MATURI UMAMHESWARA RAO Vs. PENDYALA VENKATRAYUDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It was contended, was a bone fide purchaser for value without notice of the mortgage. The 1st defendant did not undertake to discharge the mortgage liability.

(2.) He did not sell any of the items of the machinery mortgaged under Ex. A-9 nor realised any substantial sums thereby and that he is not a trustee nor personally liable.

(3.) He never gave any personal undertaking to discharge the mortgage debt. Some of the mortgaged properties were subject to the first charge in favour of one Chauhan as stated in the deed itself.