JUDGMENT

Straight, Offg. C.J. and Tyrrell, J. - It seems to us that the principle enunciated by their Lordships of the Privy Council in Suraj Bunsi Koer's Case ILR Cal. 148, as to the effect of an earlier decision of that tribunal in Muddun Thakoor v. Kantoo Lall 14 B.L.R. 187 : 1 Ind. Ap. 333 must be our guide in the present instance. It is as follows: "That where joint ancestral property has passed out of a joint family, either under a conveyance executed by a father in consideration of an antecedent; debt, or in order to raise money to pay off an antecedent debt, or under a sale in execution of a decree for the father's debt, his sons, by reason of their duty to pay their father's debts, cannot recover that property, unless they show that the debts were contracted for immoral purposes, and that the purchasers had notice that they were so contracted." It will be seen from this passage that where an antecedent debt is the consideration for a sale by the father of the ancestral property, or it is charged by him to raise money to pay oft an antecedent debt, it rests with the sons to show that such debt was contracted for immoral purposes to the knowledge of the vendee or mortgagee. B