JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for possession brought by the plaintiff-appellant in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Sitapur in respect of villages Nagrauli, Simar and Bhandpurwa on payment of Rs. 20,000. The plaintiff claims these villages as the adopted son of Baldeo Bakhsh Singh, having been adopted by his widow Mt. Gulab Kuar. Baldeo Bakhsh Singh, the owner of the villages executed a usufructuary mortgage in respect of them in favour of one Mata Prasad on 4th June, 1887 for the sum of Rs. 20,000. Baldeo Bakhsh Singh died about the year 1888 and after his death Mt. Gulab Kuar, his widow, executed on the 9th June, 1892, two usufructuary mortgages, one in favour of Puttu Lal for Rs. 13,750 and the other in favour of Lalta Prasad for Rs. 8,250, the total consideration for these two mortgages being Rs. 22,000. A 10 annas share in the aforesaid villages was mortgaged to Puttu Lal and the remaining six annas share in the same villages was mortgaged to Lalta Prasad. The aforesaid consideration of Rs. 22,000 consisted of Rs. 20,000 which had been borrowed by the lady to pay off the debt of her husband under the deed of the 4th June, 1887, and Rs. 2,000 on account of other debts alleged to have been due from her deceased husband to the mortgagees. Later on the lady executed another usufructuary mortgage for Rs. 26,000 on the 4th June, 1897 in favour of the above mentioned Mata Prasad, the mortgagee under the deed of 1887, to pay off the two mortgages dated the 9th June, 1892. The consideration stated in the deed consisted of Rs. 22,000 on account of the deeds of 1892 executed in favour of Puttu Lal and Lalta Prasad and Rs. 4,000 due to other creditors of her deceased husband, Baldeo Bakhsh Singh. In the last deed executed in favour of Mata Prasad there was a condition that at the time of redemption arrears of rent or taqavi up to Rs. 200 would have to be paid, that the Government revenue of these villages at the time of the mortgage was Rs. 1,148 and that if there was any increase in the Government revenue the mortgagor would have to pay the said increase to the mortgagee at the time of redemption. The plaintiff claimed possession merely on payment of Rs. 20,000. He denied that there was any legal necessity with respect to the sums of Rs. 6,000, the excess for which the deed had been executed in favor of Mata Prasad. He also denied his liability to pay any other sums as stipulated in the deed of mortgage. The suit was brought by him for possession of these villages against the sons of Mata Prasad and other members of his family, all of whom he impleaded as defendants.

2. The defendants denied that the plaintiff was the adopted son of Baldeo Bakhsh Singh and contended that the mortgage-deed was binding in its entirety upon the plaintiff, the sum of Rs. 6,000 having been borrowed by Mt. Gulab Kuar to pay off the debts of her deceased husband Baldeo Bakhsh Singh. They claimed that the plaintiff should pay the amount of excess revenue which they had been compelled to pay and also the arrears of rent due from the tenants. The main points on which the parties went to trial in the Court below were the factum and validity of the adoption of the plaintiff, the legal necessity for Rs. 6,000 and the liability for payment of excess of Government revenue and the arrears of rent.

3. The learned Subordinate Judge decided that the plaintiff had been validly adopted by ML Gulab Kuar, his adoption having been upheld by the Privy Council Bishwa Nath Singh v. Jugal Kishore A.I.R. 1923 P.C. 90, and that the plaintiff was bound to pay the sum of Rs. 6,000 which had been borrowed by the lady for the purpose of paying off the debts of her husband, Baldeo Bakhsh Singh. He also held that the plaintiff was liable to pay to the defendants over and above the sum of Rs. 26,000, Rs. 200 on account of arrears of rent and Rs. 4,643-2-0 on account of enhancement of revenue. In result the plaintiff's claim for possession of the villages in suit was