High Courts(1903) 11 MAD CK 0009

Kangay Gurukkal and Others vs Kalimuthu Annavi

Madras High Court · Decided on 17 November 1903 · Citation: (1904) ILR (Mad) 526 : (1904) 14 MLJ 61

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 190 words
1.

Our answer to the reference is in the affirmative. The first sentence of the extract from the mortgage instrument quoted in the order of reference

does, in our opinion, contain a promise by the mortgagor to pay on the date named, in which case there shall be a right in the mortgagor to get

back his lands.

2.

The second sentence of the extract provides that in the event of the mortgagor not paying on the due date, but subsequently, he may pay only on

the corresponding day of a future year and there shall then be an obligation on the part of the mortgagee to give up the land.

3.

The mortgage is therefore a combination of a simple and an usufructuary mortgage, within the meaning of Section 98, Transfer of Property Act

and the mortgagee is entitled to a decree for the mortgage money under Clause (a) of Section 68 and to a decree for sale u/s 67, the right to cause

the mortgaged property to be sold m default of payment being implied within the meaning of Section 58 (b) of the Transfer of Property Act.