Kuppuswami Ayyar, J.

1. The 1st defendant is the appellant in S.A. No. 780 and his sons, defendants 2 and 3 are the appellants in the other appeal. These two appeals arise out of a suit filed by the respondent for damages for breach of covenant for quiet enjoyment. Under a sale deed executed on the 19th April, 1928, the 1st defendant conveyed the plaint mentioned properties to the plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 1,000. It was recited in the document that the sale was for discharging a debt due to one Poongavanam Ammal. It was a mortgage debt. The plaintiffs case was that the understanding between the parties was that the 1st defendant should discharge the mortgage. The recital in the document that Rs. 1,000 was received for discharging his debt was relied on in support of his case. The 1st defendant pleaded that the money due to Poongavanam Ammal was left with the vendee for payment and therefore he was not bound to pay it. A suit was filed for recovery of the money due under the mortgage executed to Poongavanam Ammal, the hypotheca was brought for sale and the plaintiff was dispossessed of the property he purchased. He therefore filed this suit. He claimed Rs. 1,000, t