https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292728 Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act was treated as prospective because the amendment contained no clear indication of retrospective operation, and a declaratory form did not by itself displace existing rights. Under the pre-amendment law, partial subrogation was permissible: a purchaser who pays off an earlier charge in the circumstances of the transaction may keep that charge alive pro tanto. However, where the purchaser agreed as part of the bargain to discharge prior debts out of the purchase money, subrogation extends only to the amount of the assumed obligation and cannot exceed it. The purchaser's priority was therefore confined to the sum undertaken to be paid, with interest, and the remaining property and proceeds stayed available for the plaintiff's claim. en-us Tue, 22 Feb 1938 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jan 2021 12:37:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292728 Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act was treated as prospective because the amendment contained no clear indication of retrospective operation, and a declaratory form did not by itself displace existing rights. Under the pre-amendment law, partial subrogation was permissible: a purchaser who pays off an earlier charge in the circumstances of the transaction may keep that charge alive pro tanto. However, where the purchaser agreed as part of the bargain to discharge prior debts out of the purchase money, subrogation extends only to the amount of the assumed obligation and cannot exceed it. The purchaser's priority was therefore confined to the sum undertaken to be paid, with interest, and the remaining property and proceeds stayed available for the plaintiff's claim. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 22 Feb 1938 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292728