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

1924 Supreme(Mad) 313

DEVADOSS
Chellakutti Naicken – Appellant
Versus
Vengappa Pillai – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Devadoss, J.

1. The only point argued in this second appeal is that the mortgage, in question is an anomalous mortgage, and, therefore the provisions of Section 98 of the Transfer of Property Act apply and reliance is placed upon the case reported as Pate Muhamad v. Davood (1915) 39 Mad. 1010, for the purpose of construing the document as an anomalous mortgage. Beading the suit document as a whole, it is quite clear that) the parties intended to create an ordinary possessor mortgage. The only condition added is that should the mortgagor fail to pay the mortgage amount within a certain time the transaction should be treated as a sale. Adding a clause of this kind to an ordinary possessor mortgage would not make it an anomalous mortgage. The clause puts a clog on the equity of redemption. That by itself would not convert an ordinary possessor mortgage or a usufructuary mortgage into an anomalous mortgage. The case, Pate Muhamad v. Davood (1915) 39 Mad. 1010, is distinguishable on the facts. There the words are, "if they do not act according to those conditions, they will surrender the house and the deed treating the transaction as a sale." That shows evidently that possession

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