But Mr. Mankad, the learned Advocate appearing for the respondents draws my attention to the passage from Ganga Dhar's case (supra) at p. 774, para 17, which reads as follows:
5. Mr. R. A. Mehta, the learned, Advocate appearing for the appellant contends that the ratio laid down in the case of Maganlal Chhotalal Chhatrapati v. Bhalchandra Chhaganlal Shah, (1974) 15 Guj LR 193 would apply to the facts of the instant case and the learned District Judge erred in not following this judgment. Now, this was a case in which a child widow had mortgaged a building site admeasuring 24 sq. yds.