Skip to content


Mazhar HossaIn and ors. Vs. Misri Lal and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1886)ILR13Cal262
AppellantMazhar HossaIn and ors.
RespondentMisri Lal and ors.
Cases ReferredLala Tilockdhari Lal v. Furlong
Excerpt:
mortgage - mortgage of crops that may be grown upon a certain plot of land, its nature and effect--transfer of property act--contract act. - .....act. we are of opinion that the transfer of property act does not deal with a mortgage of this kind. future indigo crops that may be grown upon a certain plot of land belonging to the mortgagor were mortgaged. a mortgage of this kind does not come within the purview of the transfer of property act. neither can it be called a pledge of specific moveable property. it is a mortgage of moveable property that may come into existence in future. such a transaction as this is neither governed by the transfer of property act nor by the contract act. the transaction in question is in the nature of an agreement to mortgage 'moveable property that may come into existence in future. we see no reason to hold that it is not valid. it has been recognized in courts of justice in this country; see.....
Judgment:

Mitter and Agnew, JJ.

1. It has been contended before us that the mortgage upon which the plaintiff relies is not valid under the Transfer of Property Act. We are of opinion that the Transfer of Property Act does not deal with a mortgage of this kind. Future indigo crops that may be grown upon a certain plot of land belonging to the mortgagor were mortgaged. A mortgage of this kind does not come within the purview of the Transfer of Property Act. Neither can it be called a pledge of specific moveable property. It is a mortgage of moveable property that may come into existence in future. Such a transaction as this is neither governed by the Transfer of Property Act nor by the Contract Act. The transaction in question is in the nature of an agreement to mortgage 'moveable property that may come into existence in future. We see no reason to hold that it is not valid. It has been recognized in Courts of justice in this country; see Lala Tilockdhari Lal v. Furlong 2 B.L.R. A.C. 230.

We dismiss the appeal with costs.


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