MANIMALA DEVI versus INDU BALA DEBYA & ORS.

MANIMALA DEVI versus INDU BALA DEBYA & ORS.

Part payment made by the mortgagor after he lost his interest in the mortgaged property does not extend the period of limitation for a suit to enforce the mortgage. Only if the mortgagor's interest in the property subsisted at the date of part payment would limitation be extended. Section 68 of the Transfer of Property Act gives only a right to sue for mortgage money on personal covenant, not to enforce the mortgage itself.

Parties
Appellant: Manimala Devi; Respondents: Indu Bala Debya & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
03 December 1963
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court: Appeal From Patna High Court Judgment Dated July 18, 1955 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 500 of 1947
Outcome
Appeal partly allowed.
Legal Topics
Limitation on Mortgage Enforcement, Part Payment and Limitation, Rights of Mortgagee on Assignment
Property Law Limitation Law Limitation on Mortgage Enforcement Part Payment and Limitation Rights of Mortgagee on Assignment

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manimala Devi

Appellant

Indu Bala Debya & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court: Appeal From Patna High Court Judgment Dated July 18, 1955 in Appeal From Original Decree No. 500 of 1947

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether part payment by a mortgagor after assignment of his interest extends limitation for enforcement of a mortgage under Section 20 of the Limitation Act, 1908.
  2. 2 Whether Mauza Bahaldih was covered by the mortgage deeds and can be enforced under them.
  3. 3 Whether dispossession of the mortgagee provides a fresh cause of action for enforcement of the mortgage.

Ratio Decidendi

Part payment made by the mortgagor after he lost his interest in the mortgaged property does not extend the period of limitation for a suit to enforce the mortgage. Only if the mortgagor's interest in the property subsisted at the date of part payment would limitation be extended. Section 68 of the Transfer of Property Act gives only a right to sue for mortgage money on personal covenant, not to enforce the mortgage itself.

Court Disposition

Appeal partly allowed.

Orders

  • Decree of High Court set aside in part; plaintiff granted decree only in respect of the mortgage dated August 27, 1922.
  • Plaintiff's appeal dismissed in respect of the mortgage dated June 14, 1922.