Abdul Hamid vs Lala Ram Kumar - 1942 Supreme(Oudh) 20

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1942 Supreme(Oudh) 20

BENNETT
Abdul Hamid – Appellant
Versus
Lala Ram Kumar – Respondent

JUDGMENT

Bennett, J - The question referred to the Full Bench is:

Is a subsequent mortgagee who redeems a prior mortgage with money left with him for that purpose by the mortgagor subrogated to the rights of the prior mortgagee under Section 92, T.P. Act, if the mortgagor has not by a registered instrument agreed that he shall be so subrogated?

2. The facts of the ease giving rise to this question are narrated in detail in the referring order and it is unnecessary to repeat them. The referring order also shows the views taken at different times by this Court and by the Madras and Allahabad High Courts. The question was answered in the negative by a si(Pat.)ngle Judge of this Court in Mt. Jaidevi Kuwar v Sripal Singh and in the affirmative by a divisional Bench in Sukhram Das v. Mahbub Khan, A.I.R. 1935 Oudh. 399. That decision is the last decision of a Bench of this Court on the point. A Pull Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Tota Ram v. Ram Lal , AIR1932All489 held that the subsequent mortgagee could claim subrogation in the circumstances stated, while in Hira Singh v. Jai Singh , AIR1937All588 another Pull Bench of the same High Court accepted the view of the Madras High Court