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

1876 Supreme(All) 1

OLDFIELD, PEARSON, ROBERT STUART, SPANKIE, TURNER
Kalian Das – Appellant
Versus
Khub Chand – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Robert Stuart, C.J. - My answer in this reference is that, under the circumstances stated, Khub Chand's purchase cannot prevail against or be held free of the plaintiff's claim, but that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree against the property under his foreclosure suit. Khub Chand's decree was merely a money-decree, and the condition in his bond against alienation to others was merely personal to him and Sukh Lal, and although it might give Khub Chand a claim, for damages against his debtor, it could in no way affect the right of a subsequent mortgagee in enforcing his lien. No other or further right can be allowed to Khub Chand, and he therefore cannot be permitted to contest the plaintiff's claim.

Pearson, J.

2. The rights and interest of his judgment-debtors were sold, not in virtue and pursuance of the lien created by the instrument of the 10th July 1865, but in execution of the decree of 1868, which was merely a money-decree, and were purchased by Kubh Chand subject to the rights which had been acquired by the plaintiff under the instrument of the 28th March 1869. The stipulation in the earlier instrument, by which the mortgagor was precluded from alienating the prope


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