Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ramasami Vs. Sami and ors.

Ramasami vs Sami and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Aug 29, 1893
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/783734

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Property

Case Summary

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

Transfer of Property Act - Act IV of 1882, Sections 92, 93--Decree for redemption--Mortgagor's failure to pay amount due within period fined--Subsequent suit, no order under Section 93 having been made--Res judicata. - - the present suit being based on precisely the same cause of action as that suit is, of course,...

Key legal issue
Property

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramasami

Respondent

Sami and ors.

Legal References

Reported In
(1894)ILR17Mad96

Excerpt

transfer of property act - act iv of 1882, sections 92, 93--decree for redemption--mortgagor's failure to pay amount due within period fined--subsequent suit, no order under section 93 having been made--res judicata. - - the present suit being based on precisely the same cause of action as that suit is, of course, barred as res judicata.1. we consider that the decree in suit no. 241 of 1886 on the mannargudi munsif's file was a final decree inasmuch as it decreed according to the last clause of section 92 of the transfer of property act, that in case of default in payment within the stipulated time, the plaintiff was to be debarred of his right of redemption. orders passed under section 93 are, in our opinion, merely supplementary to the decree under section 92, showing whether the terms of the decree have or have not been fulfilled. it is clear that in this case when the three months' time allowed in the decree had elapsed without payment being made, no extension of time for payment having been granted, the decree became a final decree without any further orders being required. that decree then being a final one after confirmation in appeal; the present suit being based on precisely the same cause of action as that suit is, of course, barred as res judicata.2. the second appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.

Full Judgment

1. We consider that the decree in Suit No. 241 of 1886 on the Mannargudi Munsif's file was a final decree inasmuch as it decreed according to the last clause of Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act, that in case of default in payment within the stipulated time, the plaintiff was to be debarred of his right of redemption. Orders passed under Section 93 are, in our opinion, merely supplementary to the decree under Section 92, showing whether the terms of the decree have or have not been fulfilled. It is clear that in this case when the three months' time allowed in the decree had elapsed without payment being made, no extension of time for payment having been granted, the decree became a final decree without any further orders being required. That decree then being a final one after confirmation in appeal; the present suit being based on precisely the same cause of action as that suit is, of course, barred as res judicata.

2. The second appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial