Horwill, J.

1. The plaintiff brought this suit for maintenance and sought to enforce it against the suit property over which she had a charge. The appellant was impleaded because he was in possession, he having purchased the property in a suit for sale brought by himself on a mortgage. He filed in the trial Court on the ground that he was not a bona fide purchaser with notice and he preferred an appeal which was dismissed on the ground that even if he did not have notice of the charge, his right would be subject to it because the charge was prior to the sale.

2. The question whether a sale without notice would be subject to a prior charge is not free from doubt. As he law stands at present, Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act makes it clear that no charge shall be enforced against any property in the hands of a purchaser to whom such (property has been transferred for consideration and without notice of the charge; but the charge in the present case was prior to the amendment of Section 100, which introduced the clause above quoted. The learned Subordinate Judge relied on a decision of Sadasiva Ayyar and Spencer, JJ., in Srinivasa Raghava Aiyangar v. Ranganatha Aiyang