Radhakrishnier and ors. Vs. Muthusami Sholagan and ors.

Radhakrishnier and ors. vs Muthusami Sholagan and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Sep 07, 1908

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/781115

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/781115
Court: Chennai
Decided On: Sep 07, 1908
Subject: Property

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - 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...

Key legal issue: Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Radhakrishnier and ors.

Respondent

Muthusami Sholagan and ors.

Legal References

Cases Referred: Ram Shankar Lal v. Ganesh Prasad I.L.R.
Reported In: (1908)18MLJ564

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.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.

Full 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.

Same Parties Radhakrishnier and ors. vs Muthusami Sholagan and ors. Same Subject Property

Property