1. The plaintiff in O.S.No.29 of 1984 on the file of the District Munsif, Asifabad and appellant in A.S.No.7 of 1984 on the file of the Subordinate Judge Court at Asifabad, preferred this second appeal under Section 100 of C.P.C, challenging the concurrent findings recorded by both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court.

2. For convenience of reference, the ranks given to both the parties before the Trial Court will be adopted throughout the judgment.

3. The plaintiff’s mother Bondakka W/o Mahadu, in her capacity as a natural guardian and in view of legal necessity, mortgaged the agricultural lands bearing Sy.Nos.272, 277 and 303 in total of extent of Ac.36-28 guntas situated at Rebbena Village of Asifabad Taluk. The 2nd defendant’s father who is since deceased and who was 1st defendant’s husband and father of the defendant No.2, Bondakka in her capacity as a natural guardian and in view of legal necessity borrowed Rs.500/- under registered mortgage deed dated 5.7.1950 bearing document No.3 of 1950 by virtue of which the said mortgagee was put in possession of the land and agreed to remain in possession of the said land for a term of 20 years and cultivated the same duly paying the revenue to the government. The said mortgaged property would become the property of the said mortgagor immediately on the expiration of the said term of 20 years in case the debt was not discharged. As per the terms of the mortgage deed, the mortgage commenced with effect from 05.07.1950 and term of 20 years expired by 04.07.1970 and the plaintiff became entitled to redeem the said mortgage within a period of 30 years from 05.07.1970. The said mortgage money of Rs.500/- secured under the mortgage deed came to be liquidated automatically within the period of 20 years and there remained nothing to be paid to the said mortgagee under the said mortgage deed. The said mortgagee, Ganeshlal expired about 8 years ago leaving behind defendants 1 & 2 as legal heirs and they are liable to deliver vacant possession after redeeming the mortgage.

4. The plaintiff’s mother Bondakka died about 6 years prior to filing of the suit and the plaintiff came to know about the mortgage transaction only when he obtained registered copy of the mortgage deed on 12.05.1981 and when he made further enquires, he came to know on 22.06.1981 and when he obtained certificate of Khasra Pahani of Rebbena Village for the year 1954-55, one Odhavjee Kara S/o Kara Bai was also cultivating the said land along with the said deceased mortgagee, Ganeshlal and continues to do along with the 2nd defendant. Therefore, Odhavjee Kara is also impleaded as 3rd defendant, as the rights of the said 3rd defendant being derivative in nature cannot be more than that of the said mortgagee Ganeshlal, the original mortgagee. The plaintiff is the owner and pattedar of the said mortgaged property and a mortgagee Ganeshlal under the said mortgage deed and defendant nos.1 & 2 are the legal heirs of the said mortgagee Ganeshlal and the relationship of the mortgagee is still subsisting between the legal heirs of the deceased mortgagor (Bondakka) and mortgagee (Ganeshlal).

5. A part of the suit schedule property is in possession of defendants 1 & 2 and the other part is in possession of the 3rd defendant, being cultivated by them and therefore, as a consequence of automatic discharge of debt, after expiry of 20 years by 04.07.1970, the defendants are liable to deliver vacant possession in view of satisfaction of the mortgage deed. The defendants possession is with effect from 05.07.1970 is in their fiduciary capacity and they are bound under the law to account for the profits received by them from 05.07.1970, the date of the suit and thereafter, till delivery of vacant possession, remit the profits at Rs.1,295/- for the property for 11 years from 05.07.1970 to 04.07.1981.

6. Despite demands, defendants 1 & 2 did not redeliver the property redeeming the mortgage. The plaintiff claimed a decree -

(a) directing