Ramratna Singh, J.

1. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the term of ninetynine years in the usufructuary mortgage bond in suit amounts to a clog on the equity of redemption. Girdhari Mahto, defendant-respondent second party, executed the bond in suit on the 28th August 1939 in respect of a certain area of land in1 favour of the defendants first party, the appellants in this Court, for a sum of Rs. 211 only. The bond was taken in the name of Ramfula Kuer, wife of defendant No. 3; and the mortgagees were put in possession of the mortgaged property. The term of the bond was for ninetynine years and, therefore, the due date for redemption was some time in 1435 Fasli. The mortgagor sold the mortgaged land along with other lands to the plaintiffs-respondents first party under a sale deed dated the 8th November 1949 on the allegation that the term of the mortgage was only nine years. The plaintiffs deposited the mortgaged dues, that is, Rs. 211, under section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act to the credit of the mortgagees, who filed an objection in the proceeding arising out of the deposit. Hence, the suit for redemption. The plaintiffs alleged that the perio