9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (2) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Raghuraj Prasad Agarwal of Daulatpur, Lashkar, were the owners of a property at Topi Bazar, Lashkar. Vide sale deed dated8-10-1971, the said persons sold the said property to one Manik Chand for a sum of Rs. 35,000. As the said purchaser was short of funds and needed money, he entered into a deed dated11-10-1971 with the assessee individual. It is the exact nature of this document, which is the subject-matter of dispute in the present case. By this deed, which was duly registered, the said Manik Chand sold the aforesaid house to the assessee for a sum of Rs. 10,000. Manik Chand was to remain in possession of the house as before. He was to pay Rs. 150 per month by way of rent. Manik Chand had the right to repurchase the said property by pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsel for the assessee, the said Manik Chand had to secure the debt of Rs. 10,000 taken by him from the assessee and so he had created nothing but a mortgage by conditional sale in favour of the assessee to secure the debt of Rs. 10,000 advanced by the assessee to him. Manik Chand continued to remain in possession of the mortgaged property by paying interest in the form of rent of Rs. 150 per month. The deed, thus, indicates the existence of debt, the continuance of Manik Chand as mortgagor-in-possession as before and that the price of Rs. 10,000, for which the said property was indicated to be sold, was far below the true value. These facts indicate that the transaction was one of mortgage. The above facts, according to the learned counsel, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he condition that on such payment being made the assessee was to transfer the property to him (Manik Chand). The period for repayment was fixed at three years. It was also provided therein that if Manik Chand failed to pay that money to the assessee, the latter would become the absolute owner of the said property. It is also a fact that Manik Chand was paying Rs. 150 per month to the assessee and that he had paid in all Rs. 5,000 out of the above amount of Rs. 10,000 to the assessee by2-7-1983. Since the existence of the debt is there and continuance of Manik Chand in possession is also there and the price for which the property was sold by Manik Chand to the assessee, namely, Rs. 10,000 is far less than the sum of Rs. 35,000 for which he h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
