Judgment

DUA, J.: This is an appeal with certificate under Art. 133 (1) (a) of the Constitution by Gajanan and his two sons Janardhan and Nanaji who figured as defendants 1, 4 and 5 respectively in the suit instituted by Seth Brindaban, respondent in this appeal. It is directed against the judgment and decree of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) dated February 7, 1966 allowing the plaintiff s appeal in part against the dismissal of his suit by the trial court, and granting him a decree for Rs. 1,60,000/- against the appellants. The other two defendants, Rajeshwar and Narhari, were also the sons of Gajanan: the dismissal of the suit against them was upheld by the High Court. The suit for foreclosure of three mortgages was instituted on December 1, 1950. The plaintiff claimed a decree for foreclosure of the mortgages: the mortgage amount due was stated to be Rs. 1,07,269/2/- with future interest. The suit was contested on various grounds but the main point with which we are concerned in this appeal was raised in the amended written statement allowed by the court on December 15, 1959, nine years after the institution of the suit. According to the amended plea: (i) the plaintiff bein