AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This is not a case of fraudulent preference, for the mortgage of the appellant is beyond three months from the date of the adjudication. If it
appears that the object of the mortgage is to defeat, defraud or delay creditors, it is voidable u/s 53. In one sense, when one creditor obtains a
preference for himself by taking a mortgage or sale, it may operate to the prejudice of other creditors, but such transactions are perfectly valid
unless they are within three months from the adjudication. The primary object of the transaction is to protect himself and not to defeat other
creditors and a creditor is entitled to do it: see Musahar Sahu v. Lala Hakim Lal A. I. R. 1915 P. C. 115 and Natha v. Magan Chand [1903] 27
Bom. 322.
The appeal is allowed with costs throughout.