Ramesam, J.

1. The facts out of which this second appeal arises may be stated as follows. The respondent Lakshmi Animal obtained a deed of maintenance from her deceased husbands brothers in 1918, under which a house was charged with the payment of the maintenance to her. The owners of the house also executed a second mortgage of it in 1922. As the maintenance was not paid up to the year 1927, Lakshmi Animal filed a suit, O.S. No. 454 of 1927, without making the second mortgagee a party and obtained a decree. In execution of the decree she was appointed receiver on 27th January, 1930, for realisation of the profits of the house and appropriating the same towards her decree. She got possession of the house in April, 1930. The second mortgagee filed a suit on his mortgage, O.S. No. 12 of 1928, without making Lakshmi Animal a party and obtained a decree and got the property sold. It was purchased by Nagendram Chetty, the appellant before us, on 28th January, 1931. He sought to obtain possession of the property but was resisted by the respondent. The appellant applied to the District Munsif under Order 21, Rule 97, Civil Procedure Code, for the removal of the respondents obstruct