first mortgagee-
Puisne mortgagee a party--Decree passed but no sale-Prior
mortgagee paid off by mortgagor-Suit by puisne mortgagee on
his mortgage-Prayer ... puisne mortgagee-defendant in a prior mortgagee's
suit are, first, the right-to redeem the prior mortgage.
and, secondly, the right to participate
Company in
liquidation-Liquidators joining in second appeal against
decree ordering ejectment of company from land-Landlord
filing application for execution of decree without obtaining ... appellant. After the passing of the decree
the company executed a second mortgage of its fixed assets
in favour of the appellant against another loan
Santa Singh Gopal Singh And Ors. vs Rajinder Singh Bur Singh And Ors. on 4
first mortgage, was by two bro-
thers and the second mortgage of part of the same property
was by one brother. The Bombay High Court ... first mortgage did not bar a suit to
enforce the second mortgage. This was before the insertion
of s. 67A but the principle embodied
favour
of M and granted a decree for redemption of the second
mortgage of November, 1941. The District Court, allowing an
appeal, ordered redemption ... favour of Meda, and granted a decree for redemption of the
second mortgage dated November 27, 1941. The plaintiffs
appealed to the District Court, Gurgaon
favour of Meda, and granted a decree for redemption of the second mortgage dated November 27, 1941. The plaintiffs appealed to the District Court, Gurgaon ... land including the mortgage in favour of Meda. The decree passed by the District Court was confirmed in second appeal by the High Court
parties to the mortgage and who were not
parties to the suit on mortgage were not precluded from challenging the mortgage on the ground ... that mortgage. By the mercer of the mortgage in a mortgage decree, the characteristics of the
mortgage are not lost. If the mortgage
That was for a sum of Rs. 11,500/-. The second mortgage was for a sum of Rs. 4,000/-executed ... those mortgages. We were told at the bar that the second mortgage was in respect of the very properties that had been mortgaged under
deed dated 27th July,
1922 was. held to be a mortgage, the mortgagees were
entitled to get the payment of Rs. 6442/8/- as interest ... Mortgage deed, that Dwarka
Prasad did not sell the house to Madho Ram and that the
plaintiff was entitled to redeem the mortgage on payment
decreed
both the suits excepting as regards the mortgage dated
January 20, 1878. In second appeal Capoor J. of the Punjab
High Court confirmed ... well as in second appeal. That part of the
plaintiffs' case was not pressed before us.
Now coming to the mortgage said to have
