<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1955 (8) TMI 51 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302902</link>
    <description>On redemption of a usufructuary mortgage, the mortgagor is ordinarily entitled to actual delivery of possession, not merely a notice to the mortgagee&#039;s tenant to attorn, unless the tenant in fact attorns and the mortgagor accepts that attornment. If the mortgagor instead initiates rent control proceedings against the tenant on the footing that the tenant is his own tenant, that conduct amounts to an unequivocal election between inconsistent rights. Once made with full knowledge, the election is binding and cannot be withdrawn. The mortgagor is therefore precluded by election and estoppel from later treating the mortgagee as continuing in possession for the purpose of claiming mesne profits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2022 14:07:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=682939" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1955 (8) TMI 51 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302902</link>
      <description>On redemption of a usufructuary mortgage, the mortgagor is ordinarily entitled to actual delivery of possession, not merely a notice to the mortgagee&#039;s tenant to attorn, unless the tenant in fact attorns and the mortgagor accepts that attornment. If the mortgagor instead initiates rent control proceedings against the tenant on the footing that the tenant is his own tenant, that conduct amounts to an unequivocal election between inconsistent rights. Once made with full knowledge, the election is binding and cannot be withdrawn. The mortgagor is therefore precluded by election and estoppel from later treating the mortgagee as continuing in possession for the purpose of claiming mesne profits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 1955 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302902</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>