https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126618 The Supreme Court considered whether a mortgage decree could be reopened under the Bengal Money-lenders Act, 1940 by asking if execution was still pending on 1 January 1939 and whether a sub-mortgagee was protected as an assignee or holder for value. The majority treated the 1937 dismissal of execution for non-prosecution as bringing the proceeding to an end, with the later 1939 petition being only an intimation of adjustment, so no execution proceeding was pending on the relevant date and the Act did not apply. The Court also recorded that the respondent sub-mortgagee was protected under section 36(5) as an assignee, so relief against him was unavailable. en-us Fri, 04 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126618 The Supreme Court considered whether a mortgage decree could be reopened under the Bengal Money-lenders Act, 1940 by asking if execution was still pending on 1 January 1939 and whether a sub-mortgagee was protected as an assignee or holder for value. The majority treated the 1937 dismissal of execution for non-prosecution as bringing the proceeding to an end, with the later 1939 petition being only an intimation of adjustment, so no execution proceeding was pending on the relevant date and the Act did not apply. The Court also recorded that the respondent sub-mortgagee was protected under section 36(5) as an assignee, so relief against him was unavailable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 04 May 1951 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126618