DE MEL v. FERNANDO.

D. C., Colombo, 9,391.

Fiscal's sale-Execution on money decree-Purchaser of land seized in execution of such decree-Suit to realize mortgage in respect of same land- Purchaser of hypothecated land-Rival claims of the two purchasers- Priority of conveyance and registration-Effect of registration under a wrong name-Ordinance No. 8 of 1863, s. 39.

D. M., being a simple creditor of J. H. G., obtained judgment against him and caused the Fiscal to seize his share in a property called Udupitiyagoda estate. At the sale in question D. M. became purchaser of his debtor's share under deed Hated 22nd January, 1885, -which was registered on 1st February, 1887.

In 1881 J. H. G. and C. L. G., the joint owners of the said estate, had mortgaged it to J. P., who put the bond in suit on the 22nd November, 1886, without making D. M. a party thereto. At the sale in execution of this mortgage decree, R. S. P. bought the Whole estate under deed dated 24th September, 1887, which however was not registered till 29th June, 1896, R. S. P. conveyed the estate to J. P. by deed dated 11th November, 1891, and J. P.'s executor sold it to F. by deed dated 25th March, 1895.

Held, in an action brought by D. M. against F. to recover possession of the share bought by him under deed dated 22nd January, 1885, that, though the plaintiff had bought that shave and registered his conveyance previous to the purchase and registration on the part of R. S. P., the defendant's predecessor in title, and though plaintiff was no party to the original hypothecary suit, yet the title of the defendant was superior to that of the plaintiff.

Per Moncreiff, J.-As the conveyance tendered by the plaintiff for registration did not mention the real name of the land conveyed and assigned boundaries which could not be identified, so that the conveyance Was registered in the wrong book, I am inclined to think that it was not registered, that the plaintiff was to blame for its non-registration,

and that his deed was void, under Ordinance No. 8 of 1863, section 39, a against the only registered deed of the defendants.

ACTION rei vindkatio. Plaintiff alleged that J. H. Grenier and C. L: Grenier were entitled to a land of about 142 acres by virtue of a Crown grant; that under a writ of execution issued against J. H. Grenier a defined portion of the said land was seized and sold by the Fiscal on the 2nd July, when plaintiff became the purchaser thereof, and the Fiscal granted to him a conveyance dated 22nd January, 1885, which was registered on the 1st February, 1887; that the plaintiff was placed in possession and continued to hold the land till the defendants took unlawful possession of the said portion in June, 1895. Plaintiff prayed for ejectment of defendants and for a declaration of title in his "favour.

The defendants pleaded that the Greniers had in 1881 mortgaged the land in question to one Jeronis Peiris, and that the debt being unpaid the mortgage-creditor recovered judgment against them and caused the Fiscal to sell the land, when R. S. Peiris became the purchaser under deed dated 24th September, 1887, which was registered on 29th June, 1896; that R. S. Peiris conveyed it to Jeronis Peiris by deed dated 11th November, 1891; that Jeronis Peiris died in 1894, and his executor sold the land to the second defendant, wife of the first defendant, by deed dated 25th March, 1895, since when they have been in possession.

The District Judge, after evidence heard, found that the Fiscal's conveyance to R. S. Peiris, though dated 24th September, 1887, was not registered till June, 1896, till after Jeronis Peiris's executor had sold the land to defendant on the 25th March, 1895, by a conveyance registered in June, 1895. He held that plaintiffs had proved their title to the land " subject to considerations as to the bond granted by the Greniers, the rival registrations, and the question of improvements made by the defenda