Explanation:

—Brahmo Dutt was the defendant in the trial court. The plaintiff, Dharmodas Chose, while he was a minor, mortgaged his property,in favour of the defendant, Brahmo Dutt, who was a moneylender to secure a loan of Rs. 20,000. The actual amount of loan given was less than Rs. 20,000, At the time of the transaction, the attorney, who acted on behalf of the money lender, had the knowledge that the plaintiff is a minor. The plaintiff brought an action against the defendant stating that he was a minor when the mortgage was executed by him and, therefore, mortgage was void and inoperative and the same should be cancelled. By the time of Appeal to the Privy C'oundl the defendant, Brahmo Dutt died and the Appeal was prosecuted by his executors.