The purchase is free of encumbrances only when the property is sold for recovery of arrears of public revenue for which the land is the first security by statutory declaration and in all other cases the purchase is not free of encumbrances, whether the amount is due to a private person, a society, local body, or Government.

Deo—This appeal and Letters Patent Appeal No. 6 of 1946 were placed before this Full Bench for disposal because of a conflict between a Division Bench decision in 'ZALLIRAM v. MANGALSINGH,1939 NLJ 477' and the decision of Subhedar A.J.C. in 'MANRAKHANLAL v. PERMANAND,1935 AIR(Nag) 185. This judgment will dispose of both the appeals. The facts are: In execution of the final decree for sale obtained on 9th July 1932, on a mortgage executed by defendant No. 2 of his 0-1-4 share in mouza Chuchrel in Harsud tahsil, the plaintiff mortgagee purchased that share on 24th April 1939. This sale was confirmed on 7th June 1939 and the possession was delivered on 18th June 1939.

2. The defendant No. 3, lambardar, paid the land revenue due on the 0-2-8 share held by defendant No. 2 and on 13th February 1937 made an application under section 157 of the Central Provinces Land Revenue Act for recovery of Rs. 290-8-4 inclusive of costs. In these proceedings, the 0-2-8 share was sold on 21st November 1938 and was purchased by defendant No. 1. The sale was confirmed on 9th January 1939. According to the plaintiff, defendant No. 1 obtained possession of only 0-1-4 share on 12th July 1939 while according to the defendants he obtained possession of 0-2-8 share and the appurtenant fields.

3. Plaintiff had instituted this suit for possession of his 0-1-4 share on redemption of the charge existing in favour of defendant No. 1 over 0-1-4 share on payment of the proportionate amount of land revenue due on that share. The trial Court held that the plaintiff must redeem the entire charge and accordingly passed a decree for redemption of 0-2-8 share and its possession on such payment. The lower appellate Court confirmed this decree. In second appeal the plaintiff was held entitled to redeem only 0-1-4 share on payment of half the amount decreed by the trial Court. The pltff. has filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 5 of 1946 claiming redemption and possession of 0-2-8 share, while defendants 1 and 3 have filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 6 of 1946 claiming dismissal of the suit on the ground that the sale under Section 157 of the Land Revenue Act being free from encumbrance the plaintiff did not acquire any title by his auction-purchase. Alternatively it was contended that the defendant No. 1 is entitled to redeem the plaintiff.

4. On 27th August 1938, the Deputy Commissioner ordered the sale of 0-2-8 share under Section 128(f) of the Land Revenue Act. Accordingly a proclamation was issued in form No. 9 which recited that subject to the provisions of section 138 of the Central Provinces Land Revenue Act the purchaser of the said share shall acquire it free of any encumbrances imposed on it and all grants or contracts made in respect of it by any person other than the purchaser.

However, the sale was held which according to the plaintiff, means "subject to the mortgage", and according to the defendants, free from mortgage encumbrance". It is not necessary for the purpose of this appeal to resolve this controversy in the view we are taking that even if the property was in fact sold free from the mortgage encumbrance, the defendant No. 1 does not in law get a title free from encumbrance.

5. Under Section 122(1) of the Land Revenue Act the revenue assessed on a mahal and payable to the State is a first charge on the mahal and on the rents and profits thereof. Such revenue is called Land Revenue. It is not disputed that this is a charge "created by operation of law" within the meaning of Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act. Under Section 123, all land revenue payable under the Act has to be paid through the sadar lambardar, lambardar, or the patel as the case may be. Under Section 82, the assessment is offered in the case of a mahal to the proprietor, or if there are two or more proprietors, to the lambardar if for special reasons the Settlement Officer so decides.

If the assessment is accepted, it is reduced to writing under Section 86, sub-section (2), and u