PRADYUMNA KUMAR MULLICK Vs. KUMAR DINENDRA MULLICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On February 13, 1920, two persons, namely Kumar Dinendra Mullick and Kumar Ganendra Mullick, executed, in favour of Nandalal Roy and Pulin Krishna Roy, a mortgage of certain house property situated in the town of Calcutta, to secure the repayment of a loan of Rs. 3,00,000 with interest thereon at nine per cent, per annum. The mortgagors did not redeem the mortgage within the stipulated period of one year, with the result that on July 26, 1921, the mortgagees brought an action to recover the money due to them by a sale of the mortgaged property. They obtained on April 12, 1922, a preliminary decree for sale, which was followed by a final decree on April 16, 1923.

(2.) In pursuance of the final decree, the mortgaged property was directed to be sold by public auction on January 5, 1924, but the sale was postponed for one year in accordance with an arrangement arrived at between the parties for the satisfaction of the claim of the decree-holders. One, Pradyumna Kumar Mullick, who is the plaintiff in the present action, agreed to discharge the entire debt due to the decree-holders, and also to advance Rs. 21,923 to the judgment debtors on terms which will be discussed presently. He paid on January 5, 1924, Rs. 100,000 to the decree-holders, and promiesd to pay on June 27, 1924, Rs. 287,411-5-6 which was the balance of the money due to them under the final decree for sale.

(3.) The plaintiff duly paid the sum to the decree-holders, and also the additional amount as a loan to the judgment debtors. Thereupon, two deeds were executed on June 27, 1924, in his favour. One of them was a deed of assignment by the decree-holders of their rights under the preliminary and the final decrees for sale with "the full benefit of all powers, rights, remedies and securities" conferred upon them by the mortgage deed and the aforesaid decrees.