In the suit brought on the subsequent mortgages the prior mortgage was initially impleaded but later the suit was withdrawn against him.
Duttu Rao impleaded the mortgagor and his sons and the legal representatives of the fourth mortgagee C.S, Raghunatha Rao who had died in the meantime though initially the first mortgagee C.K. Rama chandra Rao was joined as a party in this suit, later Dattu Rao withdraw the suit against him.
Dattu Raos suit was also decreed, but the first mortgagee had in the meantime obtained possession of the mortgaged property and leased it out to P.S. Raghavacaar, a son of the mortgager.
The appellant acquired the rights of both the other mortgagees, Dattu Rao and Raghunatha Rao.
On December I 1962, C.V. Raghavachar filed a suit, C Section 889 of 1962, for redemption of the first mortgage and for possession of the part of the property which was in the occupation of the mortgagers son as lessee of the first mortgagee C.K. Ramachandra Rao.
Appellant C.V. Raghavachar was able to take possession of the property except a portion and he claims to be in possession through tenants.
In the meantime in January 1958 the first mortgages C.K. Ramachandra Rao had sold the property to one Srinivasamurthy.
The facts may be briefly stated.
The legal representatives of Srinivasamurthy who had died in the meantime came up in second appeal to High Court giving rise to RSA.
In June 1951 Sripangachar borrowed Rs.
On March 29, 1952 the first mortgagee C.K. Ramachandra Rao instituted a suit against the mortgagor for recovery of the mortgage debt by sale of the house As already stated the subsequent mortgagees were number impleaded in that suit, but there is numberfinding that they were left out designedly.
The sale was companyfirmed on January 9, 1956.
On two different dates in March and May in 1947 Srirangachar again borrowed Rs.
The sale was companyfirmed on October 10, 1958.
In his written statement filed in this suit Srinivasamurthy set up his rights to redeem the subsequent mortgagees as transferee of the mortgagors equity of redemption acquired by the first mortgagee.
The property in dispute is a house in Mysore city of which one Srirangachar was the original owner.
8,000/ from C K. Ramchandra Rao executing simple mortgage deed mortgaging the house.
The Karnataka High Court allowed both the appeals.
40 of 1971.
The second mortgagee Dattu Rao filed a suit on his mortgage bonds on December 6, 1956.
The suit was decided in September 1952, the house was brought to sale and the mortgagee himself purchased the property on November 29, 1955.
There were thus four simple mortgages of which two were held by A.N Dattu Rao.
The legal representatives of Srinivasamurthy had also filed a suit C.S. 563 of 1964, against the mortgagor and his son who was the lsssse for possession of the property and for mesne profits The trial Court as wall as the first appellate Court dismissed this suit and legal representatives of Srinivasamurthy came up to High Court in second appeal giving rise to R.S.A. 41 of 1971.
1500/ from A.N, Dattu Rao executing two simple mortgage deeds mortgaging this house.
1000/ from C.S Raaghuaatha Rao again executing a simple mortgage deed mortgaging the same property.
On August 28, 1946, he borrowed Rs.
A preliminary decree for redemption was passed in favour of the heirs of Srinivasamurthy in R.S A, 40 of 1971.
In this suit both the original mortgagor and Srinivasamurthy to whom the first mortgagee sold the property were impleaded as defedants.
1000/ and Rs.
The trial Court, and the lower appellate Court both held that C.V. Raghavachar was entitled to redeem the first mortgage and decree the suit.
The prior mortgage did number impaled the punisa mortgages in his suit.
C. Gupta, J. In these two appeals by special leave the companytest is between two purchasers in execution of two decrees on successive mortgages, each seeking to redeem the other.
