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

1926 Supreme(Mad) 283

DEVADOSS
Rao Bahadur Ottur Vasava Menon – Appellant
Versus
Valia Konikkilidathil Tavazshi – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Devadoss, J.

1. The only question in this Second Appeal is whether the appellants who are the mortgagors should pay-interest to the mortgagees subsequent to the date of Exhibit E, a petition presented by the appellants under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the appellants were bound to pay interest subsequent to the date of Exhibit E as they did not deposit the money under Section 83 so as to enable the persons entitled to the money, i.e., the mortgagees representatives, to draw it from Court.

2. The appellants mortgaged the properties to the tarwad of Defendants 1 and 2. At the time of the execution of the mortgage deed the karnavan was one Pangi Achan. Some time after, he was removed from the position of karnavan and the 1st defendant was appointed karnavan. Under an arrangement entered into between the appellants and the mortgagees it was arranged that the appellants should be in possession of the mortgaged property and should pay pattom in lieu of interest. Under an arrangement among the members of the mortgagees tarwad, Exhibit 1 in 1894, it was arranged that the pattom money should be collected by the 2nd defendant. Whe




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