Skip to content


Damodar Gangadar Vs. Vamanrav Lakshman - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1885)ILR9Bom435
AppellantDamodar Gangadar
RespondentVamanrav Lakshman
Excerpt:
stamp - mortgage--stipulationsnot creating fresh obligation. - section 31(4) (since repealed) :[tarun chatterjee & h.l.dattu, jj] jurisdiction of high court - respondent, a government company, chartered appellants vessel to carry rock phosphate from togo to west coast india - dispute arose between parties - under agreement, respondent had chosen mumbai as port of delivery vessel carrying rock phosphate was delivered at port of bombay - application filed by respondent earlier before delhi high court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise held, high court of bombay, is not correct in rejecting arbitration petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. .....property which the mortgagee may pay. the commissioner, c. d., is of opinion that these are condition not necessarily connected with a mortgage pure and simple, and the question is, whether an additional stamp should be charged as for an indemnity bond? it appears to us that the question should be answered in the negative. under the ordinary law' of mortgage, the mortgagor is bound, so long as the equity of redemption remains with him, to indemnify the estate against expenses incurred in protecting the title (vide fisher on mortgage, 3rd ed., vol. ii, page 947). the stipulations referred to do not appear to create any fresh obligation, and only tend to maintain in favour of the mortgagee the original security which is the purpose of the instrument.
Judgment:

W. Wedderburn, J.

1. In this case the mortgage bond contains certain stipulations under which the mortgagor engages to repay to the mortgagee any costs he may incur in suits brought against him by the mortgagor's co-sharers, and also any debts charged upon the mortgaged property which the mortgagee may pay. The Commissioner, C. D., is of opinion that these are condition not necessarily connected with a mortgage pure and simple, and the question is, whether an additional stamp should be charged as for an indemnity bond? It appears to us that the question should be answered in the negative. Under the ordinary law' of mortgage, the mortgagor is bound, so long as the equity of redemption remains with him, to indemnify the estate against expenses incurred in protecting the title (vide Fisher on Mortgage, 3rd ed., Vol. II, page 947). The stipulations referred to do not appear to create any fresh obligation, and only tend to maintain in favour of the mortgagee the original security which is the purpose of the instrument.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //