https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195259 A surety who paid a distinct debt guaranteed by him was held entitled to be subrogated to a proportionate share of the creditor's mortgage security under Sections 140 and 141 of the Contract Act, 1872. The court distinguished a guarantee for a defined part of a debt from a guarantee of the whole debt, and held that the right to the security arose immediately on full payment of the surety's own liability. Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was found inapplicable because the dispute did not concern redemption of the mortgage. The defendants were also held to be partners and liable as debtors, and the suit was maintained within limitation. en-us Fri, 13 Aug 1943 00:00:00 +0630 Tue, 24 Oct 2017 17:06:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195259 A surety who paid a distinct debt guaranteed by him was held entitled to be subrogated to a proportionate share of the creditor's mortgage security under Sections 140 and 141 of the Contract Act, 1872. The court distinguished a guarantee for a defined part of a debt from a guarantee of the whole debt, and held that the right to the security arose immediately on full payment of the surety's own liability. Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was found inapplicable because the dispute did not concern redemption of the mortgage. The defendants were also held to be partners and liable as debtors, and the suit was maintained within limitation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Aug 1943 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195259