JUDGMENT

Walsh and Sundar Lal, JJ. - This appeal arises under the following circumstances. On the 18th of January, 1901, one Zahur Ahmad mortgaged for the sum of Rs. 500 and interest thereon to Inayat Ahmad a 2 anna 8 pie share in Bahmanpur and an 8 anna share in Khasmau. Mauza Bahmanpur appears to have been previously mortgaged to another person on the 12th of August, 1900, and the mortgagor, on the 21st of September, 1901, sold the said village to satisfy the said prior mortgage. After the said sale, on the 5th of October, 1912, Inayat Ahmad the mortgagee sold his interest in the mortgage in suit to Chedi Lal. On the 9th of August, 1913, Chedi Lal sued the heira of Zahur Ahmad, who had died in the meanwhile, for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,100 on. the allegation that by reason of the sale of Bahmanpur on the 21st of September, 1907, to satisfy the previous mortgage of the 12th of August, 1900, the plaintiff had lost a part of the property mortgaged. He alleged that, when Zahur Ahmad had made the mortgage, he had represented that the property was free of all mortgages, etc. (and so it is stated in the deed of mortgage). It had since transpired that there was a previous mortgage