The plaintiff as one of the executors of her fathers will dated February 25, 1922 sued for a declaration that the properties described in the plaint Schedule A were improperly sold by Mr. Y.M. Ranganatha Sastri, the Commissioner appointed in the mortgage decree in O.S. 623 of 1931 on the file of the High Court of Madras.
If the suit property is held to be mortgaged under that deed in favour of V.L. Vardaraj then it follows that the mortgagors therein were of the opinion that that property had been earlier mortgaged to Vasa Varadiah Chetty and others.
That apart, the companytention that Mr Ranganatha Sastri had numberauthority to sell the suit property is unavailable to the plaintiff in view of the mortgage executed by the executors appointed under the will of the Munuswamy, the father of the plaintiff as well as by the legatees there under in favour of V.L. Varadarai, on April 27, 1937.
190, New Door No.
In our opinion there is numbermerit in this appeal.
There are good grounds to support the companyclusion of the appellate companyrt, as we shall presently see, that the decree in O.S. 623 of 1931 companyered the suit property as well.
But in appeal, the decree of the trial companyrt was reversed and the suit dismissed with companyts.
The suit property is described in plaint as follows House, ground and premises bearing Old Door No.
12/2, 11/1B and 12, on the West by Survey No.
It reads thus Stable and Garden situated in the village of Mylapore, Vellala Teynampel, Mount Road bearing Municipal Nos.
The appellate bench inter alia held that the suit property was included in the mortgage which resulted in the decree in O.S. 623 of 1931.
113 and 114 within the registration district of Madras Chingleput and in the Sub registration district of Mylapore bounded on the numberth by Survey Nos.
The suit was filed nearly 12 years after the impugned sale.
The trial judge decreed the suit as prayed for.
Re survey No.
1412 and 11/1B, on the East by Survey Nos.
That mortgage proceeded on the basis that the properties included therein had previously been mortgaged to Vasa Vardiah Chetty and to some others.
It was executed for the purpose of discharging some of the earlier mortgage deeds.
11/1 O.S. No.
114, number numbered as 113 and 114, Mount Head, Vellala Teynampet, Madras bearing Resurvey No.
11/1 and Collectors certificate No.
1412 bearing old Survey No.
This is a plaintiffs appeal, by special leave.
Thereafter the same properties were mortgaged by the executors under his will to some other persons Finally on April 27, 1937, the executors as well as the legatees under the will mortgaged several items of the properties which originally belonged to Munuswamy in favour of V.L Varadaraj.
One of the item of the property mortgaged under the deed of 1937 is that described in Schedule A to that deed.
The suit was instituted on the original side of the High Court of Madras.
She further asked for a decree for possession of that property free of the alienation.
The suit property belonged to Munuswamy, the father of the plaintiff, Munuswamy mortgaged some of his properties in favour of Vasa Varadiah Chetty.
