- (1.) The Appellant is the Defendant in a suit for enforcement of a mortgage said to have been effected by him by deposit of title deeds.
(2.) A decree for arrears of rent having been passed against the present Appellant, it was put into execution in the court of the Second Subordinate Judge of Hooghly. An appeal was preferred against the decree and an application for stay of proceedings in the execution case was made. The learned Subordinate Judge thereupon passed on November 15, 1941, the following order: ...I accordingly direct that the judgment debtors must either deposit the decretal amount in court within 15 days or furnish security from some Insurance Companies to the satisfaction of the decree-holder within the said period. If no such deposit be made or security furnished within 15 days, the properties will be advertised for sale....
(3.) The period was thereafter extended and a security bond, the bond which has been marked ext. 8 in this case, was executed by the Appellant and the Respondent. By this bond the Appellant and the Respondent- are jointly and severally held and firmly bound unto the Subordinate Judge, Second Court, Hooghly, his successor and successors in office and assigns in the sum of Rs. 18,767-9-3 pies of good and lawful money of British India to be paid to the said Subordinate Judge of Hooghly his successor or successors in office or assigns, as the case may be. The condition of the above written bond or obligation is such if the Appeal from the Original Decree No. First Appeal 203 of 1941 being an appeal preferred against the judgment and decree passed by the Subordinate Judge, Second court, Hooghly in Rent Suit Misc. J. Case No. 84 of 1941 are allowed then in such case the above written bond or obligation shall be void and of no effect.;