between you and me you pay me rs.
appeal from a judgment and decree dated 22nd septem ber 1947 of the high companyrt of judicature at bombay sen and bavdekar jj.
10000.
the same property was mortgaged each time.
the second was dated the 17th of december 1935 and was executed by the defend ant alone.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 140 of 1951.
the portions of the document relevant for the present purpose are as follows.
the defence was that both mortgages were satisfied.
on the 28th of march 1940 the mortgagee assigned them both to the plaintiff who number sues on them.
the judgment of the companyrt was deliv ered by bose j. this is a defendants appeal in a suit on two mortgages.
hardyal hardy for the respondent.
roshan lal and b.s.
the defendant agreed to undertake this responsibility and as a companysideration for that the mortgagee executed the agreement in question.
february 22.
it is extremely necessary to explain beforehand the transaction of give and take outstanding between both of us whereas two transactions have been done between you and metherefore you have agreed to stand suretyand only for that reason i am executing this agreement and giving it to you in writing and thereunder i am settling and formulating some new terms and i am companyfirming some very terms which were declared before.
the mortga gee narayan sathe was appointed receiver of two cinemas in poona.
the mortgages are there described as the transactions of give and take.
shastri for the appellant.
the first was executed on the 7th of april 1931 by the defendant and his father.
the claim on the two deeds together was for rs.
