Leach, C.J.

1. In the first instance this appeal came before Patanjali Sastri J. who was of the opinion that it involved the consideration of the judgments of this Court in Thayammal v. Muthukumaraswami Chettiar A.I.R. 1929 Mad. 881 and Dawood Bowther v. Ramanathan Chettiar AIR1938Mad43 which were regarded as being in conflict. In our opinion it is not necessary to embark upon a. discussion of these cases in order to decide this appeal. On 5th March 1927, defendants 1 and 2 executed a mortgage of the property in. suit in favour of two persons, Raju Chetti and Dhanapala Ghetti, to secure the payment of a sum of Rs. 250. Defendant 1 is the son of defendant 2. The plaintiff avers that on 14th October 1929, the mortgagees assigned the mortgage to him. On 6th March 1939, the plaintiff instituted a suit to enforce the mortgage and the appeal arises out of the decree passed in that suit. On 27th January 1932, defendant 4 purchased at a court sale the right, title and interest of defendant 1 in the property. All the defendants filed written statements, but the main contest was with defendants 2 and 4. Defendant 1 admitted the execution of the mortgage, but pleaded that it had been d