JUDGMENT

1. This is a first civil appeal by the applicants arising out of the proceedings taken by them under Section 4, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act. The respondents have been granted a simple money decree against the appellants by the Special Judge of Hardoi for Rs. 74,367-4-3 with pendente lite and future interest at 4 1/4 per cent, per annum and costs of the suit. The appellants are the widow, the three daughters and the three sons of Saiyid Mohammad Abid deceased. They filed an application under Section 4, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, on 29th July 1935, in the Court of the Special Judge, first grade, Hardoi. The property stated in this application was an entire village Taria, pargana Sandi, houses situate in the town of Bilgram and some miscellaneous land and grove land. The principal creditor mentioned in the application was one Raghubir Sahai, who held a possessory mortgage deed (Ex. A-1) dated 17th June 1930 in his favour for Rs. 63,000. Other creditors were also mentioned in the application, but we are not concerned in the present appeal with them as no appeal has been filed against the decrees passed in respect of those claims.

2. In the written statement filed under Section 8, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, it was stated that after the death of Saiyid Mohammad Abid deceased there was no surviving male member in the family, who was aware of the real facts, that all the children were minors except one daughter and that the deed was executed on account of persistent demands of the mortgagee under undue influence. A greater portion of the consideration of the mortgage deed was, it was alleged, not due inasmuch as the mortgagee had taken undue advantage of the simple nature of the deceased Saiyid Mohammad Abid and got many sums in the deed admitted by him to be due, by fraud. A good many amounts in the deed were alleged to be fictitious. The appellants' case was that the mortgagee had been in possession of the property from the date of the mortgage and the mortgage-debt had been satisfied out of the usufruct of the property. The mortgagee died and is represented by his mother, his widow and the widow of the mortgagee's uncle.

3. In their written statement, the respondents denied that the mortgage deed had been executed under undue pressure and fraud. It was admitted that only two dehanids in the mortgage deed, namely the dehanid in the name of Sheo Nandan Prasad for Rs. 800 and the other in the names of Sarju Prasad and Bishambar Dayal, sons of Saktey Sah for Rs. 1800, were not paid, but the remaining dehanids were all discharged." It was further pleaded that the mortgagee had paid excess amounts in respect of two dehanids, namely he paid Rs. 9000 to Munnan Singh and others instead of Rs. 8000 and a sum of Rs. 2055-4-0 to Ikhtiar Husain instead of his dehanid for Rs. 1540. Accordingly the surplus amounts were claimed with interest. The respondents further claimed remissions at the rate of one anna six pies per rupee in 1338 Fasli and seven annas in the rupee since 1339 Fasli. They claimed these amounts with interest at eight annas per cent, per mensem from the appellants. In their replication, para. 8, the appellants admitted the remissions, but they added that in spite of the remission by the Government the mortgagee, and after him his representatives, continued to realise the full rent from the tenants. It was further stated that the mortgagee did not pay the dehanid to Sheo Nandan Prasad with the result that the three houses belonging to the appellants were attached and sold for Rs. 1600 only while the houses were worth Rs. 50,000. The appellants claimed that the sum of Rs. 50,000 should be deducted from the mortgage money from the date of the sale of the houses.

4. In oral pleadings before the Court the claim in respect of the damages of Rs. 50,000 was met by the allegation that the appellants had themselves purchased the property sold in the name of Mt. Tamiz-un-nisa, one of the relations of the appellant Alia Begam, an