Butchiraju and Another vs Ramalingamurty and Others

We do not think that there was any mortgage of the land. By the contract''between the parties the property was to be enjoyed by the third

defendant as absolute owner if the now deceased father of the 1st and 2nd defendants through whom the plaintiffs claim failed to pay the money by

the 24th March � 1887. Though the parties'' agreed that no further sale-deed was necessary it may be that in order to comply with the

provisions of the Transfer of Property Act a further sale deed should have been, executed after the 24th March 1887 in order to complet''eathe

third defendant''s title. It is not shown that at the date of the suit a right to obtain such an instrument has become bawed. However this may be, the

suit being based, entirely On an alleged mortgage the suit must fail, as there is in fact no mortgage.

We dismiss the second appeal with costs.