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

1918 Supreme(Mad) 123

PHILLIPS
Mangeshwar Narain Rao – Appellant
Versus
S. Shiva Rao – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Phillips, J.

1. Plaintiffs sue to redeem a usufructuary mortgage of 1868 for Es. 1,650. In the mortgage-deed there is a provision that the mortgagor is to take back possession and pay a stipulated rent. In default of payment of this rent, the mortgagee was to recover possession and the mortgagor was to pay a sum equivalent to 12 per cent. on Rs. 1,650 as rent from, the date of the mortgage-deed until the mortgagee got back possession. The mortgagor failed to pay rent as stipulated and the mortgagee obtained a decree in 1873 for possession and for Rs. 200 odd claimed as rent and for future rent. It does not appear that this decree was ever satisfied, and the mortgagee now claims to add the decree amount and subsequent interest to his mortgage money. Under the mortgage-deed the payment to be made by the mortgagor was made a charge on the property and there was an undertaking to pay it back together with the mortgage amount. The question for consideration is whether the mortgagee is entitled to demand the decree amount of 1873 together with subsequent interest before redemption. It is contended for respondent that the amount due became merged in the decree, and that as the decr










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