BAMBRANA GUDDAPPA RAI Vs. RAMANNA BANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants in this appeal are defendants 1, 2, 4 and 5 in O. S. No. 200 of 1949 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of South Kanara who may be compendiously known as the mortgagees, while the plaintiffs 1 to 7 and defendants 24 to 26 represent the family of the mortgagors. The other defendants are tenants who-have been impleaded as necessary parties to the litigation. The action in the court below was for the redemption of a mortgage executed by the family of the plaintiffs in favour of the defendants' family evidenced by Ex. 1 dated 15-6-1909 for a sum of Rs. 1,899. The mortgage was usufructuary in character and the mortgagees were put in pos-session of the properties. It is not necessary for the purpose of this appeal to detail at any length the terms and conditions of the mortgage especially since in the court below the right of the plaintiffs to redeem Ex. A 1 was not questioned. The-main contest was with regard to the value of Improvements payable to the mortgagees in possession which according to their written statement amounted to Rs. 36290 and the main issues in the case related to the quantum of compensation for ascertaining which a commissioner had been appointed by the trial court who submitted his report. The report of the commissioner dated 4-6-1950 is a lengthy one and it deals with various matters such as the number of trees in the different plots, their size and age and the value to be paid for them. On the whole the commissioner found that the value of the improvements on redemption would amount to Rs. 22063-14-0. Objections to this report were filed by defendants 1 to 5 as welt as by the plaintiffs. Whereas the defendants claimed enhanced value, the plaintiffs submitted that the commissioner's valuation of the improvements was very high. The memos of objection to the commissioner's report by the parties had been forwarded to the commissioner for his remarks and for his further report which he submitted on 227-1950. The various objections raised by the plaintiffs were adverted to and the commissioner submitted his remarks on them.

(2.) IN this state of things on 30-9-1950 the advocates appearing on both sides submitted a joint memo to the court which is to the following effect :

(3.) AGGRIEVED by this decision, defendants 1, 2, 4 and 5 have preferred the present appeal, and here they have confined their claim only to Rs. 10,000, for which details have been furnished in the memorandum of appeal. Though details have been shown for Rs. 12466-10-0 the claim in the appeal is confined only to Rs. 10,000.