Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

14. Invoking Section 76 (h) of the TP Act, which talks of the liabilities of a mortgagee in possession, the Petitioner contends that OSFC as mortgagee "was in possession personally by itself through its agent and as such a fair occupation rent which is equal to Rs.27.00 lakh per year is liable to be appropriated in terms of clause (h) of Section 76 of Transfer of Property act and the surplus shall be refunded to the mortgagor, i.e. the Petitioner with interest."

15. It is then contended that "the fair rent which could be quantified due to self occupation of the mortgagee Corporation through its agent is not an income on enforcement of security as envisaged in the pari passu agreement as the property was not converted to cash either by sale or lease as provided u/s 29 (1) of the SFCs Act and hence the same is not distributable to other co-financiers either under sub-section (4) of Section 29 nor under the paripassu agreement."