TMI Blog1935 (8) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding No. 8 of 1922-1923, measuring R. 1-13, 63, R. 2-6. 54, R. 3-68, total 20-45 acres, situated at Tagundaing Kwin B, Kanywa Oksu, Bassein Township. 2. These two items of property were identical with those set out in the preliminary decree which followed the description of the mortgaged property in the plaint. In his application for sale however the respondent set out two items of property, one of which is identical with item (b) abovementioned, regarding which there is therefore no dispute in the present proceedings. But the other is described as a pucca barrack and its house site, 6 posts, 5 rooms, corrugated iron roof attached with kitchen with dhani roof, and all the trees standing thereon, situated on the lease land, Holding No. 41 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondent's application for sale were in the course of construction. Although these circumstances indicate that the wooden house did not form part of the mortgaged property but the new buildings, which were at the time of the mortgage in the course of construction did, the respondent's agent who filed the mortgage suit and the application from which this appeal has arisen being a different person from that who took the mortgage is not in a position to make an assertion either one way or the other. 4. In fact the description of the mortgaged property set out in the plaint from which the descriptions set out in the preliminary decree and the final decree were copied was taken from the sale certificate and the agent who filed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity of the shares of the co-mortgagors, but subsequently the shares of the co-mortgagors were increased by inheritance from one of the other defendants who died before the decree was executed, it was held that the increased shares of the mortgagors were liable to be sold in execution of the decree. In Motilal Hirabhai v. Bai Mani, AIR 1925 PC 86=86 IC 368=49 Bom 233=52 IA 137 (PC) the Privy Council upheld the claim of a pledger in execution of a redemption decree to new shares in addition to those originally pledged as an increase accrued from the goods bailed within the meaning of S. 163, Contract Act, 1872, although the redemption decree made no specific reference to such new shares which had been allotted to the pledgee after the pledge. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|