https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297761 The suit was held maintainable because the evidence showed that the plaintiff supplied the mortgage money and the named mortgagee was only a benamidar, so the Section 214 Succession Act objection failed. The mortgage was also upheld as valid and enforceable: the property was treated as self-acquired, letters of administration did not extinguish the heirs' beneficial interest, administration had effectively ended before the mortgage, and no prior sanction was required on the facts. The mortgage further bound the after-born coparcener because it secured an antecedent debt of the father that was not proved immoral. The decree was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed with costs. en-us Wed, 08 Jun 1938 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Sep 2021 15:29:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297761 The suit was held maintainable because the evidence showed that the plaintiff supplied the mortgage money and the named mortgagee was only a benamidar, so the Section 214 Succession Act objection failed. The mortgage was also upheld as valid and enforceable: the property was treated as self-acquired, letters of administration did not extinguish the heirs' beneficial interest, administration had effectively ended before the mortgage, and no prior sanction was required on the facts. The mortgage further bound the after-born coparcener because it secured an antecedent debt of the father that was not proved immoral. The decree was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed with costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 08 Jun 1938 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297761