Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the earlier mortgage claimed by the assignee bank had priority over the later mortgage and whether the prior mortgagee was guilty of gross negligence so as to lose priority under the statutory rule governing postponement of a prior mortgagee.
Analysis: The dispute turned on the creation of an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds and whether the lender had acted with the diligence expected when the original title deed was not shown to have been deposited, only a lodgment receipt being relied upon. The later mortgagee had obtained a mortgage on the basis of original title deeds. On the facts, the prior lender and its assignee had not established proper steps taken to secure the original title deed from the Sub-Registrar's office, and this lack of diligence was treated as material. The statutory principle under Section 78 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was applied to determine whether gross neglect by the prior mortgagee enabled the mortgagor to create a subsequent mortgage.
Conclusion: The prior mortgagee was held to have acted with gross negligence, the earlier mortgage could not prevail over the later mortgage, and the challenge to the appellate tribunal's decision failed.
Ratio Decidendi: A prior mortgagee who, by gross negligence in dealing with title documents, enables the mortgagor to create a subsequent mortgage may be postponed in priority under Section 78 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.