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

KRISTNAPPA CHETTY et al v. HORATALA


Kristnappa Chetty Et Al V. Horatala

Present  : Ennis A.C.J. and Jayewardene A.J.

KRISTNAPPA CHETTY et al. v. HORATALA.

181--D. C. Kurunegala, 8,353.

Mortgage in favour of two persons-Address not registered-Action by secondary mortgagee first-Sale in execution-Subsequent action by primary mortgagee-Sale in execution-Rights of purchasers under the mortgage decrees-Claim to compensation by purchaser at second sale-Civil Procedure Code., ss. 643 and 644.

P mortgaged the land in question to F in 1912 and to A in 1914. A put his bond in suit first, and on a sale in execution purchased the land in November, 1917, and transferred it to plaintiff in November, 1918. F instituted an action on his bond in October, 1917, and in execution of the mortgage decree the property was purchased by defendant by deed dated September, 1919. Neither party complied with the requirements of sections 643 and 644 of the Civil Procedure Code, and neither mortgage decree was registered. In an action for declaration of title :

Held, " As plaintiff's title is based on a sale which was prior in date to the sale in favour of the defendant, the plaintiff's predecessor acquired the title of the
























































































































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