Sundaram Chetty, J.

1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the judgment of our learned brother Jackson, J. The appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff who is the assignee of a mortgage held by defendant 4, for the recovery of a sum of money, by enforcing the mortgage. Defendant 1 was the mortgagor. Two items of properties are comprised in the mortgage. Defendant 3 happened to be a subsequent purchaser of item 2 for a sum of Rs. 725. It is clear from the findings of fact arrived at by the first appellate Court, that this transaction of sale by defendant 1 to defendant 3 was brought about with full knowledge and concurrence of the mortgagee (defendant 4) who was more or less instrumental in bringing about this purchase and who derived the benefit of this purchase, inasmuch as he credited the purchase money, viz., Rs. 725 towards the debt (between Rupees 800 and Rs. 900) due from defendant 1. This amount covers the debt due on the mortgage also. However, no endorsement of payment was made on the mortgage deed. It seems that, this-sort of arrangement was entered into for some purpose known to defendants 1 and 4 alone. Defendant 3 was kept in complete ignorance of