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

1910 Supreme(All) 85

BANERJI, JOHN STANLEY
Sahu Shiamsunder Lal – Appellant
Versus
Har Narayan – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff-appellant for sale upon a mortgage dated the 3rd of October 1901, executed by the defendant Har Narain; Two villages were comprised in this mortgage. In June 1899, the same villages had been mortgaged by Har Narain to Jagan Nath and in February 1900, he made another mortgage of the same property in favour of Ram Sanehi. Jagan Nath brought a suit upon his mortgage making Ram Sanehi and the plaintiff parties to it and obtained a decree and an order absolute for sale and caused one of the mortgaged villages to be sold by auction. This village was purchased by the plaintiff. Ram Sanehi also brought a suit upon his mortgage and obtained a decree for sale on the 31st May 1904. The plaintiff was a party to that suit. There is nothing to show that an order absolute for sale was obtained by Ram Sanehi and it is not the defendant's case that a sale has taken place in execution of that decree. The plaintiff now seeks to sell one of the mortgaged villages, namely, the one which has not been purchased by him, and his plaint contains a prayer in the alternative to the effect that he should be allowed to redeem R

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