G. S. Chaube, J.

This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the 2nd Addl. Sub-Judge of Motihari in Title Suit No. 139 of 1968. The suit was for possession of 5 bighas, 6 kathas bakast lands appertaining to plot nos. 878 and 881 of khata no. 2 be sides 10 kathas and 1 1/2 dhurs lands of plot nos. 863, 135 and 2 of khata no. 103 in the district of west Champaran and mesne profits.

2. The facts on which the plaintiffs, six in number, had based their claim for possession and mesne profits are that the ancesters of defendants 2nd party, who were the tenure holders, had executed a jarpeshgi mortgage in favour of the defendant 1st party in the suit respecting Schedule-A properties which included mokarri interest to the extent of 6/-annas in tauzi no. 729 of viHage Madhuri, 6 kathas equivalent to 45 decimals Brit lakhraj in village Laukari appertaining to plot no 499 of khata no. 251 of tauzi no. 951; and 5 bighas, 10 kathas bakast lands of plots no.878 and 881 of khata no. 2 situate at village Madhuri and the mortgagee was put in possession. The mortgage was created on the basis of registered document dated 25-8-1944 for a period of five years. The mortgage money was Rs. 24,551/-. Before the mortgage could be redeemed the mokarri tenure of the mortgagors vested in the State of Bihar with effect from 26-1-1955 in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act. 1950 (herein after to be referred to as 'the Act') According to the plaintiffs, in consequence of vesting the defendants 2nd party acquired occupancy right respecting the bakast and gairmajrua lands and buildings including those comprised in the mortgage dated 25-8-1944. However, the mortgagee defendant 1st party remained in occupation of the lands including 5 Bighas 10 kathas bakast lands of plot nos. 878 and 881. It is further case of the plaintiffs that on the basis of five registered deeds of sale dated 25-4-1967 they purchased the entire bakast lands under mortgage as also buildings standing over plot nos. 863 and Some other lands of plot nos. 135 and 2 of khata no 103 from the defendants 2nd party on payment of valuable consideration. Plaintiffs no. 1 to 3 purchased 2 bighas, 5 kathas lands of plot nos. 878 and 881 mentioned in Schedule-B; plaintiff no. 4 purchased 2 bighas 16 kathas lands of the same plots mentioned in Schedule-B, B (i) and B (ii) : plaintiff no. 5 acquired 14 kathas 1½ dhurs lands of plots no. 878, 863, 135 and 2 mentioned in Schedule B (iii) and plaintiff no. 6 purchased 5 kathas land of plot no. 878 mentioned in Schedule B (iv). The lands so purchased by the plaintiffs ate the subject matter of the suit and shall hereinafter be referred to as "the suit lands." According to the plaintiffs, the mortgagee defendant 1st party notified his claim on the mortgage to the Claim Officer in accordance with the provision of section 14 of the Act and the Claim Officer decreed that the entire mortgage money was recoverable from the amount of compensation payable to the mortgagors tenure holders, namely, the defendants 2nd party, in consequence of taking over of their intermediary interest by the State. The mortgage having become extinct, they became entitled to recover possession d their respective purchased lands from the defendant 1st party. They further contended that even though the mortgagee was expressly prohibited from making settlement of or creating any raiyati interest respecting the lands under mortgage, the defendant 1st party settled Schedule-B (iii) lands which comprised a building and gairmajrua lands with the defendants 3rd party. Therefore, the settlees did acquire no interest in those lands. Having acquired title to the suit lands on the basis of the sale deeds dated 24-5-1967, the plaintiff’s immediately after the purchase approached the defendant 1st party to deliver possession of the suit lands, but were not obliged. Hence the suit for recovery of possession and mesne profits.

3. In their written statement th