AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ramanujam, J.—The petitioner is a debtor who had borrowed a sum of Rs. 5,000 on 8th December, 1972, on mortgage of his property in
favour of the third respondent. Subsequently, the mortgagor had sold his property in the year 1974 to his son. One of the terms of the sale deed is
that the mortgage money has to be paid by the purchaser out of the sale consideration retained by him. Having taken the sale deed, the purchaser
who is the petitioner herein sought the benefit of Act 13 of 1980 and also sought a certificate of redemption of the mortgage on the ground that he
is entitled to the benefits of the Act. Both the Deputy Tahsildar (original authority) as well as the Revenue Divisional Officer (appellate authority)
have held that since the petitioner (the purchaser of the property) has retained out of the sale consideration the mortgage money payable to the
third respondent, the petitioner will not be entitled to the benefits of the Act in view of S. 12(1) of the Act 13 of 1980. The said view taken by the
authorities below has been challenged in this writ petition. It is found that the decision of both the authorities below is consistent with the view taken
by a Division Bench of this Court in S. Abraham Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, which squarely applies to the facts of this case. In that
decision it was specifically held that the purchaser of a house property which was sold to him subject to a mortgage with a direction by the vendor
to pay the money due thereon to the mortgagee was held not entitled to claim the benefit of S. 6 of the Act, in view of S. 12(1) exempting the debt
representing the portion of the purchase price of the property purchased by a debtor. In this view, no interference has been called for in the orders
passed by the authorities below.
Hence the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.