Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)
B.V. Sundararaja Iyer And Ors. vs Kanakaraj on 28 March, 1958 cites

Elumalai Chetty And Jagannadha Chetty vs P. Balakrishna Mudaliar on 31 March, 1921

4. As the benefit of the section is granted only to a transferee it is necessary that there should be a valid transfer. An instrument of mortgage of immovable properties is itself an interest in immovable property and if its value is more than Rs. 100 it could be effected only by a registered document. Vide Elumalai Chetti v. Balakrishna Mudaly (1921) 41 M.L.J. 297 : I.L.R. 44 Mad. 965. In the absence of such an instrument a mere oral assignment of the mortgage right, as in the present case, cannot invest in the respondent the rights of the transferee of the mortgage. We do not agree with the learned Judge that Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act would enable the respondent to claim the benefit as a transferee. For one thing there was no contract to transfer the mortgage right in writing signed by the transferors. Even if the conditions for the applicability of Section 53-A are deemed to be satisfied, the doctrine of part performance embodied in the section does not operate to effect a transfer of title, which under the provisions of Section 54 can be effectuated only by a registered instrument.
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 13 - Full Document
1