Patanjali Sastri, J.

1. The main question for determination in this second appeal is a short one and it arises on the following facts. The property in suit originally belonged to the respondent and his brother. It was sold to one Ramaswami Goundan subject to a charge for Rs. 100 per annum for the maintenance of one Minakshi, the widow of a deceased coparcener of the family. Ramaswami subsequently leased the property for an annual rent of Rs. 125 to the respondent for a term of five years commencing from 13th May, 1926, Ramaswami himself undertaking to pay the maintenance due to Minakshi. On 4th August, 1928, the respondent sub-leased the property to the appellant herein under Ex. A for the remainder of the term. Ramaswami was adjudicated insolvent sometime in 1928 and his interest in the property having been brought to sale by the Official Receiver in public auction, it was knocked down to the appellant as the highest bidder on 1st March, 1930, but the sale was completed by the Official Receiver executing the necessary conveyance (Ex. IV) only on 2nd December, 1930. In the meantime, however, Minakshi demanded payment of the arrears of maintenance due to her up to 21st Januar