Skip to content


Radhakrishnier and ors. Vs. Muthusami Sholagan and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in(1908)18MLJ564
AppellantRadhakrishnier and ors.
RespondentMuthusami Sholagan and ors.
Cases ReferredRam Shankar Lal v. Ganesh Prasad I.L.R.
Excerpt:
- - that in a casa like the present the plaintiff could have a decree for sale on the subsequent mortgages free of the prior mortgage is clear from rengasami nadan v. but we see no good reason why there should not be a decree for sale subject to the prior mortgage, and there is direct authority for granting such a decree in ram shankar lal v......on the same property. they brought the present suit on the two subsequent mortgages and asked for sale subject to their prior usufructuary mortgage. both the courts below held that the suit was not maintainable. that in a casa like the present the plaintiff could have a decree for sale on the subsequent mortgages free of the prior mortgage is clear from rengasami nadan v. subbaroya iyen i.l.r. (1907) m. 408. the plaintiffs are willing to accept such a decree if the decree they asked for cannot be granted. but we see no good reason why there should not be a decree for sale subject to the prior mortgage, and there is direct authority for granting such a decree in ram shankar lal v. ganesh prasad i.l.r. (1907) a. 385.2. we, therefore, reverse the decree of the district judge and remand the.....
Judgment:

1. Certain property was usufructuarily mortgaged to the plaintiffs in 1890. The plaintiffs subsequently got two other mortgages on the same property. They brought the present suit on the two subsequent mortgages and asked for sale subject to their prior usufructuary mortgage. Both the Courts below held that the suit was not maintainable. That in a casa like the present the plaintiff could have a decree for sale on the subsequent mortgages free of the prior mortgage is clear from Rengasami Nadan v. Subbaroya Iyen I.L.R. (1907) M. 408. The plaintiffs are willing to accept such a decree if the decree they asked for cannot be granted. But we see no good reason why there should not be a decree for sale subject to the prior mortgage, and there is direct authority for granting such a decree in Ram Shankar Lal v. Ganesh Prasad I.L.R. (1907) A. 385.

2. We, therefore, reverse the decree of the District Judge and remand the appeal for disposal on the merits. Costs will abide the result.


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