DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SKIPPER CONSTRUCTION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short question involved in this appeal is whether the lease executed in favour of Abraham Cheriyan, husband of the mortgagee would survive after the execution of the mortgage deed. In our view from the evidence on record, it is apparent that parties expressly saved the leasehold rights. The lessee was not party to the mortgage deed and there is no evidence on record from which it can be inferred or implied that the lessee surrendered his leasehold rights. It is well established law that unless there was a surrender of leasehold rights at the time of execution of the mortgage, mortgagor would not be entitled to obtain delivery of physical possession of property on redemption of mortgage.

(2.) The relevant facts for deciding the aforesaid question are as under :-

(3.) At the time of hearing of this appeal, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants referred to the mortgage deed and additional mortgage deeds to show that by the said deeds rights of lessee are expressly saved.