Skip to content


P. Velayuda Naicker and ors. Vs. Haider HussaIn Khan Saheb and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in3Ind.Cas.729
AppellantP. Velayuda Naicker and ors.
RespondentHaider HussaIn Khan Saheb and anr.
Cases Referred and Jagat Tarini Dasi v. Naba Gopal Chuki
Excerpt:
transfer of property act (iv of 1882), section 84 - tender of mortgage money--refusal to receive by mortgagee--interest from date of tender--whether mortgajor should keep money ready for payment even after refusal. - - it is not alleged in this case that there was a subsequent demand by the mortgagee for the amount and that the mortgagor failed to pay......interest from such date. it is contended before us that it is proved in this case that the money tendered to the mortgagee was received from a, person who had agreed to purchase the property from the mortgagor after redemption and as he received back his money after the mortgagee refused ' to accept the tender, it cannot be, said that the plaintiff, mortgagor, from the date always kept the money ready for payment and that, therefore, the interest must run on and the cases of gyles v. hall 2 p.w. 378; satyabadi behara v. musammat harabati 5 c.l.j. 192 and jagat tarini dasi v. naba gopal chuki 5 c.l.j. 270 are relied upon.2. we are bound by the terms of section 84' of the transfer of property act, and, as already pointed out, under that section, interest shall cease from the date.....
Judgment:

1. The Judge has found, and his finding is not disputed before us, that there was a genuine and unconditional offer by the agent of the mortgagor to pay the mortgagee the amount due to him. The agent had the money with him. The mortgagee refused to receive the amount that was so tendered. Under Section 84 of the-Indian Transfer of Property Act interest on the principal money shall cease to run from the date of the tender, and the Judge has disallowed interest from such date. It is contended before us that it is proved in this case that the money tendered to the Mortgagee was received from a, person who had agreed to purchase the property from the mortgagor after redemption and as he received back his money after the mortgagee refused ' to accept the tender, it cannot be, said that the plaintiff, mortgagor, from the date always kept the money ready for payment and that, therefore, the interest must run on and the cases of Gyles v. Hall 2 P.W. 378; Satyabadi Behara v. Musammat Harabati 5 C.L.J. 192 and Jagat Tarini Dasi v. Naba Gopal Chuki 5 C.L.J. 270 are relied upon.

2. We are bound by the terms of Section 84' of the Transfer of Property Act, and, as already pointed out, under that section, interest shall cease from the date of tender'. The word tender does not in itself imply that he must have been always ready to pay the money. It is not alleged in this case that there was a subsequent demand by the mortgagee for the amount and that the mortgagor failed to pay. We, therefore, think the Judge is right in disallowing interest and we dismiss the appeal with costs.


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