9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Adjustment of excess interest payment. 2. Exclusion of certain items from the mortgaged property. Detailed Analysis: 1. Adjustment of Excess Interest Payment: The official liquidator argued that the mortgagees are not entitled to the enhanced interest rate of 9 1/2 % per annum from April 1, 1965, due to the lack of a properly executed and registered agreement under the Indian Registration Act, 1908, and the Companies Act, 1956. The liquidator contended that the excess interest already paid should be adjusted towards the principal amount due, calculating interest only at 8% as originally stipulated in the mortgage deed. The court found that although the agreement to increase the interest rate was not registered, the mortgagor company had paid the enhanced interest rate, and the mortgagees had appropriated these payments. The court noted that the agreement was binding on the company itself as long as it was a going concern, even though it was void against the liquidator and creditors due to non-registration under Section 125 of the Companies Act. The court held that the payments made at the enhanced rate were in pursuance of a lawful agreement and were not made under mistake, fraud, misrepresentation, or coercion. Therefore, the official liquidator is not entitled to ask for the readjustment of the excess interest payments. 2. Exclusion of Certain Items from the Mortgaged Property: The official liquidator sought to exclude wooden partitions, a motor pump-set, a Missen hut, a motor-car shed, and lights and fans (other than permanent fittings) from the mortgaged property, arguing that these items do not constitute immovable property under the Transfer of Property Act. The court examined whether these items were permanently attached to the earth or intended for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of the property. It considered photographs and descriptions of the items, noting that the wooden partitions, motor-car shed, and Missen hut were integral to the building and not intended to be temporary structures. The mortgage deed also included future constructions and improvements as part of the hypotheca, indicating the parties' intention to include such items. The court concluded that the items in question were indeed improvements and accessions to the property, falling within the terms of the mortgage deed. Therefore, these items cannot be excluded from the mortgaged property to be sold for the realization of the mortgage amount. Conclusion: The application by the official liquidator was dismissed. The mortgagees are not required to adjust the excess interest payments, and the items listed by the official liquidator are not to be excluded from the mortgaged property. There was no order as to costs.
|
