SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1918 Supreme(SC) 21

SIR WALTER PHILLIMORE, AMEER ALI, VISCOUNT HALDANE, SIR JOHN EDGE
HET RAM – Appellant
Versus
SHADI LAL – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellant: T. L. Wilson & Co.
Solicitors for first respondent: Pyke, Franklin & Gould.

Judgement

Appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court (May 13, 1913) varying a decree of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Moradabad.

The appellant, in 1883, purchased immovable property which was subject to a simple mortgage made in 1880 in favour of one Lachman Das, and to further mortgage made in 1881 in favour of the first respondent, and took possession.

In 1895 Lachman Das obtained against the mortgagor and the appellant a decree absolute for sale under s. 83 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1884, upon his mortgage of 1880. The first respondent was not made a defendant to the suit although his mortgage of 1881 was duly registered. Later in 1892 Lachman Das died, without having executed the decree, and was succeeded by the appellant as heir. The appellant took no steps under the decree.

Law Rep. 45 Ind. App. 130 ( 1917- 1918)

Het Ram V. Shadi Lal 44

In 1910 the first respondent instituted the present suit against the mortgagors, the appellant, and other transferees of the property mortgaged (now joined as respondents), for a sale decree under his mortgage of 1880.

The trial judge made a decree for sale, but ordered that the sale should be subject to the prior mortgag

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top