Q. What are the equivalent citations for Motavengattil Krishna Panikkar vs Kezatath Krishna Menon ?

The equivalence citation are25 IND. CAS. 369 ; AIR 1915 MAD 227 1 ; LQ/MadHC/1914/281 ;

Motavengattil Krishna Panikkar Vs. Kezatath Krishna Menon On 06 August, 1914

Q: Q. What was the bench assigned for the case Motavengattil Krishna Panikkar vs Kezatath Krishna Menon?

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SADASIVA AIYAR , HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NAPIER

Open iDraf

Motavengattil Krishna Panikkar v. Kezatath Krishna Menon

Motavengattil Krishna Panikkar
v.
Kezatath Krishna Menon

(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)

No. | 06-08-1914

[1] The application of the mortgagee (appellant-defendant)is, in substance, not for compelling the mortgagor, (respondent-plaintiff) to take delivery of. the mortgaged property from the appellant but for the issue of a cheque in favour of the appellant for the amount deposited in Court, by the respondent.

[2] The money was paid into Court by the respondent expressly in order that the appellant, who was entitled under the decree to have the property sold in default of such payment, might not bring it to sale and might draw the amount from Court. The money became the money of the appellant as soon as it was so deposited and the plaintiff cannot be heard to object to the appellant receiving a cheque to draw that money from the Court.

[3] The lower Court s order is set aside and the Munsif s order restored with costs on the respondent (plaintiff) in all Courts.

Advocates List

For the Appearing Parties ----

Bench List

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SADASIVA AIYAR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAPIER

Eq Citation

25 IND. CAS. 369

AIR 1915 MAD 227 1

LQ/MadHC/1914/281

HeadNote

Mortgage — Delivery of possession — Application of mortgagee, held, is not for compelling mortgagor to take delivery of mortgaged property from mortgagee but for issue of cheque in favour of mortgagee for amount deposited in Court by mortgagor — Money paid into Court by respondent expressly in order that appellant, who was entitled under decree to have property sold in default of such payment, might not bring it to sale and might draw amount from Court — Money became money of appellant as soon as it was so deposited and respondent cannot be heard to object to appellant receiving cheque to draw that money from Court — Specific Relief Act, 1877 — Ss. 34 and 35 — Specific Relief — Delivery of possession