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

1932 Supreme(SC) 33

LORD THANKERTON, SIR JOHN WALLIS, SIR GEORGE LOWNDES
LASA DIN – Appellant
Versus
GULAB KUNWAR (DEFENDANTS) – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellant: T. L. Wilson & Co.

Judgement

Appeal (No. 63 of 1931) from a decree of the Chief Court of Oudh (September 23, 1929) affirming a decree of the District Judge of Lucknow (December 21, 1928), which affirmed a decree of the Subordinate Judge dismissing the appellants suit.

The suit was brought on February 28, 1928, by the appellant as mortgagee to recover the money due under a mortgage executed by one Bikram Singh on July 26, 1912. The respondents were the widow of Bikram Singh and subsequent transferees of the mortgaged property.

The mortgage was for a period of six years, but contained a clause (set out in the judgment of the Judicial Committee) by which, in case of default, the mortgagee was to have power, 3 before the expiration of the stipulated period, to realize the principal and interest by a sale of the mortgage property. Default in payment of interest had been made in the first year; it was stated that no interest had ever been paid.

The sole question arising upon the appeal was whether the suit was barred by the Indian Limitation Act, 1908, Sch. I., art. 132. That article provides that a suit to enforce payment of money charged upon immovable property shall be brought within twelve years of the




































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