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

1919 Supreme(All) 184

HENRY RICHARDS, RAFIQUE
Ram Bharosa Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Musammat Kabutra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. It appears that the property was mortgaged as far back as the year 1907. The particular form of mortgage adopted was what is called a mortgage by conditional sale. No suit we then instituted to assert any right of pre-emption. A foreclosure decree was obtained in 1912, which was made absolute on the 7th of June 1913. Again no attempt was made to assert any right of pre-emption. The property was then transferred to the appellant on the 1st of April 1914 and the present suit was not instituted until the 26th of June 1915, that is, more than a year after (he transfer in favour of the defendant vendee was registered. If pre-emption was sought by virtue of this last mentioned deed of transfer, it is quite clear that it was barred under Article 10 of the Limitation Act as being brought more than one year after the registration of the sale-deed. The plaintiff, however, based her cause of action on the making of the decree absolute in the foreclosure suit, and then by applying Article 120 of the Limitation Act attempted to show that the suit was filed within time. The contending defendant pleaded that there was no custom, that th

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