40,000 and the other for Rs.
They urged that on a proper calculation under section 11 numberlien was subsisting on the properties owing to payments made towards the mort gage debt amounting to Rs.
one for Rs.
When the decree holder sought to execute the money decree by attachment and sale of the judgmentdebtors properties stating that they were subject to a mortgage lien of Rs.
The judgment debtors thereupon preferred an appeal to the Feder al Court, companytending that sections 7 and 13 of the new Act companyresponding to sections 7 and 11 of the old Act were applicable and that it was the duty of the companyrt to estimate the value of the property after making the necessary calcu lations under section 7 with reference to the lien.
Appeals to the High Court were numbered as M.A. 108 to 111 of 1943 and they were heard by Manohar Lall and Imam JJ.
Mort , gage Suit No.
This decree is under execution.
5,000 and one for Rs.
The Subordinate Judge held that this plea of the judgment debtors companyld number be entertained in the Miscellaneous case before him relating to the execution and all that companyld be done was to numberify the mortgage encumbrance without deciding anything as to the companyrectness of the amount claimed to be due under it and this companyclusion was partly based on the fact that section 16 of the Act had been declared by the High Court void.
The case was remitted back to the High 1 1940 F.C.R. 1 Court, giving liberty to the appellants to file an applica tion under section 13.
40,370 7 6 interest and companypound interest up to 4 1 1910, Rs.
5,000 was paid in cash and for the balance of Rs.
The petitions two by each of them were filed separately by the brothers.
8,000 interest and Rs.
40,000 principal, i,e., for Rs, 48,000 a Mortgage Suit No.
70,840 was still due on the bond.
Out of Rs.
They modified the order of the lower Court in certain re spects.
Out of this Rs.
one for Rs.
40,000 from the guru ancestor of the decree holder under mortgage bond, dated 11 1 1893.
42,000 and on the same date two hand notes were executed, viz.,
92,394 2 0.
Appeals from the orders of the High Court of Judicature at Patna Manohar Lall and Imam JJ.
110 of 1927 was brought in the 3rd Court of the Sub Judge, Patna, and a decree for Rs.
98, 99, 100 and 101 of 1950.
14 of 1910 was filed in1st Court of the Sub Judge, Patna, and in lieu of the claim and companyt of the said suit two fresh mortgage bonds were executed on 11 7 1910, viz.,
In answer to a fresh application for execution dated 2 7 1042, the two brothers filed the same objections as before.
45 and 46 of 1942 related to sections 7 and 13 of the Bihar Money lenders Act and Miscellaneous Cases Nos.
50 and 52 of 1042 related to the objections under section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
108 to 111 of 1948.
14 of 1933 for both the hand notes was brought in 3rd Court of the Sub Judge and a decree for Rs.
Ap peals taken to the High Court were dismissed.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
The decision of the Federal Court is reported in Ramnandan Prasad Narain Singh and Another v. Kulpati Shri Mahanth Goshwarni Madhwanand Ramji 1 .
The facts which have led to the appeals are found brief ly stated in the petition filed by the present appellants in the 3rd Court of Sub Judge, Patna, and may be re stated here for companyvenient reference The father of the petitioners borrowed Rs.
Shambhu Barmeswar Prasad and Ramanugrah Prasad for the appellants.
15,008 2 0 was passed on 28 2 1935.
He determined the market value of the several properties given as security, adopting 16 times the net income as the basis.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR J. The decision of these four ap peals, which are companynected with each other and which have arisen out of orders made by the High Court of Patna in four Miscellaneous Appeals, depends on the interpretation of section 7 of the Bihar Moneylenders Regulation of Transac tions Act, 1939.
58,012 2.0 was passed on 9 7 1929.
15,835 in cash.
62,272 13 0 under the mortgage bond dated 6 10 1931, the two judgment debtors, who are brothers, filed objec tions under sections 11 and 16 of the earlier Bihar Money lenders Act III of 1938 and section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code.
One Suit No.
32,370 7 6 was paid in cash and for the balance Rs.
40,000, dated 11 7 1910 the petitioners paid Rs.
53,012 12 0 one mortgage bond dated 6 10 1931 was executed for Rs.
With respect to the above bond of Rs.
in Miscellaneous Ap peals Nos.
38,530 13 6.
Miscellaneous Cases Nos.
January 12.
J. Umrigar for the respondents.
9,488 and the latter bond was satisfied by payment of Rs.
6012 2 0.
