JUDGMENT :- This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment of the District Judge of Barabanki who allowed the appeal instituted by the defendants against the decree of the Munsif of Barabanki in a suit for possession.

2. In order to appreciate the controversy in this case, a brief reference to facts may be made at the outset. One Irshad Husain made a simple mortgage of his property on 10-7-1923, in favour of defendants 1 and 2. He subsequently made a usufructuary mortgage of the property in favour of the appellant on 13-1-1928, but this is not very relevant for the purposes of this appeal. The defendants 1 and 2, who were the simple mortgagees, obtained a decree on the basis of their mortgage dated 10-7-1923 against the mortgagor but in the suit, however, they failed to implead the subsequent usufructuary mortgagee, who is the appellant in the present appeal. After obtaining the decree on the basis of the prior mortgage dated 10-7-1923, defendants 1 and 2 put it into execution against the mortgagor and this execution was transferred to the Collector.

The Collector granted a self-liquidating mortgage for 20 years in respect of the property under S. 17 of the Debt Redemption Act, and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document