Skip to content


Puran Mal Vs. Kuray Mal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1880)ILR2All565
AppellantPuran Mal
RespondentKuray Mal and ors.
Excerpt:
joint mortgage - purchase by mortgagee of a share in mortgaged property--redemption of mortgage. - .....i think, open to the objection taken. the pleader for the appellants refers to a decision of the privy council which, however, he did not cite in support of his arguments. the precedent of this court, mahtab singh v. misree lal h.c.r. n.w.p. 1867 p. 88 to which we were referred, does not affect the case before us in any direct way. i was at first disposed to consider that the decision in nawab azimut ali khan v. jowahir singh h.c.r. n.w.p. 1866, p. 3 was one which applied injuriously to the appellant's case. but on looking into the case, in which i was a party to the judgment, i find that the decision of the judicial committee of the privy council overruled the latter part of the judgment. it further appears that the decision of the privy council to which appellants refer is that in.....
Judgment:

Spankie, J.

1. The judgment of the lower Appellate Court appears, I think, open to the objection taken. The pleader for the appellants refers to a decision of the Privy Council which, however, he did not cite in support of his arguments. The precedent of this Court, Mahtab Singh v. Misree Lal H.C.R. N.W.P. 1867 p. 88 to which we were referred, does not affect the case before us in any direct way. I was at first disposed to consider that the decision in Nawab Azimut Ali Khan v. Jowahir Singh H.C.R. N.W.P. 1866, p. 3 was one which applied injuriously to the appellant's case. But on looking into the case, in which I was a party to the judgment, I find that the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council overruled the latter part of the judgment. It further appears that the decision of the Privy Council to which appellants refer is that in the case of Nawab Azimut Ali Khan v. Jowahir Singh 13 Moore's Ind. App. p. 404, which is the very case to which I have alluded above.

2. I gather from the judgment of the Privy Council on the point now at issue that in respect to shares in which a mortgagee under a joint mortgage has not himself bought the equity of redemption, he retains his character as mortgagee, though he has purchased the equity of redemption in other shares. Thus the plaintiff here, who has become the representative of a mortgagor of a particular share, is entitled to redeem his own particular share in the joint mortgage of which the joint character has been broken up, but he cannot redeem, against the will of the mortgagee, the share of Badipan, another share holder. I would therefore decree the appeal and reverse the decision of the lower Appellate Court in so far as it relates to the share of Badipan, and I would modify the decree accordingly with costs in proportion to decree and dismissal.

Oldfield, J.

3. I concur in the order proposed by Mr. Justice Spankie. The right of one mortgagor to redeem the whole mortgage rests on the joint character of the mortgage, and when that has been broken, the right ceases, and he cannot redeem more than his share against the will of the mortgagee.


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