1. I think (in respectful agreement with the view expressed in Hari Bapuji v. Bhagu Sadhu, AIR. 1937 Bombay 142, Abdul Hamid Khan v. Mohamed Ali, AIR. 1952 Bombay 67 and Ayyakutty Chettiar v. Imbichiamina Bi, 1962 KLT. 728 - see also Mulla's Transfer of Property Act, 4th Edition, page 294 where it is stated that the omission of the words "with notice of the payment" from S.55 (6) (b) off that Act by Act 20 of 1929 "makes the charge of the buyer for price prepaid effective not only against the seller but against all persons claiming under him irrespective of notice") that the lower appellate court was right in holding that the charge provided by S.55 (6) (b) of the Transfer of Property Act is available even as against a bona fide transferee for value from the seller. True, S.55 (6) (b) must be read along with S.100, for, the former only creates a charge and you must: go to the latter for the incidence of that charge. With great respect to what is said in Ayyakutty Chettiar v. Imbichiamina Bi (1962 KLT. 728), I do not think that there can be any question of S.55 (6) (b) excluding the operation of the saving; in the second paragraph of S.100 on the ground that the former i