Mortgage by conditional sale versus sale with repurchase option turned on the document's operative clauses, not its label.

The Supreme Court examined whether a 1950 document constituted a mortgage by conditional sale under section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act or a sale with an option to repurchase. Reading the instrument as a whole, it found that the consideration was used to discharge prior debts rather than advanced as a loan, possession and enjoyment passed with ownership rights, and the transferee could mutate and deal with the property as owner. The absence of a corresponding right of foreclosure and the presence of strong title-transfer indicators were inconsistent with a mortgage by conditional sale. The transaction was therefore treated as a sale with an option to repurchase.

---

---

Issues: Whether the document dated 11.12.1950 created a mortgage by conditional sale within Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, or amounted to a sale with an option to repurchase.

Analysis: The terms of the document were examined as a whole to ascertain the real intention of the parties. The Court noted that the consideration was not advanced as a loan, but was used to discharge prior debts and outstandings. The document transferred possession and conferred enjoyment under ownership rights, provided that on failure to repay within five years the transferor and his heirs would lose any right to take back the property, and further enabled the transferee to mutate the property in his name and deal with it as owner thereafter. The absence of a corresponding right of foreclosure and the positive indicators of transfer of title were held to be inconsistent with a mortgage by conditional sale. The styling of the document as a conditional sale was not decisive, but its operative clauses showed a sale with an option to repurchase.

Conclusion: The transaction was held to be a sale with an option to repurchase and not a mortgage by conditional sale. The appeal therefore failed.

---