Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 4 of 4 (0.20 seconds)Subbaraya Rowthu Minda Nainar And Muthu ... vs Kuppusamy Aiyangar And Ors. on 12 February, 1909
6. As regards the first point, it was held by the Chief Justice in proceedings between these same parties in Subbaraya Rowthu Minda Nainar v. Kuppusamy Iyengar 6 M.L.T. 278 : 1 Ind. Cas. 535 that the mortgage interest under the decree obtained by the Nadars includes the right to sell the property in default of payment and that no order for sale of the decrees obtained by the Nadras was necessary in order to enable the Chetties to execute the decrees which they (the Nadars) had obtained.
Section 134 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Ramasamy Pillai vs Muthoo Chetty And Ors. on 17 January, 1910
In Ramasamy Pillai v. Muthoo Chetty (1910) M.W.N. 4 : 7 M.L.T. 125 : 5 Ind. Cas. 834 a mortgagee was held to be a transferee for the purposes of Section 134 of the Transfer of Property Act and to have aright as such to sue in his own name. The appellants in the present case are in a stronger position as they are mortgage decree-holders and have by the compromise effected in this Court become purchasers of the decrees obtained against the respondents. The whole interest of the Nadars in the decree obtained by them has passed to the Chetties by operation of law and, therefore, the appellants were entitled to apply as transferees under Order XXI, Rule 16 for execution of those decrees to the Court which passed them. These appeals must, for these reasons, be allowed with coats in this Court and the Court below and the execution petition must be sent back to the Subordinate Judge for disposal according to law.
1