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

1922 Supreme(Mad) 52

C TROTTER, RAMESAM
N. Ramakrishna Mudali – Appellant
Versus
The Official Assignee Of Madras – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Coutts Trotter, J.

1. The plaintiff in this case in 1904 executed a mortgage in favour of the Mylapore Benefit Fund to secure a loan of Rs. 1,500. The mortgage conferred a power upon the mortgagee to Hell the property, on failure by the mortgagor to carry out the terms as to repayment and so forth. In 1910 the Fund was pressing for repayment and the plaintiff was not able to repay. Thereupon the Fund announced its intention of selling the property. Just before the sale the plaintiff was enabled to produce one Devasikamani Chetty who stepped into the breach, paid off the Fund and took over the security. Devasikamani Chetty, further more, made a new advance of, I think, Rs. 800 over the original consideration of Rs. 1,500 to the plaintiff and secured that by a further equitable mortgage by deposit of title-deeds of the same property that was covered by the original mortgage to the Mylapore Fund. Devasikamani Chetty fared no better than the Fund, because he, in his turn, could get no repayment. So he sub-mortgaged the property to the second defendant in this case who ultimately, purporting to act in exercise of the power of sale conferred under the document, sold it to the pres








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