This second appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of money on foot of failure of consideration for a transfer in favour of the father of the plaintiffs of a certain mortgage right. The defendant against whom the Courts below have decreed the suit is the transferor of the mortgage right.

The facts relevant to the determination of the two questions of law which have been argued before me lie in a short and narrow compass. One Karnam. Appiah effected a simple mortgage of certain properties in favour of one Ranga Reddi in 1929, having become the owner thereof by a sale deed from the original owner Sitaveerayya. In 1934 Ranga Reddi transferred the mortgage right to the defendant who in his turn transferred it later to the plaintiffs’ father, one Baliah. After Baliah’s death the plaintiffs obtained a decree against the original mortgagor Appiah, and in execution purchased the hypotheca themselves. The sale was duly confirmed and full satisfaction of the decree recorded by the execution Court. When, thereafter, the plaintiffs sought to obtain delivery, they found themselves obstructed by a third party, one Reddi Narayana Reddi, against whom they consequently filed a petition for