JUDGMENT

MISRA, J. :—The present appeals by certificate are directed against the judgment dated 6th November, 1968 of the Madras High Court.

2. The dispute between the parties centres around 48.70 acres of land, partly wet and partly dry in village Pichanur, Gudiyattam Taluk, North Arcot District and one house in Gudiyattam town. Admittedly the said properties belonged to one Varadayya Chetty. He had two sons, K. V. Purushotham and K. V. Sriramulu. K. V. Purushotham in his turn had four sons while K V. Sriramulu had three sons. They constituted a joint Hindu family. The family owned and possessed 48.70 acres of land and three houses. Varadayya Chetty died about 30 years prior to the institution of the suits giving rise to these appeals. At the time of his death his eldest son K. V. Purushotham was the only adult male member, the other son, K. V. Sriramulu being only 4-5 years old. Purushotham thus came into the sole management of the entire family affairs and he brought up his younger brother Sriramulu. Their ancestral family business (Kulachara) was that of tobacco and money lending.

3. It appears that immediately after the second world war Purushotham started a new business of lungi. In connection with his new venture he borrowed money from others either on promissory notes or on the security of the family properties. He, however, suffered loss in that business. When his creditors began to press for immediate discharge of the debts, K. V. Purushotham and his brother K. V. Sriramulu on their behalf and on behalf of other minors in the family entered into an agreement on 7th July, 1955 with V. Govindaswami Mudaliar, V. Shanmugha Mudaliar and V. Nataraja Mudaliar, sons of Vaidinankuppam Venugopala Mudaliar. This agreement was evidenced by a writing, Ext. B-4. Under the agreement K. V. Purushotham and K. V. Sriramulu were to sell their entire property, except one acre of land, and a house, to Mudaliar brothers for a sum of Rs. 14,000/- to discharge their debts. They received a sum of Rs. 500/- by way of advance and the balance of Rupees 13,500/- was to be paid within two months. It was further stipulated that in case the vendees defaulted they would lose the advance money, on the other hand if the vendors defaulted they would have to pay to the vendees a liquidated damage of Rs. 2,000/-.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid agreement, a sale deed was executed on 22nd of Aug, 1955 marked Ext. B-5 for an enhanced consideration of Rs. 16,500/-. The sale deed referred to various debts owed by the vendors which were to be discharged by the vendees and the balance, if any, was to be paid to the vendors. The recital in the sale deed indicated that Rs. 250/- was paid in cash to the vendors at the time of execution of the sale deed. The sale deed further recites that the vendors have not shown the exact amount of debts which the vendees have agreed to pay. The amounts specified therein are only approximate. The sale deed further authorised the vendees to discharge the mortgage debts mentioned in the sale deed in the first instance, if they had no sufficient funds to clear off all the debts at one time and clear off the ordinary debts later.

5. The validity of the aforesaid sale deed, Ext. B-5 dated 22nd Aug. 1955 and a mortgage deed Ext. B-49 in favour of A. M. Vasudeva Mudaliar had been challenged by the sons of K. V. Purushotham and K. V. Sriramulu respectively by two suits : Suit No. 107 of 1958 and Suit No. 108 of 1958. There was yet another suit by one of the creditors, M. V. Chinnappa Mudaliar for annulment of the said sale. As mentioned earlier, the original suit No. 107 of 1958 was filed by the four sons of Purushotham impleading Purushotham and Sriramulu as defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and three minor sons of Sriramulu as defendants Nos. 3 to 5 under the guardianship of their mother; V. Govindaswami Mudaliar, V. Shanmugha Mudaliar and V. Nataraja Mudaliar, the three vendees as defendants Nos. 6 to 8 in Suit No. 107 of 1958 and defendants Nos. 8