Abdur Rahim, Offg. C.J.

1. I agree in the judgment which my learned brother is going to read.

Krishnan, J.

1. In this appeal we have a case of competition for possession between a first mortgagee who purchased the properties in execution of his own mortgage-decree against the owner and a second usufructuary-mortgagee, whose mortgage was before the decree and who was not a party to the 1st mortgagees suit or decree but who had taken a new usufructuary mortgage after the date of the decree from the owner.

3. The material facts on which the question in this case arises are undisputed and are these. The plaint lands were part of the zemindari of Karvetnagar. The then Raja and his eldest son executed a simple mortgage-deed, Exhibit A, of the plaint lands in 1S77 for Rs. 18,000 in favour of two persons whose interest is now represented by the plaintiffs. In 1884 the said son who had then become the Raja gave a usufructuary mortgage, Exhibit I, for Rs. 14,00,000 to the then mahant of Tirupati, whose representative-in-interest now is the defendant, over 194 villages in the zemindari among which the plaint villages are all included. In 1886 the 1st mortgagees under Exhibit A brought a s