Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (1.32 seconds)Ananda Chandra Roy vs Abdullah Hossein Chowdhury on 16 June, 1913
6. I concur. The only case in which a mortgagee of a leasehold interest in India becomes, after entering into possession liable to pay the rent appears to be where his possession is attributable to his having obtained a decree for foreclosure, the reason being that in such a case, the lessee parts with the whole of his interest, and the entire interests both of the lessee and of the mortgagee become by operation of law merged in the person of the latter--vide E. Macnaghten v. Bheeharee Singh (1878) 2 C.L.R. 323 and Ananda Chandra Roy v. Abdulla Hossein Chowdhury (1914) I.L.R. 41 Calc. 148.
Kannye Loll Sett And Anr. vs Nistoriny Dossee And Anr. on 6 March, 1884
The decision in Kannye Loll Sett v. Nistoriny Dossee (1884) I.L.R. 10 Calc. 443 proceeded as already pointed out on the view that the mortgage was an out and out assignment of the lease, which it is not in the present case or ordinarily in India.
Randuparayil Kunhi Sou vs Ablukandiyil Parkum Mulloli Chathu on 13 November, 1912
410 and Kunhi Sou v. Mulloli Chathu (1915) I.L.R. 38 Mad. 86.
Section 57 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
1