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

1936 Supreme(Mad) 286

HORWILL
Halsnad Madappaya – Appellant
Versus
P. Mahabala Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Horwill, J.

1. On 23rd February 1916 defendant 1 executed the mortgage deed, Ex. A, in favour of the plaintiff for Rupees 20,000. In this document were recitals by which the plaintiff held himself responsible for any loss that might accrue to defendant 1 on the ground of his not paying off certain debts out of the consideration. On the other hand, defendant 1 held himself liable on the security of the same property for any excess amount that might be spent by the plaintiff in preserving his mortgage rights. In Ex. A there was a definite recital that there were no prior mortgages. In fact however there was a mortgage evidenced by Ex. M dated 15th January 1900 for Rs. 400 on items 1 to 5 of the same property. In 1916 the mortgagee of that prior mortgage brought O.S. No. 180 of 1916, to which both the present plaintiff and defendant 1 were parties. During the course of the suit, on 8th June 1917, defendant 2, by Ex. J., purchased the equity of redemption. The property was brought to sale and both the plaintiff and defendant 2 filed petitions, Exs. C and I, to set aside the sale on payment of the decree amount. The plaintiff had filed the earlier petition and it was the plaintif












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