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

1965 Supreme(Cal) 118

P.N.MUKHERJEE
BANKU BEHARI CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
KALYANI DEBI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MANINDRANATH GHOSH, NILMONI GOSVAMI, Saurindranath Roy Choudhuri

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises under the following circumstances:

( 2 ) THE respondent brought a suit, purporting to be one under Section 36 of the Bengal Money-Lenders Act on the allegation inter alia that she borrowed Rs. 2,500 from the appellant, who was a money-lender, through her husband. The transaction, however, which was intended to be a mortgage, was made or effected in the form of a sale with a separate agreement of re-purchase or re-conveyance. As a matter of fact, there were two documents, a conveyance or sale-deed, and an agreement for re-conveyance and the learned trial Judge dismissed the suit on the preliminary ground that, having regard to the said two separate documents and in view, particularly, of the proviso to Section 58 (c) of the Transfer of Property Act, the transaction cannot, in law, be regarded as a mortgage and, accordingly, the present suit on that basis would fail.

( 3 ) FROM this decree of dismissal, an appeal was taken by the plaintiff respondent to the lower appellate Court, which was eventually heard by the learned Additional District Judge, who held, relying, in particular, upon the decision of this Court, reported in Mahindra Nat




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