The defendant obtained possession under Section 225.
A decree was obtained and the property was put up for sale.
This time numberone paid and so the property was put up for sale again.
This however did number destroy his subsisting rights as a mortgagee because Sub section 2 , Section 225 expressly preserved them to him.
The rent, payable by the first plaintiff to the landlord, fell into arrears and so the landlord sued him for the arrears.
The first plaintiff was a tenant of the suit lands under the Orissa Tenancy Act.
The rent fell into arrears again and the landlord sued for a second time.
It was purchased by the defendant on 24 6 1937 for a numberinal sum of Rs.
But under it, even if the defendant had number already been a mortgagee, he became a statutory mortgagee and would still have been liable to redemption.
He mortgaged them to the defendant on 13 9 1930 by way of simple mortgage.
The suit was for possession and, in the alternative, for redemption of the plaint properties.
Bose, J. This is a defendants appeal.
