Venkataramana Rao, J.

1. These two appeals arise out of a suit to enforce a mortgage dated 16th January, 1919 executed in favour of Chappalamadugu Govindayya by one, Yagnayya and his undivided son Ramamurti, and Hanumantha Rao for himself and as guardian of his sons Venkatanarasimham and Satyanarayana who are defendants 2 and 3 in this suit. All the members of the family of Hanumantha Rao are also impleaded as defendants herein besides Ramamurti, the son of Yagnayya. The said Ramamurti, Venkatanarasimham and Satyanarayana are impleaded as trustees of Seetaramaswami and Anjaneya temples on the ground that the father of the 1st defendant Yagnayya, and Hanumantha Rao the father of Venkatanarasimham and Satyanarayana were trustees of the said temples. The reason for the inclusion of these defendants in the capacity of trustees apart from their individual capacity is that items 19 and 20 of the plaint schedule property which are also comprised in the said deed of mortgage are properties dedicated to the said temples and vested in the trustees in trust for the temples. The validity and the binding nature of this mortgage on the minor defendants was the subject-matter of an issue i