Kailasam, J.-The plaintiff is the appellant in this Letters Patent Appeal. As a mortgagor, the filed O.P. No. 18 of 1964 and deposited the amount due under a usufructuary mortgage and preyed for redemption under section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. The usufructuary mortgage was originally executed by one Ramachandra Iyer, the original owner of the suit property under Exhibit A-2, dated 2nd March, 1924, in favour of one Kauvery Achi. Ramachandra Iyer later sold the suit property to the father of the plaintiff under Exhibit A-1, dated 18th December, 1929. Defendants 1 and 2, who succeeded to the interest of the usufructuary mortgagee under a will executed by Kauveri Achi on 30th September, 1942, did not resist the suit for redemption, but consented to a decree for redemption. Defendants 3 and 4, who were in possession as tenants inducted by the usufructuary mortgagee, resisted the suit on the ground that they were entitled to the benefits of the Tamil Nadu Cultivating Tenants Protection Act. The third defendant claimed to be cultivating the property under Kauveri Achi by a registered lease deed till her death, and then, under defendants 1 and 2. There is no dispute that defend

Click Here to Read the rest of this document