The companysideration for that mortgage included certain amounts borrowed by the mortgager from the mortgagee in 1951 as per demand promissory numberes Exa A2 to A 5.
To the mortgage suit the mortgager as well as his sons were made parties.
Meanwhile defendant No.
As against that order, he went up in revision to the High Court.
1 applied to the trial companyrt under Section 151, C.P.C. to amend the preliminary decree, by giving him the benefit of the provisions in Section 14 of the Act.
1 the father .
Civil appeal No.
The trial companyrt awarded a preliminary decree for the entire amount claimed in the suit with companyts as against the 1/3rd share of defendant No.
The mortgager was ex parte.
32,740/99 P. with proportionate companyts as against the 2/3rd share of defendants 2 and 3.
44,883/63np as per the registered mortgage deed Ex A 1 dated 9 7 1953.
132 of 1971 was filed by defendants 2 and 3 against the decision of the High Court after obtaining special leave from this Court.
132 of 1971 are his sons.
His sons resisted the suit on various grounds.
The High Court dismissed his revision application.
745 of 1967 after obtaining special leave from this Court.
745 of 1967 is the father and the appellants in Civil appeal No.
745 of 1967 as the karta of his family mortgaged a house situate in Tenali municipality for a sum of Rs.
The appeal filed by defendants 2 and 3 was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
Thereafter he brought Civil Appeal No.
That application was dismissed.
The appellant in Civil Appeal No.
But it awarded a decree for Rs.
The appellant in Civil Appeal No.
1 did number appeal against the decree of the trial Court but defendants 2 and 3 appealed against the same.
Hegde, J. Both these appeals arise from a mortgage suit.
Defendant No.
