The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of inheritance principles under Sunni law, the principle of res judicata, and the rights of co-owners in the equity of redemption.

JUDGMENT

Mitter, J. - This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage executed by the predecessor of the plaintiffs in favour of the predecessors of defendants 1 to 12, so far back as the year 1852.

2. The three short genealogical trees given below will show who the mortgagees and their successors-in-interest are, as also who the mortgagors and their successors-in-interest are respectively. It is essential that we should have those trees before us in order to understand the questions in controversy in this appeal, more particularly as the heirs of the mortgagees have also succeeded to certain shares in the equity of redemption in the disputed properties.

     (1)                   Kanu = Khatija                                 |                        |--------                      Feda Gazi                        |                     Asad Ali                        |                   |----                  Sons             Daughter                   |                   |                   ---------------------                             |                         Plaintiffs.                             |     (2)   Paran married Khatija (widow of Kanu)                             |           Hira Bibi (married) - Hasan Ali                |           Asmat Ali                |           |---------------|     (3) Hasan Ali      Brother             |             | S           |---------|-----|-----|-----|-----|         Defendants                    1 to 12

3. It is not necessary to state the earlier history of this somewhat long-drawn litigation, which commenced in 1919. It is sufficient to state that, by the decree of the lower appellate Court, which is now under appeal, the plaintiffs have been allowed to redeem to the extent of only four pies share and the controversy in the appeal before us has centred round the question as to whether the plaintiffs should not be allowed to redeem to the extent: (i) of 11 annas four pies share of the mortgagors, (ii) or, in any event, to the extent of eight annas four pies share and to have recovery of possession of the mortgaged property to the extent of the said shares.

4. It is common ground that the mortgaged property belongs to Paran and Kanu, whose relationship to the parties to the litigation is shown in the above genealogical tables.

5. The mortgage was executed in favour of Ahsanullah and Aminullah Sawdagar, predecessor of defendants 1 to 12, by Feda Gazi, Hira Bibi, daughter of Paran, and Manu Bibi, wife of Feda Gazi, in respect of 3 drones 12 kanis of land belonging to taluk, called Paran Kanu, on 10th Falgoon, 1215 M.E., for a consideration of Rs. 188, and it was agreed that the mortgagees were to be put in possession of the mortgaged property and enjoy the same in lieu of interest and that, on payment of the mortgage money, the mortgage property would be released.

6. The claim by the plaintiffs to redeem to the extent of 11 annas four pies share and to recover possession of the same is based on the case that Paran and Kanu were brothers; and plaintiffs, as the heirs of Feda Gazi, would also inherit the share which Feda Gazi inherited from his uncle Paran. It is argued, in this appeal, that, as there is no finding by the lower appellate Court, that Paran and Kanu were not brothers, the case should be remitted to the lower appellate Court for a proper finding on the question. We do not think there is any substance in this ground. The lower appellate Court clearly points out: (i) that it was distinctly stated in the plaint that Paran's heir was his daughter Hira Bibi alone; (ii) that, in the decree of 1859, Ex. 1, Feda Gazi did not claim any share of Paran's property as his heir; (iii) that Feda Gazi was not Paran's heir was recognized in a claim case in 1862; and (iv) that, to an attachment of certain property of Feda Gazi by Azim, Hira Bibi preferred a claim to it as Paran's heir and it was held Hira Bibi was the only heir. These findings of th