1957 (7) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rnaments to the defendant No. 3. Subsequently, two of the three ornaments so Sub-pledged were redeemed and were again Sub-pledged with the defendant No. 4. The plaintiff paid two items of Rs. 800 and Rs. 500 to the original pawnee, Manni Ram. As a portion of the debt remained unpaid he did not get back the ornaments. Then the Debt Redemption Act came into force and under it the amount of the loan got reduced because the plaintiff was an agriculturist. The debt got reduced to such an extent that the payment already made by the plaintiff satisfied it. The plaintiff, therefore, sued to recover possession of the three ornaments after redemption and contended that he was entitled to do so without the payment of any amount. He said that he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... have been decreed because it was not within time and the other was that the plaintiff could not in any case get back the ornament that was lying with the defendant No. 3 without paying the amount due to him for the Security of which ornament had been pledged to him. Both these contentions were negatived by the learned single Judge who dismissed the appeal but granted leave to appeal under the Letters Patent. This appeal is the result. 3. The plea of limitation has not been pressed before us and the decision of the learned single Judge about that plea must therefore be held to have become final. The only question which the learned counsel for the appellant has argued before us is that the appellant before us could have either of two capa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f pawn, to another person, without in either case destroying or invalidating his security. But if the pawnee should undertake to pledge the property (not being negotiable securities) for a debt beyond his own, or to make a transfer thereof as if he were the actual owner, it is clear that in such case he would be guilty of a breach of trust, and his creditor would acquire no title beyond that held by the pawnee. Whatever doubt may be indulged in, in the case of a mere factor, it has been decided in the case of a strict pledge, that if the pledgee transfers the same to his own creditor the latter may hold the pledge until the debt of the original owner is discharged. If, therefore, Manni Ram Sub-pledged to the appellant the ornamen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X