TMI Blog1939 (5) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #8377; 7997-0-5 only. Defendant 1 borrowed money at different dates from the plaintiff aggregating to ₹ 1500, to carry on this litigation and on 23rd August 1932 he executed a mortgage bond in favour of the plaintiff assigning by way of security the decree that would be passed in the money suit instituted by him. The stipulation was that the plaintiff would be entitled to realize out of the decretal amount the sum of ₹ 1500 due to him together with interest at the rate mentioned in the document. On 8th March 1934, a decree was passed in favour of defendant 1 in the money suit for a sum of ₹ 2566-10-0 only. On appeal to this Court preferred by the defendants it was further reduced to ₹ 1743-2-0. The judgment of this C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... number of points in support of his appeal. His first contention is that as a decree for a definite sum of money was not in existence at the date when the mortgage bond was executed in favour of the plaintiff, she was an assignee only of a right to sue which is not alienable under the Transfer of Property Act. The plaintiff therefore has not acquired any rights under the decree and cannot claim to execute it. In support of this contention the learned Advocate has relied upon certain decisions of this Court which are to be found in Abu Mahomad v. S.C. Chunder (1909) 36 Cal. 345, Jewan Ram v. Ratan Chad Kissen Chand (1921) 8 A.I.R. Cal. 795 and Khetra Mohan Das v. Bishwa Nath Bera . I do not think that this contention is sounds. It is true, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to sue. 3. The second argument that is put forward is that the plaintiff was at best a mortgagee in respect of the rights under the decree and unless she purchased the entire rights of the decree-holder she could not rank as an assignee of the decree and was not entitled to execute it as such. The assignment was undoubtedly by way of mortgage and not of the entire rights of the assignor. What the assignee was entitled to under the terms of the instrument was to realize the sum of ₹ 1500 together with interest on the decretal amount and she was to pay the balance, if any, to the assignor. She was therefore an assignee of the decree for the purpose of realizing the amount due on the mortgage bond and she was competent under the terms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
