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

PERERA M.S. v. UNANTENNA


Rose C.J. V. Pulle J.

1953 Present : Rose C.J. and Pulle J.

M. S. PERERA (Assistant Government Agent, Kandy),
Appellant,
and
UNANTENNA et al., Respondents

S. C. 9-10-D. C. Kandy, X 1,397

Mortgage-Land Redemption Ordinance, No. 61 of 1942, as amended by Ordinance No. 62 of 1947-Section 3 (1) (b)-" Transfer "-Includes voluntary conveyance of mortgaged property subsequent to date of hypothecary decree- Hypothecary decree-Does mortgage become merged in decree ?

Where a land is mortgaged and the mortgage is put in suit and decree is entered against the mortgagor for the payment of the amount due on the mortgage bond, a subsequent voluntary conveyance by the mortgagor in favour of the mortgagee, the consideration for which is set off in full settlement of the amount due on the said decree, is a transfer as contemplated in section 3 (1) (b) of the Land Redemption Ordinance. In such a case it cannot be contended that, notwithstanding that the charge on the land created by the mortgage bond existed even after the decree, the debt due from the mortgagor personally to the mortgagee became merged in the decree and ceased to exist and that the land, therefore, was not



















































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