JUDGMENT

Ryves and Daniels, JJ. - The issue in this case is whether the mortgages executed in 19 (Sic) and 1908 by a Hindu widow Mussammat Kailasha were executed for legal necessity.

2. The suit out of which the appeal arises was brought by the mortgagees for sale of the mortgaged property. The defendants appellants are the reversioners of Musammat Kailasha's husband Radha Kishan There are Some parts of the judgment of the lower Appellate Court which are not Very clear, but there is no doubt as to What its findings are. It finds that the consideration for these mortgages was actually advanced for payment of revenue, and it is not disputed that it was applied in payment of revenue. The appellants contend that there was no legal necessity, first because It was not shown that the estate was actually threatened with sale when the mortgages were executed and Secondly because Mt. Kailasha received from the estate an income sufficient to enable her to pay the revenue. As to the latter point the, learned Judge finds that she had an income which would ordinarily be sufficient to enable her to pay revenue but at the time when these mortgages were executed, she had been obliged to incur unusual