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

2023 Supreme(Mad) 421

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, J.
K.S.Sudhakar - Petitioner
Versus
P.Mahavir Mehta – Respondent
C.R.P.No.236 of 2023
Decided On : 06-02-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. J.Dayana

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 94(b), 151 - Redemption of mortgage - Furnish security for an amount - Set aside fair and decreetal order - Suit for redemption of mortgage and during pendency of Suit he filed an Interlocutory Application in I.A. directing respondents to furnish security for an amount - Held, Trial court found that admittedly mortgage money has not been paid by petitioner to respondent and by taking into account that mortgage period has expired he cannot claim any rent or compensation from respondent for his use and occupation of plaint schedule property - Court formed an opinion that said claim is against basics of usufructuary mortgage - When revision petitioner / plaintiff has not deposited mortgage amount, very claim itself is untenable and more so, relief sought for in Interlocutory Application is also unsustainable - Plaintiff has not fulfilled his obligations and therefore, he cannot seek relief by way of right from defendants and thus, this court do not find any infirmity in respect of findings made by Trial court - Fair and decreetal order stands confirmed - Petition dismissed.

ORDER :

Prayer: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal dated 15.09.2022 passed by the Learned III Additional District Judge, Coimbatore in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.632 of 2019.

The fair and decreetal order dated 15.09.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.632 of 2019 is under challenge in the present civil revision petition.

2. The revision petitioner instituted the Suit for redemption of mortgage and during the pendency of the Suit he filed an Interlocutory Application in I.A.No.1 of 2021 under Section 94(b) and Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure directing the respondents to furnish security for an amount not less than Rs.15,00,000/-.

3. The Trial Court adjudicated the issues and made a finding that only after payment of mortgage money the respondent can hand over the possession of plaint schedule property to the petitioner. The Trial court found that admittedly the mortgage money has not been paid by the petitioner to the respondent and by taking into account that the mortgage period has expired he cannot claim any rent or compensation from the respondent for his use and occupation of the plaint schedule property.

4. The Court formed an opinion that the said claim is against the basics of usufructuary mortgage. When the revision petitioner / plaintiff has not deposited the mortgage amount, the very claim itself is untenable and more so, the relief sought for in the Interlocutory Application is also unsustainable. The plaintiff has not fulfilled his obligations and therefore, he cannot seek relief by way of right from the defendants and thus, this court do not find any infirmity in respect of the findings made by the Trial court.

5. Accordingly, the fair and decreetal order dated 15.09.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.S.No.632 of 2019 stands confirmed and Consequently, the Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.236 of 2023 is dismissed. No costs.

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 Back to top