R. Bhaskaran, J.

When this second appeal came up for admission, I heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st respondent, who took notice in the appeal. This second appeal is filed by the 1st defendant in a suit for redemption of mortgage. The case of the plaintiff is that he executed a mortgage in respect of the plaint schedule property for Rs.3,000/- in favour of one Thankappan Aasari in 1965. The defendants took assignment of the mortgage right in 1969. Thereafter, the plaintiff executed a purakkadam for Rs.500/- from the defendants and

extended the period for mortgage for one year. Subsequently, another loan of Rs.3,000/-was also taken by the plaintiff from the 1st defendant by executing purakkadam deed No. 1907 of 1972 and when the plaintiff requested for redemption of mortgage, the defendants did not comply with the request and therefore the suit was filed.

2. The 1st defendant in the written statement contended that the plaintiff had agreed to sell the property to the defendant for a value of Rs.5,000/- per cent for the land and Rs. 10,0007- for the building. The defendant had effected improvements to the buildin